February 11, 2025
City Council Meeting
Written Public Comments
City Council
Meeting Time: 02-11-25 18:00
eComments Report
Meetings Meeting
Time
Agenda
Items
Comments Support Oppose Neutral
City Council 02-11-25
18:00
43 7 1 2 0
City Council
02-11-25 18:00
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS
At this time, members of the public may address the Council on matters not listed on the agenda within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council, provided that NO action may be taken on off-agenda items unless authorized by law. Public Comments are limited to three (3) minutes per speaker unless a different time limit is announced. 2 1 0 0
3.7. Second Reading and adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Orange establishing Parking Meter Zones, operations; fees; and procedures. Ordinance No. 02-25.
3 0 2 0
9.1. Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 03-25 containing administrative updates to various sections of Titles 9, 10, 12, and 13 of the Orange Municipal Code.
2 0 0 0
Agenda Item: eComments for 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS
At this time, members of the public may address the Council on matters not listed on the agenda within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council, provided that NO action may be taken on off-agenda items unless authorized by law. Public Comments are limited to three (3) minutes per speaker unless a different time limit is announced.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:15pm 02-11-25
Item 5.2: A huge thank you to Councilmember Gyllenhammer for adding agenda item 5.2 to the council meeting to discuss solar initiatives for the city’s buildings. Not only will this investment save the city and taxpayers money, but it also reduces the amount of carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and other pollutants that are emitted into the environment. Reducing the amount of pollution translates into cleaner air and water and improved health for our city.
Suzanne Tani, Orange Resident
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:46am 02-11-25
I hope the City Council makes a statement regarding the Orange Heights development so that those opposing the development and attending the council meetings can stop wasting all of our time. This development is a done deal and those wanting to oppose should only be allowed to submit written comments so that real business can be attended to. I get that they don't want more housing and want to keep the property as open space but those are selfish reasons. Those opponents forget that at one time, their houses were built on property that was once open space but now they're opposing it for others. If they want the property to remain open space, then they should put their money where their mouth is and buy the property! If not, then let's move on to more important things like getting us out of a deficit. The sooner those homes are built, the sooner we'll get property taxes and more people will shop in Orange.
Agenda Item: eComments for 3.7. Second Reading and adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Orange establishing Parking Meter Zones, operations; fees; and procedures. Ordinance No. 02-25.
Overall Sentiment
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 4:04pm 02-11-25
Dear City Council Members:
I formally request that this item be removed from the consent calendar to be able to hear additional public testimony regarding this proposal. We are long term business and property owners in the Old Towne area and have questions regarding the pay for parking proposal and it's true impacts to the businesses and community.
We also have questions regarding proper public noticing to the affected parties. There are many absentee owners who were unaware that this was being brought before the City Council on January 28, 2025 and were unable to testify on that date.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:37am 02-11-25
Orange City Council members,
I am in complete support of the paid parking in Old Towne. I am amazed that the city hasn't brought this about beforehand. Old Towne has become a destination with all of it shops and restaurants and like many other orange county cities, people who want to visit are willing to pay for premier parking. I appreciate that there will still be free parking for those that don't want to pay but for those, like me, who want to park close, we can pay for it. This isn't something new and with the city's budget situation, this is a no-brainer. After watching the last meeting, I find it interesting that Mayor pro tem Bilodeau would rather visitors be penalized for wanting to stay and shop (spend) longer by enforcing the 2-hr limit and ticketing. First, I don't want our officers wasting their time ticketing customers nor do I want to pay a company to do the same. Our officers are not meter maids. They are doing an amazing job keeping us safe and that's more important. Second, shouldn't the visitor/customer have the right to stay longer if they're willing to pay for it? Isn't that the purpose of economic development? Third, for those that live in the apartments in the area, shouldn't it be the responsibility of the apartment owners to provide parking and not the city's? I'm sure the leases that were signed specify if there's parking designated for the unit and if it doesn't then that's a problem that should be taken up with the apartment owner not an issue with the city.
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 7:28am 02-11-25
Dear City of Orange Council Members:
Our families have owned the property at 129-131 N. Glassell, since 1953. Throughout the years, we have been good stewards of the property and have had excellent tenants to provide for the City of Orange and adjacent Cities. We have a mix of retail and office space, and would like to continue on for many years to come. For a number of reasons, including the possible adverse effect on our current and perspective tenants, we are not in favor of any additional parking cost in Downtown Orange.
Thank you for your consideration on this matter.
Steven A. Nelson
Brian Casserly
Pam Childress
Agenda Item: eComments for 9.1. Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance No. 03-25 containing administrative updates to various sections of Titles 9, 10, 12, and 13 of the Orange Municipal Code.
Overall Sentiment
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 1:10pm 02-11-25
Please clarify section 10.38.010 where it states “No person shall park or leave standing on any street designated in this section, any of the following types of vehicles”. What vehicles are you talking about? The new ordinance eliminated the referencing vehicles. Please also clarify section 12.36.040. It states “A fee shall be paid to the Community Development Department a fee at the time of filing the application for a Building Permit”. Am I to pay for two fees and what is the first one for? It doesn’t make sense Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 12:59pm 02-11-25
I noticed that the ordinance states it is exempt from CEQA but there is no mention of the exemption on the staff report. I thought any potential CEQA impacts had to be noted on the staff report for transparency to the public.
Also, it would be helpful to note which adjustments are a result of city or State mandates, so the public knows which agency is responsible for the changes. There are also some inconsistencies in the ordinance. I.E. under
10.14.050 Boulevard and Avenue are abbreviated (under Anaheim Way) but are spelled out in all areas. Also under 10.30.040, should the "Neighborhood Permit Parking Program" be capitalized or not? It isn't in section C but it is in the rest of the report. Just some minor inconsistencies that should've been fixed before it's final