2026-10-26 - Planning Commission Meeting

00:0026th to order.

00:02Will the secretary please call roll?

00:05>> Commissioner Guzman.

00:07>> Here.

00:07>> Commissioner Leo.

00:09>> Here.

00:09>> Commissioner Oliva.

00:12Commissioner Pham.

00:14Commissioner Woo.

00:15>> Present.

00:16>> Vice Chair Benninger.

00:18>> Present.

00:18>> Chair Ramos.

00:21Vice Chair, the quorum has been reached

00:23at 5:32 with Olive

00:27Oliva and Pham

00:31and Chair Ramos missing. Absent.

00:34>> Very Very good. Thank you.

00:36Let's start with the pledge of

00:37allegiance. Jacqueline, could you please

00:39lead us?

00:44>> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

00:47United States of America

00:49and to the republic for which it stands,

00:51one nation under God, indivisible, with

00:54liberty and justice for

01:02>> Before we begin, I'd like to remind my

01:04fellow commissioners to turn turn your

01:06mic on and off off I'm I'm when speaking

01:08and off when you're not.

01:10And when speaking, please place the

01:11microphone within 4 in away from you.

01:15Members of the public may attend the

01:17planning commission meeting either in

01:19person or via the Zoom.

01:21I now invite the secretary to describe

01:23how the public can access and

01:25participate in this meeting.

01:30>> This meeting is being live streamed via

01:32our portal at www.santaana-

01:37pa- dot primegov.com

01:42/public/portal

01:44and on our YouTube at

01:45www.youtube.com/cityofsantaanavideos.

01:50If you'd like to provide a public

01:52comment, you may also do so in the

01:54following ways.

01:56Join the meeting via Zoom. Enter the

01:58meeting ID number 87879481068.

02:04When the item you wish to comment on is

02:06being discussed, please select the hand

02:08icon to indicate that you would like to

02:10speak. Once called upon, remember to

02:13unmute yourself and state your name for

02:14the record.

02:16You can also join the meeting by calling

02:18669-900-6833.

02:22Enter the meeting ID number 87879481068.

02:29When the item that you would like to

02:30comment is being discussed, press nine

02:32to let us know you would like to speak.

02:35You'll be called upon by the last three

02:36digits of your phone number.

02:38After you are called upon, you may press

02:41*6 to unmute yourself. For those who are

02:44attending this meeting in person and

02:45would like to provide public comment,

02:47please fill out the request to speak

02:49form and turn it in to the recording

02:51secretary.

02:52All speakers will have 3 minutes to

02:54speak. I will alert you when your time

02:56is up.

02:59>> Thank you. Moving on to public comments

03:01on non-agenda or non-public hearing

03:04items, secretary, does anyone wish to

03:06speak?

03:11>> No, we don't have any

03:13speakers at this time.

03:15If you're attending this meeting in

03:16person and would like to comment on

03:18non-agenda public hearing items, please

03:20fill out the request to speak form and

03:22turn it in to the secretary.

03:24If you're participating via Zoom and

03:25would like to comment on non-agenda or

03:27non-public hearing items, please select

03:29the hand icon to let us know that you

03:31would like to comment. If you're calling

03:33in and would like to comment on

03:34non-agenda or non-public

03:37hearing items, please dial *9 and then

03:40*6 to unmute yourself. I will wait a few

03:43seconds.

03:47Chair, we do not have any speakers at

03:49this time.

03:51>> Thank you.

03:53Moving on to consent calendar, looking

03:55for one motion. Is there a motion to

03:57approve the item A, which is minutes

03:59from the October 12th meeting, and item

04:01B, excuse absences?

04:03>> I move.

04:04>> Second.

04:05>> So moved by a Commissioner Wu and and uh

04:08seconded by Commissioner Guzman.

04:10Secretary, please take roll call.

04:13>> All right.

04:15Commissioner Guzman.

04:16>> I.

04:17>> Commissioner Leo.

04:19>> I.

04:20>> Commissioner Oliva.

04:23Commissioner Pham.

04:26Commissioner Wu.

04:27>> I.

04:28>> Vice Chair Benninger.

04:29>> I.

04:30>> Chair Ramos.

04:38Motion approved

04:40by majority vote

04:42with Commissioner Oliva, Pham, and Chair

04:46Ramos absent.

04:49>> Okay, that concludes the uh consent

04:51calendar items. Moving on to public

04:54hearing.

04:55I will now review the uh

04:58procedure for the public hearing so that

04:59everyone knows what to expect.

05:03Staff will provide presentation and

05:05answer questions from the the

05:07commission.

05:08Public hearing will be opened. I promise

05:10to do it this time, Commissioner Leo

05:12Leo.

05:13The uh applicant will be given

05:15opportunity to speak and limited to 15

05:16minutes.

05:18Members of the public will be given

05:19opportunity to comment, limited to 3

05:21minutes.

05:23The applicant will be given opportunity

05:24to respond to the public comments,

05:27limited to 5 minutes.

05:28Public hearing will be closed.

05:30Then discussion will return to the

05:32commission with formal action to be

05:34approved, denied, or continued.

05:38Please when

05:42when presenting your presentation,

05:43please state your name address, and

05:45that's voluntary.

05:47State clearly whether you support,

05:48oppose, or neutral to the proposition

05:51proposal.

05:52Your statement should include all

05:53pertinent facts within your knowledge.

05:59Please Please note decisions on these

06:01matters are final unless appealed within

06:0310 days.

06:04Any interested individual or party

06:07by any individuals or party

06:08recommendation on these matters will be

06:10forwarded to the city council at a later

06:12date for final decision.

06:16This is the time and place for

06:18conditional use permit

06:202026-0011

06:23for the property located at 1029 East

06:274th Street located within the transit

06:29zone code Pacific Development 9084

06:34zoning district.

06:35Before we begin, do any commissioners

06:37have anything they would like to

06:39disclose with regards to this item?

06:44Okay.

06:45See none.

06:47The case planner Natalie Wu

06:50Lu will provide a brief presentation.

06:59>> Thank you, Vice Chair Benninger.

07:07Tonight's first item is a conditional

07:10use permit 2026-0011

07:14for Verizon Wireless at 1029 East 4th

07:17Street. The request is for the approval

07:20of a conditional use permit to renew the

07:22entitlement for an existing 60-ft tall

07:25major wireless facility disguised as a

07:27mono eucalyptus.

07:29Staff's recommendation

07:31is to adopt a resolution approving CUP

07:35number 2026

07:37-11 as conditioned.

07:43The site's general plan land use

07:45designation is urban neighborhood medium

07:48low and the property is located in the

07:50ST84 transit zoning code within the

07:54urban neighborhood two sub district.

07:57The surrounding land uses include

07:59industrial outdoor storage to the north,

08:02recycling facilities to the east and the

08:04west and a multi-family residential

08:07development and mini warehouse storage

08:09directly to the south.

08:11The lot size is approximately 1.18 acres

08:15and includes an 8,000 square foot

08:17existing restaurant building.

08:22The original CUP number 2015-20

08:27was approved by the planning commission

08:29on December 14th, 2015.

08:32It allowed the construction of a 60-foot

08:36mono-eucalyptus, ancillary ground

08:38equipment, equipment closure, as well as

08:40landscaping.

08:42Pursuant to the municipal code section

08:4541-198.3B,

08:48it requires that major wireless

08:51communication facility uh renew every 10

08:54years.

08:59The existing site is occupied by

09:02Taqueria El which is an existing eating

09:04establishment with outdoor dining that

09:07has been in operation since 1997.

09:10Permits were obtained in 2020 and 2023

09:13to replace equipment associated with the

09:15wireless facility to maintain cellular

09:17service.

09:21Here are a few photos of the existing

09:24facility as viewed from the southeast

09:27and east elevations.

09:34Here is a partial site plan um

09:37with north pointed towards the top of

09:39the screen. The wireless facility sits

09:42near the northern portion of the site

09:44and is at the rear of the existing

09:46restaurant.

09:52Here is also a snippet of the equipment

09:55area plan. The equipment is existing

09:58already and it's about 114 square feet.

10:07Here is an elevation of the existing

10:10mono eucalyptus wireless facility as

10:12viewed from the east elevation.

10:21The facility provides a benefit to Santa

10:24Ana residents, businesses, and motorists

10:27who use mobile services by providing

10:30cellular and data capacity in the area.

10:33The applicant is proposing the following

10:35improvements to the site, which include

10:37repaving and restriping of the existing

10:39parking spaces, installation of two new

10:41Brisbane box trees, and replacement of

10:44all deteriorating and or faded stealth

10:47branches or needles, and refreshing of

10:49antenna socks as needed.

10:52The facilities equipment and antenna

10:54area are adjacent to the existing

10:56commercial building on site with the

10:59location being optimal to provide the

11:00necessary wireless coverage.

11:07The project is consistent with the urban

11:09neighborhood medium low general plan

11:10land use designation. This facility will

11:13continue to comply with all height,

11:16location, screening, and stealth design

11:17standards.

11:19The project is also consistent with

11:21several general plan land use goals and

11:24policies that emphasize the preservation

11:27and improvement of the existing

11:28neighborhood and districts, promoting

11:30compatibility with the surrounding built

11:32environment, supporting a clean and safe

11:34environment for residents, workers, and

11:36visitors, as well as providing cellular

11:38data services to the surrounding area

11:40while still being compliant with

11:41development standards.

11:44In accordance to the California

11:46Environmental Quality Act and CEQA

11:47guidelines, this project is exempt from

11:49further review as it is an existing

11:52facility. Notice of exemption

11:54environmental review number 2026-25

11:57will be filed for this project. There is

11:59no fiscal impact associated.

12:03Staff recommendation is that the

12:05Planning Commission adopt a resolution

12:07approving conditional use permit number

12:082026-0011

12:11as conditioned.

12:15This concludes staff presentation. Staff

12:18is here alongside the applicant to

12:19answer any questions.

12:22>> Thank you, Natalie. Does any

12:23commissioners have any questions for

12:25staff?

12:28Commissioner Wu?

12:30Um,

12:31yeah.

12:33But

12:33>> I just have a quick question for staff.

12:36Um, in your PowerPoint presentation and

12:38in the staff report it states that

12:40um, the improvements will include the

12:43box trees, um,

12:45the replacing the faded stealth branches

12:47and refreshing of antenna socks as

12:49needed. Is the as needed referring to

12:52the antenna socks?

12:54>> Yes, it is.

12:55>> Okay, and who determines whether they're

12:56needed?

12:58>> That would be, I would say based off of

13:01a site visit if there is branches that

13:05are falling off or if there if there's

13:07clear like fading of the existing

13:10screening, then the request would be

13:12that the applicant replaces them.

13:14>> And and have has staff gone to inspect

13:18the Okay. And will the recommendation be

13:20to replace the antennas?

13:22>> Based off of a site visit, it looks like

13:25the facility is still in

13:28I would say good condition at this time.

13:30I would not say it was it would be

13:31necessary.

13:32>> Okay.

13:33And then I have another question, but I

13:34don't know if you can answer this. In

13:36the updated zoning code

13:39CUPs are going to be moved to director

13:42level approval. Is that correct or am I

13:44mis- misremembering that?

13:47>> Thank you, Commissioner um brand new

13:49CUPs will still be brought forth before

13:51the planning commission.

13:53But CUP renewals or renewals for

13:56facilities such as these would be at the

13:58director level.

14:01>> Thank you. I was misremembering it.

14:02Thank you.

14:03Or maybe remembering it correctly. Thank

14:06you.

14:07>> Thank you, Commissioner Guzman.

14:08Commissioner Liu.

14:11>> No questions.

14:12>> No questions.

14:13Uh I do have a couple of questions. One

14:14of them um

14:16not knowing all the equipment that's

14:17down on the ground

14:19is there any batteries in any of this

14:21this equipment that's on the ground?

14:29What my question is here is really

14:30concerned a fire seeing that we've

14:32recently had a a charging station go up

14:36um

14:37at a facility and actually one went and

14:39the other one went.

14:40Is there any equipment down in that

14:42ground level could that could result in

14:43a a fire like that?

14:45>> Thank you, Vice Chair. It's our our

14:47understanding no batteries. Um however,

14:50the applicant is here if they want to

14:52provide any clarification on the level

14:54of specificity for equipment there.

14:56>> Very good. Also, looking at first time I

14:58looked at Eucalyptus as tree type. It

15:01really does a good job to me hiding the

15:02antennas and what have you. Um

15:05is that very common with this type of

15:06design with the Eucalyptus tree type

15:08trees?

15:11>> I would say it's

15:13fairly common on sites where maybe a

15:17monopole which is more common isn't

15:19necessarily

15:21fits with

15:22the other tree types. I would say

15:24oftentimes it's proposed as an

15:25alternative.

15:26>> Yeah, cuz with the pines you obviously

15:28have an antenna so pine is stick out

15:29away from the branches and obviously you

15:31can tell what that is. This one you had

15:33to look twice to see that wasn't a

15:35a real tree on it which I I like that

15:38that design. Okay.

15:40All righty.

15:43Through with questions? Is it now time

15:44to open the public hearing?

15:46Would the applicant like to speak on the

15:48matter?

15:53>> Good evening, Commissioners. My name is

15:54Sonal Takwer. I'm with New Wave Com-

15:57Communications. My point of

16:00contact information is on file.

16:03I am here today representing Verizon

16:05Wireless as well as the underlying

16:08property owner,

16:09DeAnda.

16:11Um first of all, I'd like to thank

16:13Planner Natalie Lu for being very

16:15cooperative and helpful throughout the

16:17entitlement process.

16:19Um

16:20Verizon Wireless has and the property

16:22owner have reviewed the conditions of

16:24approval. We are amenable to them.

16:26However, there is a condition of

16:29approval that we would respectfully

16:31request that some of the verbiage would

16:33be changed

16:35um or modified.

16:37Specifically for condition of approval

16:40number one,

16:42it specifies that the applicant, which,

16:46you know, in the staff report does refer

16:49both to Verizon Wireless as well as the

16:51underlying property owner,

16:53for item 1A, it says that the applicant

16:57would be responsible for the repaving,

16:59repairing, restriping and of the

17:02existing parking lot and parking spaces

17:04on site.

17:06Our request is that this specific

17:09verbiage for 1A be modified and updated

17:13to specify that it would be the

17:15underlying property owner's

17:16responsibility, so there's no

17:19misunderstanding in the future um that

17:23this would be the responsibility of the

17:24wireless facility. This is an existing

17:28unmanned wireless facility. It does not

17:31encroach um or utilize any of the

17:35parking. It's an unmanned facility.

17:37Um so that parking is primarily utilized

17:40by the patrons of the Takumiya and the

17:44uh excuse me, Takumiya Away

17:46establishment.

17:48While there may be minimal visits by

17:52network operations with Verizon, it

17:55would probably be limited to

17:57I don't know

17:59four or five visits a year for a very

18:01limited amount of time if it was

18:03something that could not be addressed

18:05remotely or let's say there was some

18:08foliage from the faux eucalyptus tree

18:10that fell or that needed to be replaced.

18:12Then of course, that's only reason that

18:15we would go to that facility.

18:17There's not an established or assigned

18:19parking space there. So since

18:22the wireless facility itself does not

18:25generate

18:27parking or impact that kind of

18:29circulation we would respectfully ask

18:32that 1A

18:34has something that very clearly states

18:37the upkeep of the parking lot, and the

18:40striping, and those conditions

18:43remain the responsibility of um the

18:46property owner.

18:48This is something that we did um

18:52briefly discuss with staff. I do

18:54understand that this type of verbage is

18:56probably

18:57um

18:58standard in the newer conditions of

19:00approval.

19:02However, condition of approval nine

19:05in this same draft resolution does

19:06specify that

19:08it's the owner of the wireless facility

19:10that would be responsible for removing

19:12the facility if it ever decommissioned.

19:15So, similarly,

19:16since that condition is able to point

19:19out who in the applicant bears that

19:21responsibility,

19:23we would ask if the commission would

19:25consider making that change.

19:28As far as installing the new two

19:30Brisbane boxes, maintaining the wireless

19:33facility, and replacing any,

19:36you know, branches,

19:37um

19:40eucalyptus socks, all of that, we we

19:42know that's our responsibility and we'll

19:44continue to do that.

19:46Other than that, I am available um for

19:48any questions.

19:50Actually, I do Sorry, I did remember you

19:51had a question about the equipment. Um

19:55the facility itself

19:58has been reviewed both by the building

20:00department, fire department, um so there

20:03shouldn't be any concerns about

20:06batteries causing a fire. However, if

20:09some natural disaster was to occur and

20:11there was ever an issue, the contact

20:13information for Verizon's network

20:16operations is available there. There are

20:18also alarms in place that would, you

20:20know, send messages to network

20:22operations to address

20:24um that issue, and the hope would be

20:27that approximate residents or passersby

20:30would also

20:32reach out to the fire department. So,

20:34there are safety measures in place

20:36if that was to happen, but it's very

20:38unlikely.

20:42>> Question.

20:44>> Wait.

20:45Go ahead, Commissioner.

20:47Um my question is

20:51the

20:52tree,

20:53>> Yes.

20:54>> right? And the equipment is all yours,

20:57right?

20:58>> Correct.

20:58>> Okay. And and your your wireless uh

21:01uh uh

21:02company.

21:03>> Correct.

21:05>> But when you get down to the bottom,

21:07it lands on the land, right?

21:09>> Yes.

21:09>> So, do you have any easement or any

21:13direct title or how how is that acquired

21:16for you to be able to occupy that little

21:19space where the round hole is?

21:21>> Uh so, Verizon Wireless a little bit

21:24over 10 years ago actually acquired that

21:26property by reaching out to the

21:28underlying property owner that they own

21:30does and proposing this wireless

21:33facility and they have a lease

21:35agreement in place that clearly

21:37specifies, you know, what the lease area

21:39is for Verizon and then everything else

21:42around it that would

21:44become the responsibility or maintain

21:47the responsibility of the property

21:49owner.

21:49>> And correct me if I'm wrong,

21:52in our zoning update, we're trying to

21:56improve properties uh regarding

21:59regardless the ownership, but if you're

22:01leasing it the store or whatever,

22:04uh when uh condition or use permit come

22:07before us, I think what we're trying to

22:09do is consistently apply that to

22:12everyone say, "Well, this is a good

22:14opportunity and time for us to make sure

22:17that the properties are all um uniformly

22:20kept up."

22:22And and so

22:24>> Yes.

22:24>> that lease you have, you know, I'm and

22:27I'm not a city attorney. I'm going to

22:28ask staff for advice later about that,

22:31you know,

22:32uh seems to apply also to you sharing

22:35the road. Now, how we state that uh

22:38there's still is a responsibility there

22:40where even though you're not using the

22:42parking space, etc. I I I understand

22:44that. And that's sort of my my thinking

22:47and direction at this time that I will

22:49have further questions of staff of how

22:51that would work, but I just wanted to

22:53let you know

22:55you're not [snorts] specifically be be

22:57um

22:58penalized, but we have a lot of these

23:00that keep coming up.

23:01>> Right.

23:02>> Uh for for for renewal and all that and

23:05we're going to try to get something go

23:06forward with.

23:08>> Right. Is it okay if I respond back to

23:10you?

23:10>> Please.

23:10>> Okay. Um I completely understand that

23:13Verizon understands that as well. I

23:15think in this situation it's Again, we

23:17want to do our part to maintain the

23:21integrity, the um aesthetics of the

23:23property, but we also want to be mindful

23:27of the nexus in relation to our wireless

23:30facility and make sure that Verizon or

23:33any carrier is not being

23:38does not have a condition that puts an

23:39undue burden on them in relation to how

23:42they operate their facility. So, for

23:45this reason, yes, the uh installation

23:48and maintenance of the two new Brisbane

23:50box trees as well as the irrigation

23:52there.

23:53Of course, in maintaining our wireless

23:55facility.

23:56Now, if this was a

23:58project where let's say our equipment at

24:01grade was encroaching into two parking

24:04spaces or

24:05utilize more parking, which we know from

24:07a planning standpoint, we never want to

24:09remove parking.

24:10But, if we were doing

24:13something along those lines, I think

24:16you know, we wouldn't really be pushing

24:18on this condition or let's say if it was

24:20a land um establishment and a project

24:22where

24:23um

24:25it was a multi-tenant commercial use and

24:27we were going into the uh

24:30establishment that was adjacent and we

24:32also were another restaurant or retail,

24:35then I think it would be appropriate to,

24:39you know, say all the applicants or

24:40tenants would be responsible. But, just

24:44knowing how we operate and that we don't

24:46actually bring patrons to the site, we

24:49just provide coverage for the community,

24:52first responders,

24:53our ask would be just like condition of

24:56approval number nine to just specify 1A

25:00is the responsibility of the owner.

25:02Owner and Verizon know that. It's

25:04understood in their lease. We've

25:05actually talked about this. But because

25:08of the way this resolution is written

25:11and that it, you know, reiterates that

25:13this is for the lifetime of the permit

25:14and the applicant here is defined as

25:16Verizon and um the property owner, we

25:20just want to protect ourselves. Verizon

25:22wants to protect itself in the future

25:24if, let's say, this commission, this

25:26planning

25:27um department or the members of staff

25:30that are here today are no longer

25:31working there, we don't want a situation

25:33where now

25:35let's say also if ownership changes,

25:37that comes up for debate.

25:39>> And we have the same go in there. Hear

25:40you.

25:41>> Yeah. Thank you.

25:45>> Commissioner Fan, any questions?

25:48>> I mean, I think um

25:50it'll be more a question for staff, but

25:52uh in general, I think I heard you

25:54mention that um the property owner is uh

25:58in agreement with you that they will

26:00take full responsibility for the site.

26:01Is that what I'm hearing? Cuz

26:03>> With with regards to the parking and

26:05all, I mean, uh

26:06again, with the parking, maintenance of

26:08the the site now with regard to the

26:11landscape, that is

26:13um

26:13the two trees around this existing

26:17facility and of course maintaining the

26:20uh cleanliness and um signage associated

26:24with the wireless facility, that is

26:26Verizon's responsibility. And of course,

26:28if anything was not um

26:32you know, being maintained, the the

26:34property owner of course would contact

26:36us and say, "Hey, this, you know, you

26:38need to have somebody come out here to

26:39address the situation."

26:41>> Uh with specific

26:43uh specifics to uh condition one, I just

26:46want to make sure that if we were to

26:47entertain that request, that we're not

26:50um

26:52you know, revising a condition that the

26:54property owner who's also a party to

26:56this agreement hasn't been kind of

26:59um

27:00brief of it, right?

27:02>> I can say on the record the property

27:04owner is in agreement. We've had

27:05conversations about this and he has not

27:08had any resistance or issue with it.

27:10>> Yes.

27:11>> Yeah.

27:11>> Thank you.

27:15>> Mr. Guzman, any comments?

27:18>> I have a question, but I think I have a

27:19question for staff.

27:21>> Very good.

27:21>> Um was the property owner

27:26uh contacted about this? I know that the

27:30applicant mentioned that she had

27:31conversations with staff about changing

27:33this, but was the on the the property

27:35owners the land list, were they

27:37contacted about this change or

27:40has staff had any communication with the

27:42land list?

27:43>> Staff has had communication with the

27:45property owner who noted that they would

27:48be re-striping the parking lot.

27:52>> And I have a question for the applicant.

27:54Um when you say that you lease from the

27:56from the property owner, what's the

27:59area? Is it just the area where the cell

28:01tower and everything that was shown in

28:03the diagram tonight is

28:06right? All the space

28:08>> Correct. So it's it's the the cell No,

28:10no, no, you're you're fine. It's the

28:12cell tower, but it's also the um

28:15the accessory equipment that's behind

28:17the the um wrought iron vents in the

28:20EMU.

28:21>> So to confirm, you Verizon is not

28:24leasing into the parking area, correct?

28:26>> Correct.

28:27>> Okay.

28:33>> No questions.

28:35Okay.

28:36Couple of questions. Uh one

28:40>> um Chairwoman entered at 6:00 p.m.

28:43>> Thank you.

28:44Um what is the voltage in in those

28:46electrical panels at the base of them?

28:50>> Um

28:51I can look at the plans to see if that's

28:54there, but unfortunately I'm not the an

28:56electrical engineer. I don't know that

28:58off the top of my head. What I can tell

29:00you is that anything that is proposed

29:03would be compliant with what again the

29:07uniform building code allows and you

29:09know, any modifications or equipment

29:11that is there is required to go before

29:14the building department, the fire

29:15department and plan check just like any

29:17other project. So

29:19Um I can tell you that

29:20>> way rather looking up. Have you ever had

29:22an experience with a fire in any of

29:24those boxes?

29:25>> I have not.

29:26>> Okay. Okay. Um

29:29Also,

29:30is there any I don't know if we we

29:32require this or or not. So this could go

29:35both places, but is there any

29:37requirements to have a telephone number

29:39or emergency number on the fence to

29:41call?

29:42>> Yes, that is a requirement. It's already

29:45there. It's also

29:46reiterated as a condition of approval in

29:49this resolution as well as the one that

29:51was passed by planning commission in

29:532015.

29:54>> Okay. And two questions, is it readable

29:57and is it correct?

29:59>> Correct. Yes, it's printed on formalized

30:01signage.

30:03It's legible and not only does the city

30:06of Santa Ana require it and the building

30:08department, but the FCC requires all

30:10that information be posted and

30:12maintained at all times.

30:16>> Very very good. It is now codified in

30:18our zoning update.

30:20And they show diagrams

30:22about the size and requirement.

30:26>> Um just checking. I've had experience

30:28where you found the wrong the uh number

30:30was wrong.

30:31Okay.

30:33All right. That's that is my questions.

30:35Um

30:36Chairman Ramos

30:39>> No questions at for time. Thank you.

30:41>> Very good.

30:42>> I you.

30:42>> Chair, our chair Ramos, I have a

30:44question.

30:45>> Go go ahead, Commissioner Goodman. Go

30:46ahead.

30:46>> Actually, I have a question for legal

30:47counsel.

30:49Sorry.

30:50Um

30:52are is this commission allowed to

30:55uh impose a condition on the

30:58non-applicant, i.e., the landowner,

31:01via this action? I because what I'm

31:03hearing is that we're going to impose a

31:05requirement on somebody who's not the

31:07applicant of the conditional use permit.

31:09>> Um that's a very good question. Um so,

31:11this is a conditional use permit and

31:13it's it it runs with the land. So, it is

31:17something attached to the property. It's

31:21not necessarily attached to an

31:22individual. Um

31:24in some cases, you can bind other

31:26individuals, not property owners, but

31:29ultimately, the condition just has to

31:30relate to the property. Um it's up to

31:33staff to do our best to identify who

31:36would be the person that that's

31:37responsible or more than one person.

31:40But, um the ultimate the the key is that

31:42it relates to the property. So, if you

31:44are imposing you can impose a condition

31:46for repair repaving, repairing, um and

31:49it could be specific to the property

31:51owner, if that's who staff determines

31:53appropriate.

31:54>> Okay.

31:55>> So, in ordinary language, that means

31:58that the language that staff propose uh

32:01does that because it's binding to the

32:03property and not specifically to the

32:06applicant for the CPUC.

32:09>> Yes, that's correct.

32:10>> Okay. So, we don't need an additional

32:13language or change.

32:14So,

32:15that will be handled administratively.

32:18Right.

32:19>> If you want to be more specific, like I

32:22said, you can you can identify who you

32:25believe is responsible, but ultimately,

32:27the condition just has to be complied

32:29with. Whether it's complied with by the

32:30property owner or the applicant is

32:33really up to them to determine that. It

32:35does make sense to be clear about who

32:38you believe should be responsible, but

32:40it's it's a condition that is required

32:42for use of the conditional use permit

32:44and it's about the property.

32:46So it's it's it's your discretion.

32:53>> Okay. Uh any other questions?

32:56Do we have any anyone that would like to

32:58speak on this matter?

33:01Thank you, applicant.

33:02>> Thank you.

33:09Chair, we have not received any public

33:11comments. If you are attending this

33:12meeting in person and would like to

33:14comment on this item, please fill out a

33:16request to speak form and turn it into

33:18the secretary. If you are participating

33:21via Zoom and would like to comment on

33:23this item, please select the hand icon

33:25to indicate that you would like to

33:27speak. If you're calling in and would

33:29like to comment on this item, please

33:31dial star nine and then star six to

33:33unmute yourself. I will wait a few

33:36seconds.

33:40Uh vice chairs, we do not have any

33:41speakers.

33:44>> Okay, then I'm going to go ahead and

33:45close the uh

33:47uh testimony part of this

33:49public hearing and return it back to the

33:51to the commissioners.

33:54>> Uh can I have a question?

33:56Or can I just

33:57>> Uh

33:58go ahead.

33:58>> Go ahead.

33:59>> I just want to give staff an opportunity

34:01to chime in. Um

34:03are you amenable to what the applicant

34:06uh has suggest because I

34:08you know, you probably had the

34:09opportunity to change the language prior

34:11to having it show up here.

34:13Uh unless you know, this is the first

34:14time you've heard about it, then that's

34:15a different question.

34:17But I want to make sure that

34:19that's something that that you're

34:20interested in pursuing as well.

34:23>> Thank you, commissioner. We believe the

34:24language as is covers what the city

34:26needs as far as the condition being met.

34:29However, we are amenable to changing

34:30that condition from its stating

34:32applicant to property owner.

34:38>> I kind of like that question. Why do we

34:40put it in there in the first place? Was

34:41there a certain reason that we put it in

34:43back when this was approved

34:45approved 10 10 years ago?

34:50>> Thank you, Vice Chair. So,

34:52the way the text is drafted is a

34:54standard way that we draft conditions.

34:56Um and also, as Melissa was mentioning,

34:58we look at who the most appropriate

35:00person would be for satisfying the

35:02condition of approval in any

35:04discretionary action. However, for this

35:06uh particular condition, um like I was

35:09mentioning,

35:10we're amenable to it stating property

35:12owner rather than applicant.

35:18>> Do we have any other comments? Uh

35:19Commissioner Lee.

35:24>> It's a It's a question for staff cuz we

35:25have another one on on here. When when

35:27we

35:28when we renew these,

35:31and they bring in little bit new

35:32technology, it covers a little more

35:33folks, do we have the map

35:37from COVID

35:39where the school district had no

35:41coverage

35:42for their students?

35:44And the reason I ask

35:46is if we are upgrading these facilities

35:48throughout city,

35:51is there a way to take the map where the

35:53students were unable to access Wi-Fi

35:55from their apartment or wherever,

35:57if these new facilities that we're

35:59installing, the new equipment,

36:01is it helping cover those

36:04gaps or those blind spots in the network

36:07in the city? Cuz we've all driven

36:08through the city and had a call drop.

36:11So, the question is, as we install as

36:13you guys renew these, cuz they're not

36:14going to come back to us very very soon,

36:17the question is, are we covering the

36:19city so there are no drops? And that

36:21someone who lives in a complex apartment

36:23complex can access the Wi-Fi to do his

36:26or her homework

36:27That were gaps in the system prior to

36:29COVID. And that would mean contacting

36:31the school district, finding out where

36:32the gaps were. But as we could do these

36:34and we renew these for the city every 10

36:36years,

36:37we make sure that

36:39the community benefits from the

36:40coverage.

36:41Uh that's why I didn't ask any questions

36:43of the applicant cuz they're installing

36:45new equipment. Question I'm asking is,

36:47as you guys see it, are we covering the

36:49city so the residents benefit from these

36:51leases that the private property owners

36:53are benefiting from?

36:55And that's my question. You don't have

36:56to answer it, but if you can get a copy

36:57of the map from COVID, the school

36:59district should have it. There were many

37:01places where students could not access

37:03Wi-Fi, where there was their house

37:05didn't pay for the cable box, or the

37:07apartment complex didn't have it. I'm

37:09sure we had it in many complex areas. So

37:12that's my question. So as you guys go

37:13through this over the next year or so,

37:16and they upgrade facilities cuz they're

37:17all going to do it,

37:18cuz eventually you're we're going to go

37:19from 5G to 6G.

37:22Question is, do we have enough coverage

37:23for the residents of Santa Ana? That's

37:25just a general question.

37:26Um and

37:28I'd like to make a motion

37:31uh to approve the item along with a

37:33change in the language

37:35that would make it amenable

37:37that staff is amenable to for the

37:40applicant.

37:43>> [clears throat]

37:44>> Do we have any other commission comments

37:45or questions before we take the motion?

37:49As seen uh we have a motion from

37:51Commissioner Leo. Do we have a second?

37:52>> it.

37:53>> We have a second from Vice Chair

37:54Benninger.

37:56Secretary, can you please call for a

37:57roll call vote?

37:59>> Commissioner Guzman?

38:01>> I.

38:01>> Commissioner Leo?

38:02>> I.

38:04>> Commissioner Oliva?

38:06Commissioner Pham?

38:07>> I.

38:08>> Commissioner Wu?

38:09>> I.

38:10>> Vice Chair Benninger?

38:11>> I.

38:12>> Chair Ramos?

38:13>> I would be abstaining as I was in

38:15present for the entirety of the public

38:16hearing.

38:18>> Motion approved by majority vote.

38:21With commission members

38:23Oliva absent

38:26and Chair Ramos abstaining.

38:30>> Thank you.

38:31We're now moving on to item number two.

38:33This is the time and place for

38:34conditional use permit number 2026-0012

38:38for the property located at located at

38:41711 South Grand Avenue located within

38:45the light industrial M1 zoning district.

38:47Before we begin, do any commissioners

38:49have anything they wish to disclose with

38:50regard to this item?

38:53Seeing as there are no disclosures, we

38:55will continue. The case planner Natalie

38:57Liu will provide a brief presentation.

39:04>> Thank you, Chair Ramos.

39:06Tonight's second item is conditional use

39:08permit 2026-0012

39:12for ATC Sequoia LLC at 711 South Grand

39:16Avenue.

39:17The request is for the approval of a

39:20conditional use permit to renew the

39:21entitlement for an existing 58-ft tall

39:24major wireless monopine communications

39:26facility.

39:28Staff is recommending to adopt a

39:30resolution approving CUP 2026-12

39:34as conditioned.

39:37The existing site's general planned land

39:40use designation is industrial and the

39:43property is within the light industrial

39:45M1 zone.

39:47The surrounding land uses include

39:50railroad tracks and a mobile home park

39:53directly to the north and the east and

39:56to the south and the west there is

39:58warehouse, wholesale, and an auto repair

40:00use.

40:01The lot size is about 1.68 acres and has

40:05an existing approximately 16,000 square

40:07foot warehouse building on site.

40:12The original conditional use permit

40:14number 2014-07

40:16was approved by the planning commission

40:18on April 28th, 2014.

40:22The approval allowed the construction of

40:24the 58-foot monopine, ancillary ground

40:27equipment, equipment enclosure, and

40:30landscaping.

40:31Per the municipal code, the facility

40:34does require renewal every 10 years.

40:39The site is occupied by Parkhouse Tire,

40:43Incorporated, which is an existing

40:45industrial tire warehousing use that's

40:47been in operation since 1992.

40:50In 2022,

40:52the applicant submitted uh acquired

40:55permits for the removal and replacement

40:57of antennas and equipment associated

40:59with the wireless facility.

41:04Here are a few photos of the existing

41:07facility as viewed from the northwest,

41:10one being directly adjacent to the site,

41:12and the other photo being taken directly

41:14offsite as viewed from Grand Avenue.

41:23Here is the site plan with the north

41:25arrow pointed towards the top of the

41:26screen. The wireless facility is cited

41:29on the eastern portion

41:31of the site at the rear of the existing

41:34warehouse. Grand Avenue is directly

41:36towards the left of the screen.

41:43Here is a snippet of the equipment area

41:45plan.

41:50The

41:51existing equipment area is about 920

41:54square feet.

41:59Here is an elevation of the existing

42:01monopine as viewed from the west

42:03elevation.

42:11The facility provides a benefit to Santa

42:14Ana residents, businesses, motorists who

42:16subscribe to mobile phone services by

42:18providing cellular and data capacity in

42:20the area.

42:22The applicant is proposing the following

42:24improvements, including the installation

42:26of two Hikyu box trees, replacement of

42:30all deteriorating and faded stealth

42:32branches or needles, and refreshing of

42:35antenna socks as needed.

42:37The facility's equipment and antennas

42:39are directly adjacent to the industrial

42:41building. This location is optimal for

42:43them to provide the necessary coverage

42:46for existing and expanding services.

42:51Similarly to the first item, this

42:54project is consistent with the

42:56industrial general plan land use

42:57designation, and the facility will

42:59continue to comply with all standards.

43:04The project is also consistent with all

43:07land use goals, similarly to the first

43:08project, with emphasis on preserving

43:11existing neighborhoods, compatibility

43:13with the built environment, providing a

43:16clean and safe environment, as well as

43:18still complying with development

43:19standards.

43:24In accordance to CEQA, the project is

43:27exempt from further review as it is an

43:29existing facility. A notice of exemption

43:322025-86

43:33will be filed for this project, and

43:35there is no fiscal impact associated.

43:41Staff recommendation is that the

43:42Planning Commission adopt a resolution

43:44to approve conditional use permit

43:462026-12

43:48as conditioned.

43:53This concludes staff presentation. Staff

43:55is here alongside the applicant to

43:57answer any questions.

44:03>> Thank you. Does the Commission have any

44:05comments or questions for staff.

44:12With that, the public testimony portion

44:14of the public hearing is now open. Would

44:16the applicant like to speak on the

44:17matter?

44:26>> Good evening. Emily Murray on behalf of

44:28the applicant. I would just like to take

44:29a minute to thank staff for all of their

44:32hard work on this site and I'm available

44:34this evening to answer any questions any

44:36of you may have.

44:39>> Thank you.

44:40Does the commission [clears throat] have

44:41any comments or questions of the

44:42applicant?

44:44Go ahead, Vice Chair Banager.

44:46>> Um

44:47Verizon owned the equipment in the first

44:50and who owns your your your equipment?

44:53>> So, American Tower owns the tower and

44:54then leases space on the tower for the

44:58antennas themselves and in this case

44:59Verizon actually owns the antennas on

45:01this tower as well.

45:04>> Thank you.

45:05And I assume that the

45:07my question to the first tower is that

45:09again, your voltage and what you have

45:11down below is not a hazard has not

45:13caused a hazard.

45:14>> That that's correct. I don't have the

45:16exact figure on the voltage but we don't

45:18have any history of fires. The we have

45:20sign prominent signage for who to call

45:23if there are any concerns and yes, no no

45:27history, nothing dangerous happened.

45:28>> And this may sound silly but I need to

45:30ask it and that's 20 as a 24-hour number

45:32so that we don't catch you up when you

45:34sleep.

45:35>> Yes, I

45:35>> Okay, thank you.

45:38>> Thank you, Vice Chair Banager. Are there

45:40any other questions? Go ahead,

45:42Commissioner Leal.

45:43>> As the technology changes,

45:47how often do do they come to you and say

45:49we need to change? Cuz technology is

45:51changing quickly. I know 6G is already

45:53out in some places. We're at 5G now. How

45:56often does it change over and I know

45:57that sometimes there's multiple

45:59carriers on on one antenna. So, I'm so

46:02I'm just wondering kind of how often

46:03that happens cuz now the technology is

46:05coming much quicker.

46:06>> Yes, sir.

46:07>> And so, I'm just kind of wondering how

46:09you guys evaluate and how it happens

46:11because of the needs of of our community

46:13in general.

46:14>> Uh yes, so I I believe this tower has

46:16been in operation for about 11 years.

46:18There's already been one upgrade, I

46:20believe, in 2022 in staff's

46:22presentation, and I'm sure you're right

46:23that that those upgrades may

46:25uh happen more frequently, and we

46:27process those through an application to

46:29staff and and replacement or renewal of

46:31that equipment uh consistent with the

46:33conditional use permit.

46:34>> Okay, thank you.

46:37>> Thank you, Commissioner Leo.

46:39Do we have any other questions for the

46:40applicant?

46:45I don't think we have any additional

46:47questions at this time. Thank you.

46:48>> Thank you very much.

46:49>> Recording secretary, have we received

46:51any written communication, or is there a

46:53member of the public that would like to

46:54comment on this item?

46:58>> Chair, we have not received any public

47:01If you're attending this meeting in

47:02person and would like to comment on this

47:04item, please fill out a request to speak

47:06form and turn it in to the secretary. If

47:09you're participating via Zoom and would

47:10like to comment on this item, please

47:12select the hand icon to indicate that

47:14you would like to speak.

47:16If you're calling in and would like to

47:17comment on this item, please dial star

47:20nine and then star six to unmute

47:22yourself. I will wait a few seconds.

47:28Chair, we do not have any speakers.

47:33>> Thank you.

47:34Are there any final comments for the

47:36applicant before I close the public

47:37hearing?

47:39Seeing as there is none, uh the public

47:42testimony portion of the public hearing

47:43is now closed. Is there a motion on this

47:46matter?

47:50>> There's a question there.

47:55>> I move to approve a resolution.

47:57>> We have a motion from Commissioner Wu.

47:59Do we have a second?

48:01>> Second.

48:02>> We have a second from Commissioner

48:04Guzman. Secretary, can you please call

48:06for a roll call vote?

48:08>> Commissioner Guzman?

48:10>> Aye.

48:10>> Commissioner Leo?

48:12>> Aye.

48:12>> Commissioner Oliva?

48:15Commissioner Pham?

48:16>> Aye.

48:17>> Commissioner Wu?

48:18>> Aye.

48:19>> Vice Chair Benninger?

48:20>> Aye.

48:21>> Chair Ramos?

48:22>> Aye.

48:24>> Motion approved by majority vote with

48:27Oliva absent.

48:29Commissioner.

48:31>> Thank you.

48:33We're now moving on to the historic

48:34preservation matters.

48:36We're moving on to item three.

48:38This is a time and place for historic

48:40resources commission application

48:41application number 2026-7,

48:45historic

48:46historic register categorization number

48:482026-8,

48:51and historic property preservation

48:52agreement number 2026-9

48:56for the property located at 20 at 2361

48:59North Riverside Drive, located within

49:02the single family residence R1 zoning

49:04district. Before we begin, do any

49:06commissioners have anything they wish to

49:08disclose with regard to this item?

49:11Seen as there are no disclosures, the

49:13case planner Pedro Gomez will provide a

49:14brief presentation.

49:18>> Uh thank you, Madam Chair.

49:48Okay. So, good afternoon and um

49:52the third item on tonight's agenda

49:54tonight's agenda is a request to place

49:55the property addressed as 2361 North

49:58Riverside Drive on the historic

50:00register,

50:02to categorize it as contributive, and to

50:04execute a Mills Act agreement with the

50:06property owner.

50:13And as a reminder, the contributive

50:15category can be assigned to a building

50:17that contributes to the overall

50:19character and history of a neighborhood

50:21or district, and is a good example of

50:24period architecture.

50:28This specific property is being referred

50:30to as the Wright-Bachman House, and it's

50:32located in the Floral Park neighborhood.

50:35It's architecturally significant as an

50:37intact example of a Tudor Revival style

50:40in the city of Santa Ana. It's a

50:41contributor to the Floral Park National

50:43Historic District, as well.

50:46The original building permits indicate

50:48that the property was constructed in 19

50:5026 for the owner Walter Wright. Uh by

50:531927, the Bachmans resided at the

50:55property, where they remained until

50:57circa 1933.

50:59From the mid-1930s through the 1940s,

51:02the property was occupied by several

51:04residents, including local business

51:05owners Louis Dance of Dance-Schmidt

51:08Music Store,

51:09Darwin Scott of Scotty's Malt Shop,

51:12and the Griswold family subsequently

51:14resided at the property from

51:15approximately 1942 to 1966.

51:20The Wright-Bachman House qualifies for

51:21listing on the Santa Ana register under

51:23criterion one as an intact example of a

51:26Tudor Revival style in the city,

51:29and the recommended categorization is

51:30contributive because it contributes to

51:33the overall character and history

51:34[clears throat]

51:35of the neighborhood, and it's a good

51:36example of period architecture.

51:42Uh on this slide, we have additional

51:43photos of the house.

51:45Character-defining features include, but

51:47are not limited to, the asymmetric main

51:50facade that's on the south, the brick

51:52and stucco siding, the steeply steeply

51:56pitched cross gabled roof form,

51:58the historic glazed wood panel front

52:00door,

52:01the glazed wood secondary entrance,

52:04tripartite windows, wood casement

52:06windows, the brick chimney on the

52:09southeast facade,

52:11the bay windows, and then the stucco

52:12vent openings on the south gable.

52:15And you can see some of those features

52:17here on these photos presented.

52:22The property has no identified

52:24unauthorized modifications, and upon

52:26consideration of the application, it's

52:28recommended that the city enter into a

52:29historic property preservation agreement

52:31subject to the completion of future

52:33improvements as described in the work

52:35plan.

52:36So, here on the screen we have a few

52:38items of the work plan, and that's

52:40you know, assessing the condition of the

52:41historic wood entrance doors,

52:44assessing the exterior brickwork,

52:47assessing the condition of the wood

52:49windows,

52:50and this includes the tripartite

52:52windows, the casement windows,

52:54and includes the sashes, the frames, the

52:56glazing, and anything associated with

52:58the the window, including sills.

53:03The work plan also includes assessing

53:04the condition of the exterior brick

53:06chimney,

53:07the condition of the cross gabled roof,

53:10assessing the detached historic garage,

53:15and then lastly, assessing the

53:16hardscaping, which includes the

53:18driveway, walkways, front porch, patios,

53:21and steps for any cracks, settlement, or

53:24deterioration that the property owner

53:26can repair and or replace in kind.

53:29Staff is going to ensure that the

53:30proposed work is done sensitively and

53:32will maintain the property's character

53:34defining features throughout the

53:36lifespan of the Mills Act agreement.

53:40Uh with that, staff recommends that the

53:42commission adopt a resolution to approve

53:44HRCA number 2026-7,

53:47HRC number 2026-8, and recommend that

53:50the city council authorize HPPA number

53:532026-9.

53:56Uh that concludes staff's presentation.

53:58I do want to note that the property

53:59owner is in attendance or

54:01representatives of the property owner

54:02are in attendance today should there be

54:04any questions directed to them.

54:08>> Thank you.

54:09Does the commission have any comments or

54:11questions for staff?

54:13Go ahead, Commissioner Woo.

54:15>> Um

54:16in researching uh the Mills Act and and

54:20our zoning update, I find the only

54:22mention regarding historical uh

54:25uh district property is on uh article 5,

54:29page uh 50 uh 32, uh item D, which only

54:33talks about lot split. Uh but in also uh

54:37the city of Santa Ana,

54:40want to get this right.

54:42Uh hold on a second.

54:45Uh

54:47the the Mills Act applies to a contract

54:50to the specific product uh property as

54:53outlined in the conditions that you

54:55have.

54:56And

54:57um

54:58the the

54:59the assessment of the um

55:02work to be done uh to to main- maintain

55:05that characteristic of the Mills Act and

55:08for us considering uh

55:10uh approving that contract

55:14uh seems

55:16not a problem in itself to one property.

55:19My question was like to look at they're

55:21they're also applying for another

55:23property, which is happened to be next

55:24door.

55:25So, that raised a question. Hm.

55:27You have two houses. Are you going to

55:29live in both houses? Are you going to

55:30put the dog in one and, you know, live

55:32in the other one? You know, um I don't

55:35know. I I think that's one question I

55:37have for

55:38uh the property owner. What What is

55:40their intention? Then there's the the

55:42the question about

55:45are we flipping a house here in term of

55:48a quick sale? And and staff answered

55:51that question by listing the the

55:54assessment of the of work that might

55:56need to be done. So, administratively,

55:58according to our rezoning update, staff

56:01has directed to set up the

56:03administrative condition in order to

56:06monitor

56:08the the the contract of the the mill.

56:10So, we're going to lean heavily on on

56:13staff for that administrative. So,

56:16my question then

56:18>> Sorry, Commissioner. Well, quickly, a

56:19point of clarification for staff. To

56:21what extent, if any, should we be asking

56:23questions about agenda item number four

56:25while we're on agenda item number three?

56:29>> I'm I'm getting to your question, you

56:31know,

56:33>> I I just want to make sure we're not

56:34listing we're not mentioning another

56:37the next agenda item if we should not

56:40be.

56:40>> Thank you, Vice Chair.

56:42>> [clears throat]

56:42>> Um the questions posed for this item

56:44should be limited to the items presented

56:46for this item.

56:47>> Yeah, yeah, but I'd like to ask that

56:49question, too.

56:50Uh I'm not asking question about both

56:52property. I'm just going to point out

56:54that there's two separate items

56:56for the property. It just happened to

56:58have the same owner. And that under

57:01our current

57:03regulation in the Mills Act, there's

57:05nothing to prevent that. Okay? And I

57:07just want to eliminate that as a part of

57:09the discussion. Okay?

57:11So,

57:13I'm sorry. Did I cross the line again?

57:17>> No, I I just I'm not clear on your

57:18question, but I will concur with staff

57:22that we want to make sure that the

57:23questions that we're asking relate to

57:25this item and not to the next item,

57:28which we have not gotten to that public

57:30hearing yet.

57:31>> And that's where I'm going with this.

57:33So, um

57:34it since

57:35assessment staff did

57:37since it is in the historical district

57:41that it is a two Tudor Revival style

57:44with sufficient

57:46architectural um

57:49uh

57:50items that we need to pay attention to

57:52to to fit the Mills Act, right?

57:57>> Uh thank you, Commissioner.

57:59So, [clears throat] what's been

57:59presented before you today is staff's

58:02recommendation for listing

58:04the property on the historic register,

58:07categorizing as contributive,

58:10and then for the planning commission to

58:11make a recommendation to the city

58:13council that we should enter into Mills

58:14Act agreement. That's based on staff's

58:16review of the property, our assessment,

58:19and working with a consultant, and we've

58:21deemed that there's enough historical

58:22integrity for it to be eligible for

58:24listing,

58:25um which is why we're presenting it

58:27today.

58:28Um to us, it it doesn't matter

58:31the property owner if they own two,

58:33three, four. We're assessing each

58:36property individually

58:38based on chapter 30 and based on the

58:40Secretary of Interior standards.

58:42And so, the recommendation before you

58:44today is is solely on that.

58:46>> So, one of the thing I want to ask the

58:48homeowner

58:49uh a property owner is uh

58:51what what is their intent Are they going

58:53to occupy the property or the current

58:55occupants? So, I'll ask that when they

58:58when when it's open to discussion with

59:01the owner.

59:02>> Thank you.

59:05>> Thank you, Commissioner Woo. Do we have

59:06any other questions for staff?

59:08Commissioner Guzman.

59:10>> Thank you, Charles.

59:12This question is for Mr. Gomez.

59:14Um

59:15I have a question about what our role is

59:17in or a reminder, I guess, a refresher

59:19on what our role is when we're assessing

59:22these.

59:23I know the standard is a little

59:25different um

59:27for these historic homes versus when

59:30we're doing conditional use permits or

59:33development plans, etc. So,

59:35are we looking at whether

59:38these are truly historic homes? Are we

59:41Are we assessing whether what's been

59:43provided to us and recommended to us is

59:45correct? I I I'm kind of at a loss here

59:48what we're supposed to be evaluating,

59:50and then I have a second question

59:51regarding staff.

59:53>> Of course.

59:54>> [clears throat]

59:54>> So, similar to the land use matters,

59:57uh, the land use matters of the city is

59:58regulated by chapter 41 zoning.

1:00:01So, the historic matters in the city are

1:00:03regulated by chapter 30. And so, chapter

1:00:0530 identifies, um, criteria for

1:00:07selection for listings and standards,

1:00:10one of which is the property has to be

1:00:12minimally 50 years old to be eligible.

1:00:14And then there's certain standards, you

1:00:16know, the property has to be associated

1:00:18with notable figures in the city or has

1:00:20to retain enough integrity of a specific

1:00:22style, um, for us to make a

1:00:24recommendation. So, what staff does is

1:00:27we do all of that work, compile it into

1:00:29a report, and then what's called the DPR

1:00:31form,

1:00:33and we present that information to the

1:00:34commission. So, the commission's role is

1:00:36to review that information based on

1:00:38chapter 30, and either agree or disagree

1:00:41with staff that this property should be

1:00:43listed, should be categorized with the

1:00:45category that's being recommended, in

1:00:47this case it's contributive,

1:00:49and that we should enter into Mills Act

1:00:50agreement. If for some reason

1:00:53the commission disagrees,

1:00:55you'd have to provide information to

1:00:56staff as to why you disagree. It could

1:00:58be like, I don't think the person

1:01:00associated with this was significant

1:01:01enough to be,

1:01:03um, mentioned or or the reason why we

1:01:05listed or I don't think this is a great

1:01:07example of period-correct architecture,

1:01:10or I think the modifications are too far

1:01:12beyond that it it's lost its integrity.

1:01:15These are all examples of of reasons why

1:01:17you could disagree with staff and make a

1:01:18recommendation to not list it.

1:01:21Um, so.

1:01:23>> And the other [clears throat] question

1:01:24is just generally, I know that staff is

1:01:28once these Mills Act agreements are

1:01:30entered into, staff has to monitor this.

1:01:32Is there a dedicated staff that does

1:01:35historic I mean, this is

1:01:37the ninth agreement if we approve it

1:01:40that's going to be sent out to the

1:01:43City Council. Is there enough I mean, is

1:01:44it dedicated staff? Who does the

1:01:46approving is my question. The resources

1:01:48are used to go and monitor for whether

1:01:50the Mills Act agreements are actually

1:01:52being um

1:01:54maintained in proper form and all that.

1:01:57>> [clears throat]

1:01:58>> Every city does it differently.

1:01:59Um, the City of Santa Ana has one

1:02:02sometimes as much as three staff people

1:02:05uh staff persons that um help monitor

1:02:07and process applications because there's

1:02:10so many um

1:02:12it's just infeasible to to expect staff

1:02:15to do that. So, we we're talking about

1:02:17revamping the program which we've talked

1:02:18about for a couple years to introduce

1:02:20the self-certification um application

1:02:23where every 5 years or so whenever it's

1:02:25up for um certification, property owners

1:02:28would be prompted to tell us what

1:02:30improvements they've made based on the

1:02:33work plan. And if anything kind of comes

1:02:35up that's concerning or property owners

1:02:37are non-responsive or not making the

1:02:39improvements that um

1:02:41that's in the agreement, then there'd be

1:02:43follow-up sort of um inspections or

1:02:45visits to ensure that they're complying

1:02:47with what they're supposed to be

1:02:48complying with.

1:02:49Um, but yes, to go out and do

1:02:50inspections for over four 500 properties

1:02:53is it's just not possible.

1:02:58>> Thank you, Commissioner Guzman. Do any

1:03:00other Commissioners have any questions

1:03:02for staff at this time?

1:03:04All right, seeing as there are none,

1:03:06we're going to go ahead and open the

1:03:09public testimony portion of the public

1:03:10hearing. So, that is now open. Would the

1:03:13applicant like to speak on the matter?

1:03:24>> Good evening, commissioners. Uh my name

1:03:26is Tim Simon. This is my wife, Martha.

1:03:28Um I'd like to thank Pedro for walking

1:03:30us through this process, which has been

1:03:32a lengthy one. We're here representing

1:03:33my mother-in-law, her mother, who is

1:03:36nearing 96 years of age and has has a

1:03:38mobility issue. She lives in this house.

1:03:42The house has been in possession of the

1:03:44family since 1966. If you recall the

1:03:47presentation of who has lived there, it

1:03:49ended in 1966, and that's when her

1:03:51family took possession. They have no

1:03:54um consideration. They are not

1:03:56considering selling this property or

1:03:57flipping it as you you made reference

1:03:59to.

1:04:00Um some of these assessed

1:04:03observations have been made. There's

1:04:05been a good deal of work upgraded on the

1:04:07house in order to pass

1:04:09uh the inspection to get to this point.

1:04:11So, um if you have any other questions,

1:04:14please talk to us.

1:04:16>> Thank you. Does the commission have any

1:04:18comments or questions for the applicant?

1:04:23I don't think there are any right now.

1:04:24Thank you.

1:04:25>> Thank you.

1:04:27>> Recording secretary, have we received

1:04:29any written communication or is there a

1:04:31member of the public that would like to

1:04:32comment on this item?

1:04:35>> Chair, we have not received any public

1:04:37comments. If you are attending this

1:04:39meeting in person and would like to

1:04:40comment on this item, please fill out a

1:04:42request to speak form and turn it in to

1:04:44the secretary.

1:04:45If you're participating via Zoom and

1:04:47would like to comment on this item,

1:04:49please select the hand icon to indicate

1:04:51that you would like to speak. If you're

1:04:53calling in and would like to comment on

1:04:55this item, please dial

1:04:57star nine and then star six to unmute

1:04:59yourself.

1:05:01I will wait a few seconds.

1:05:06Chair, we do not have any speakers.

1:05:10>> Thank you. Are there any final questions

1:05:13for the applicant before I close the

1:05:14public hearing?

1:05:17Seeing as there are none, the public

1:05:19testimony portion of the public hearing

1:05:20is now closed.

1:05:23Is there a motion on this matter?

1:05:28>> I'll make a motion that we approve.

1:05:30>> We have a motion from Vice Chair

1:05:31Benninger. Is there a second?

1:05:34>> I'll second the matter.

1:05:36>> Thank you. We have a second from

1:05:37Commissioner Leo. Secretary, can you

1:05:39please call for a roll call vote?

1:05:42>> Commissioner Guzman?

1:05:43>> I.

1:05:44>> Commissioner Leo?

1:05:45>> I.

1:05:46>> Commissioner Oliva?

1:05:48Commissioner Pham?

1:05:50>> I.

1:05:50>> Commissioner Wu?

1:05:51>> I.

1:05:52>> Vice Chair Benninger?

1:05:54>> I.

1:05:54>> Chair Ramos?

1:05:55>> I.

1:05:57>> Motion approved by majority vote with

1:05:59Commissioner Oliva absent.

1:06:02>> Thank you. Congratulations.

1:06:05Now moving on to item four. This is a

1:06:06time and place for historic resources

1:06:08commission application number 2026-6,

1:06:12historic register categorization number

1:06:152026-7,

1:06:17and historic property preservation

1:06:19agreement number 2026-8

1:06:22for the property located at 2365

1:06:25North Riverside Drive, located within

1:06:28the single family residence R1 zoning

1:06:30district. Before we begin, do any have

1:06:32Do any commissioners have anything they

1:06:34wish to disclose with regard to this

1:06:35item?

1:06:38There are no disclosures. The case

1:06:39planner Pedro Gomez will provide a brief

1:06:42presentation.

1:06:43>> Thank [clears throat] you again, Madam

1:06:44Chair. And you'll have to get forgive

1:06:46me, part of the screen is being obscured

1:06:48by um the Zoom tools, so

1:06:51Uh the fourth item on tonight's agenda

1:06:53is also a request to place the property

1:06:56right next door, 2365 North Riverside

1:06:58Drive, um on the register and to execute

1:07:02a Mills Act agreement with the property

1:07:03owner.

1:07:05So, like the previous property, the

1:07:06property is being recommended to be

1:07:08listed as contributive.

1:07:10And I'll cover it again just in case,

1:07:11but a property can be designated as

1:07:14contributive if it

1:07:16>> [clears throat]

1:07:16>> contributes to the overall character and

1:07:19the history of a neighborhood, or if

1:07:20it's a good example of a period

1:07:22architecture.

1:07:25So, the property is being referred to as

1:07:26the Harwood-Schwarm House, and it's

1:07:28located in Floral Park. It's

1:07:30architecturally significant as an intact

1:07:33example of a Spanish Colonial Revival

1:07:35style house in the city.

1:07:37And it's also been identified as a

1:07:38contributor to the Floral Park National

1:07:40Historic District.

1:07:43The property was constructed in 1927 for

1:07:45F.R. Harwood, and early occupants

1:07:48include E.A. Schwarm and local

1:07:50residential contractor.

1:07:51And the property subsequently had

1:07:53several residents between 1930s and

1:07:551950s, including Ernest L. Spencer, the

1:07:58co-owner of radio station KVOE, and John

1:08:01Ashby, a Bank of America employee.

1:08:04The house qualifies for listing in the

1:08:06Santa Ana register

1:08:07under criterion one as an intact example

1:08:10of a Spanish Colonial Revival style

1:08:12home. And the recommended categorization

1:08:14is contributive because it contributes

1:08:16to the overall character and the history

1:08:19of Floral Park, and it's a good example

1:08:21of period architecture.

1:08:24So, here again we have photos of the

1:08:27property, additional photos. And

1:08:29character defining features include the

1:08:32um

1:08:33asymmetric composition, the stucco and

1:08:37rubble stone siding.

1:08:39It includes a front gable roof form clad

1:08:41in terracotta barrel tiles, the flat

1:08:44roof form with terracotta coping.

1:08:47The historic entrance patio,

1:08:49the double sash windows, the nine over

1:08:52nine wood frame double hung sash

1:08:53windows. And along the east elevation

1:08:56entrance patio, the shed roof and the

1:08:58terracotta tiles with stucco door

1:09:00surrounds.

1:09:05The property has no unidentified

1:09:07unauthorized no identified unauthorized

1:09:09modifications.

1:09:11And then upon consideration of the

1:09:13application, it's recommended that the

1:09:14city enter into a historic property

1:09:16preservation agreement subject to the

1:09:18completion of the future improvements

1:09:20described in the work plan. And those

1:09:22include removing the existing metal

1:09:24security screen door for the primary

1:09:26entrance.

1:09:27Assessing exterior stucco and rubble

1:09:29stone cladding for any cracks,

1:09:32deterioration, or inappropriate

1:09:34patching.

1:09:35Assessing the exterior wood elements

1:09:37including the doors, door surrounds, the

1:09:39decorative trim, and other wood

1:09:41features.

1:09:44And then continuing on, it'd be

1:09:46assessing the exterior painted surfaces

1:09:48and finishes for peeling, cracking,

1:09:50fading. Assessing the condition of the

1:09:52original wood sash windows including the

1:09:54frames, the sash, the glazing, the

1:09:57hardware.

1:09:58Assessing the hardscaping including the

1:10:00driveway, walkways, and entrance patio

1:10:03steps.

1:10:04And then

1:10:06the last slide here is assessing the

1:10:07condition of the roofing including the

1:10:09terracotta

1:10:10barrel tiles, the coping, the flashing,

1:10:13and associated roof components. And then

1:10:15assessing the detached garage garage,

1:10:18excuse me, including the stucco,

1:10:19terracotta, and then the wood tilt-up

1:10:21garage door.

1:10:24Again, staff will ensure that the

1:10:26proposed work is done sensitively and

1:10:28will maintain the property's

1:10:29character-defining features intact as

1:10:31part of the Mills Act agreement for this

1:10:33property.

1:10:35And then

1:10:36with that, staff recommends that the

1:10:37commission adopt the resolution to

1:10:39approve HRCA 20266 and HRC number 20267.

1:10:44And recommend that the city council

1:10:46authorize HPPA 20266.

1:10:50Again, I'm available for questions and

1:10:53the property owner representatives are

1:10:55also in attendance to answer questions.

1:10:59>> Thank you.

1:11:00Does the commission have any comments or

1:11:01questions for staff? Commissioner Leo.

1:11:05>> Pedro, I have a question about um

1:11:08the detached garage. And it's more of a

1:11:11a process than it is wondering whether

1:11:13or not So, if they maintain the exterior

1:11:17the his- the historical

1:11:19attributes of the exterior

1:11:21could they convert the garage into an

1:11:23ADU? It's detached from the house.

1:11:26As long as the exterior's kept the same.

1:11:29It's a wood tilt-up garage as it says in

1:11:31the application. Could they convert it

1:11:33to an ADU and still be considered

1:11:35historical? Because there's This is not

1:11:37the only property that's got detached

1:11:39garages in that neighborhood.

1:11:41Is that Is that doable? I mean, is that

1:11:43possible? Because since it is a

1:11:45structure, but if you don't change the

1:11:46exterior of the structure

1:11:48and remove its historical

1:11:50characteristics, I assume you could do

1:11:52it.

1:11:53>> Uh in short, yes.

1:11:54Uh there is also state laws that um

1:11:56prohibit

1:11:58denying ADUs. Um

1:12:00what they do allow is for us to impose

1:12:02standards that we normally wouldn't

1:12:03impose as part of this type of review

1:12:06for say um what's called a HEMA

1:12:08application, which

1:12:10before these recent changes to chapter

1:12:1230

1:12:13would have um

1:12:14meant that the planning commission

1:12:15reviews any exterior changes.

1:12:18So

1:12:19in this case, because we're staff is not

1:12:21allowed to have any sort of

1:12:23discretionary action on ADUs, if someone

1:12:25needed to say remove a garage door,

1:12:27which is identified as a

1:12:28character-defining feature and original,

1:12:30they could. And what we could do is ask

1:12:33for that to be filled in with stucco to

1:12:35match like for like. Um wood windows to

1:12:38match maybe something that was original.

1:12:40It'd have to be distinct enough to not

1:12:42create what's called a false sense of

1:12:43history, but in short, they can and we

1:12:45can regulate a little bit to make sure

1:12:48that the um

1:12:49alterations are compatible.

1:12:51>> Thank you. That's my only question,

1:12:53Chair.

1:12:54>> Thank you, Commissioner Leo. Do we have

1:12:56any other comments or questions for

1:12:57staff? Go ahead, Commissioner Woo.

1:13:00>> Um the city conducts a 5-year

1:13:02self-service certification inspection

1:13:04process process on these um

1:13:07uh Mills Act properties, right?

1:13:12>> [clears throat]

1:13:13>> We've developed a self-certification

1:13:15process. The city has not um

1:13:18had the opportunity to start that

1:13:19process.

1:13:21So, we haven't sent notices to property

1:13:22owners to do the self-certification.

1:13:25>> Uh

1:13:25uh is the applica- uh applicant going to

1:13:28be owner occupied?

1:13:32>> So, representatives of the property

1:13:34owner uh mentioned that they currently

1:13:36reside in one property.

1:13:38It'd be a question for them, but I doubt

1:13:40that they also reside in this one.

1:13:42>> Thank you.

1:13:45>> Do we have any other comments or

1:13:46questions for Go ahead, Commissioner

1:13:47Pham.

1:13:48>> Uh this is more of a general question.

1:13:51What is the benefit for the city

1:13:53to engage in all these contracts as you

1:13:55you mentioned it's over 4 to 500 uh

1:13:58contracts that we're currently engaged

1:14:00in. Obviously, like you mentioned, we're

1:14:03short-staffed. We won't be able to um

1:14:07administer these contracts.

1:14:09Um

1:14:10So,

1:14:12is there like a physical physical

1:14:14benefit or a cultural benefit for us to

1:14:17maintain these historical districts?

1:14:22>> Uh in short, yeah.

1:14:24Yes.

1:14:25Uh the cultural benefit mostly.

1:14:27So, in a city like Santa Ana that is

1:14:29absent natural resources like other

1:14:32cities, you know, streams, coastal

1:14:35access,

1:14:36um we're limited in what resources we

1:14:38have to preserve and

1:14:41sort of um

1:14:43emphasize. And so, historic is one of

1:14:44them. So, our history, our abundance of

1:14:47historical properties is one thing that

1:14:49we can celebrate and um the policy um

1:14:53decision-makers have established that

1:14:54this is something that they would like

1:14:56um to have for the city. And so, it is

1:14:59at a loss. So, each Mills Act agreement

1:15:01is a property tax reduction for the

1:15:04property owners and that ranges

1:15:06uh by property anywhere between 40 to

1:15:0860. Uh but the county does the

1:15:09assessment, so it is at a loss for

1:15:11property tax revenue for the city.

1:15:13So, the benefit though is that property

1:15:15owners are incentivized to upkeep their

1:15:17homes, invest the money into the

1:15:19properties, and then hopefully and

1:15:22collectively that helps sort of restore

1:15:24these neighborhoods and keep them

1:15:25intact, and help with the sort of

1:15:27cultural celebration, and the historic

1:15:29celebration, and hopefully drive

1:15:31other ways of money coming in. That's

1:15:34That's what I would say the benefit in

1:15:35in high-level.

1:15:37>> And then these um sorry, do these

1:15:39contracts they're um

1:15:46They're not obligations, right? Meaning

1:15:48um if a property not this project

1:15:50specifically, but in general if a

1:15:52property was sold to a different owner,

1:15:54and the owner decides that they

1:15:57uh do not want to engage in the Mills

1:16:00Act, and it's uh completely um

1:16:03um

1:16:04option- optional, they can exit the

1:16:06agreement, or is it a binding agreement

1:16:08that carries with the land and not um

1:16:11the actual owner at that time?

1:16:14I just want to make sure I understand

1:16:15kind of the mechanics of the Mills Act.

1:16:17>> Sure. I mean, it is an agreement, so

1:16:18it's binding in that manner. In the

1:16:20agreement, there's specifica- there's

1:16:22specifications like how either the city

1:16:24or a pri- uh private property owner can

1:16:26enter into exiting the agreement, but

1:16:28the first um

1:16:30period is 10 years. And after that, it's

1:16:32a revolving 1 year, so that's um until

1:16:35either the city or a private property

1:16:36owner decide to exit out of it. Um there

1:16:39are potentially, depending on how it

1:16:41works, There's stipulations for

1:16:43penalties for you know, exiting the

1:16:45agreement, but

1:16:47it's possible and I don't think it's

1:16:49happened in the time that I've been

1:16:50here. Certainly not

1:16:51any anyone that I can remember.

1:16:54But it's possible.

1:16:57>> That's all. Thank you.

1:17:00>> Thank you. I also have a question

1:17:03on just what we should be considering as

1:17:05a commission.

1:17:07As a commission does owner should owner

1:17:10occupancy have any

1:17:12impact in our decision-making?

1:17:15>> No.

1:17:16>> Thank you.

1:17:18Do we have any other questions for staff

1:17:20from any of the commissioners?

1:17:23Great. With that, we're going to move on

1:17:24to the public testimony. The public

1:17:26testimony portion of the public hearing

1:17:28is now open. Would the applicant like to

1:17:30speak on the matter?

1:17:37>> Good evening once again. Tim Simon,

1:17:39lawyer for

1:17:40Um

1:17:42I believe there was a question from

1:17:43Commissioner Woo as to the occupancy of

1:17:46the other house. It's occupied by my

1:17:49mother-in-law's grandson and his family.

1:17:52That's who lives there.

1:17:56>> We're doing our due diligence.

1:17:58>> I'm sorry.

1:17:59>> We're doing our due diligence.

1:18:01>> Oh.

1:18:01>> Yeah. That's all.

1:18:02>> I understand.

1:18:02>> Yeah. Nothing personal.

1:18:05>> Thank you. Do any other commissioners

1:18:07have any questions for the applicant?

1:18:11Great. Thank you.

1:18:14Recording secretary, have we received

1:18:16any written communication or is there a

1:18:18member of the public that would like to

1:18:19comment on this item?

1:18:22>> Sure, we have not received any public

1:18:24comments.

1:18:25If you're attending this meeting in

1:18:26person and would like to comment on this

1:18:28item, please fill out a request to speak

1:18:30form and turn it into the secretary.

1:18:32If you're participating via Zoom and

1:18:34would like to comment on this item,

1:18:35please select the hand icon to indicate

1:18:37that you would like to speak.

1:18:39If you're calling in and would like to

1:18:41comment on this item, please dial star

1:18:43nine and then star six to unmute

1:18:45yourself. I will wait a few seconds.

1:18:51Chair, we do not have any speakers.

1:18:54Thank you.

1:18:55Are there any final questions of the

1:18:57applicant before I close the public

1:18:58hearing?

1:19:01Vice Chair Benninger, did you have Okay.

1:19:03Uh with that, the public testimony

1:19:04portion of the public hearing is now

1:19:06closed. Is there a motion on this

1:19:08matter?

1:19:10>> So moved.

1:19:11>> Thank you. We have a motion from

1:19:13Commissioner Guzman to approve.

1:19:15>> Second.

1:19:15>> And we have a second from Vice Chair

1:19:17Benninger. Secretary, can you please

1:19:19call for a roll call vote?

1:19:22>> Commissioner Guzman?

1:19:23>> I.

1:19:23>> Commissioner Yu?

1:19:25>> I.

1:19:25>> Commissioner Oliva?

1:19:27Commissioner Pham?

1:19:29>> I.

1:19:29>> Commissioner Wu?

1:19:30>> I.

1:19:31>> Vice Chair Benninger?

1:19:32>> I.

1:19:33>> Chair Ramos?

1:19:34>> I.

1:19:36>> Motion approved by majority vote with

1:19:38Commissioner Oliva absent.

1:19:41>> Thank you. Congratulations.

1:19:44That concludes the business calendar.

1:19:46We're now moving on to staff comments.

1:19:51>> Thank [clears throat] you, Chair. No

1:19:52staff comments tonight.

1:19:54>> Thank you. We're now moving on to

1:19:56closing comments from the commission or

1:19:59any questions that there may be for

1:20:00staff.

1:20:03Go ahead, Commissioner Pham.

1:20:04>> Um if if possible,

1:20:06uh if there is a case, um

1:20:09could you forward us um you know,

1:20:11distribute to all of us a um application

1:20:14a Mills Act application that was denied?

1:20:16I I just want to review why

1:20:19um an application would be denied cuz

1:20:21obviously when we're when we're sitting

1:20:23here reviewing,

1:20:24uh you know, staff has

1:20:26presented all the kind of conditions for

1:20:29approvals. I want to understand it

1:20:31it

1:20:32it'd be a pointless exercise if you if

1:20:34you present,

1:20:35we

1:20:37approve, you present, we approve, you

1:20:38present, we I want to understand that

1:20:40there there Obviously, we're not aiming

1:20:43to deny an application, but I want to

1:20:45understand that there there is a pathway

1:20:47to deny it so that we understand when we

1:20:51are listening to your presentation that

1:20:53we can keep an an ear out for those uh

1:20:56certain conditions if uh present. Yeah.

1:20:59>> Sure, we can um do a survey see if we

1:21:01can find any. The only thing that I

1:21:03would mention is that a lot of the

1:21:06properties that wouldn't otherwise

1:21:08qualify never made it to HRC or before a

1:21:11body. So, it'd be one of those things

1:21:13where we're trying to find something

1:21:14that didn't happen because it didn't get

1:21:16to the point of the decision-making cuz

1:21:18they got screened out. But, if we do

1:21:20have an example of one where the HRC

1:21:23denied, we'll be sure to share that with

1:21:25the Planning Commission. Do we good?

1:21:26Thank you.

1:21:29>> Thank you, Commissioner Pham. Vice Chair

1:21:31Manager?

1:21:31>> Just following up on the Commissioner

1:21:33Pham's question, very good question.

1:21:35What percentage of applications that you

1:21:37received get rejected?

1:21:42>> [clears throat]

1:21:44>> I'd say close to

1:21:46maybe 40-60.

1:21:48And um

1:21:50it's for reasons of alterations and just

1:21:52not meeting those criteria. So, um

1:21:55Planning Manager Ricardo Solis is

1:21:56correct.

1:21:57Commission doesn't usually see those cuz

1:21:59we've already filtered them out as not

1:22:01eligible.

1:22:02>> So, you have a pretty good filter before

1:22:04it gets to us.

1:22:05>> It's part of the review process that we

1:22:07do. Um it's pretty rigorous. Um the

1:22:10applications that come before you um

1:22:12have gone through the review process

1:22:14extensively.

1:22:16Um and in those instances where we

1:22:18recommend denial, we would recommend

1:22:19denial and advise the property or yeah,

1:22:21property owner that we wouldn't be able

1:22:23to recommend approval.

1:22:25Most cases are like, okay, thank you. I

1:22:27understand.

1:22:31>> Thank you, Vice Chair Manager.

1:22:32Do we have any other comments or

1:22:34questions for staff? I do have some

1:22:36questions, so I was present at the last

1:22:38City Council meeting where the zoning

1:22:40code update study session started. And

1:22:43from what I understood, there may be a

1:22:45second. It was a little confusing

1:22:46understanding exactly what next steps

1:22:48would be. And I also heard a extensive

1:22:50discussion by several council members on

1:22:53the residential industrial overlay. And

1:22:55I know we had extensive conversations on

1:22:57that as well as a commission. So, I

1:22:59would just and I'm sure that it was

1:23:01a part of all of the material that the

1:23:03City Council got. But as those

1:23:05discussions are being had on the dais, I

1:23:07think it would be helpful for staff to

1:23:09also remind the council of the extensive

1:23:11nature of the discussion that was had by

1:23:13this commission specifically on that on

1:23:16the residential industrial overlay,

1:23:17which may change.

1:23:19So, just want to

1:23:20make that comment. And then also just

1:23:22general reminder to everybody to vote.

1:23:24We are 8 days away from election day.

1:23:27Voting centers are now open. They opened

1:23:29on Saturday. We'll be open every day.

1:23:31You can drop off your ballot securely at

1:23:33a ballot box. If you're not registered,

1:23:35you can register same day on site. And

1:23:37if you're in line by 8:00 p.m. that day,

1:23:39then you can vote. So, that's my my

1:23:42closing comment.

1:23:43>> Vice Chair Manager, did you want to add

1:23:44to that?

1:23:45>> following up. I really uh

1:23:48Ali did an excellent job presentation

1:23:50presenting to us the staff.

1:23:53I mean presenting to a council,

1:23:55especially on a busy night that we had.

1:23:57But I thought they did an excellent fair

1:23:58presentation to that. Uh I think now

1:24:01they have a second reading coming with

1:24:03that.

1:24:04I also like to

1:24:06uh

1:24:08follow up with the commissioners to get

1:24:09out and vote. This is our opportunity.

1:24:11If you don't like how something's run,

1:24:13this is your opportunity to make that

1:24:14change. I get several people say, "It

1:24:16doesn't matter anyway." Yes, it does.

1:24:18Every vote counts. So, please get out

1:24:20and and and vote. Thank you.

1:24:23>> Thank you. With that, do we have any any

1:24:25final

1:24:26Go ahead, Commissioner Leo.

1:24:28>> I just wanted to congratulate you on

1:24:30your mother-in-law. She's 96. My parents

1:24:32are in their late 80s. Good luck to you.

1:24:33Good luck to her. And hopefully she

1:24:35makes it to 100.

1:24:40>> Thank you, Commissioner Leo. I think

1:24:42that's a good note to close on. So with

1:24:44that, this meeting is adjourned. Our

1:24:46next regular meeting is scheduled for

1:24:48November 9th, 2026 at 5:30 p.m. Thank

1:24:51you all.

```*