Public Comments
Non-Agenda Item
City Council
Meeting Time: 08-26-25 18:00
eComments Report
Meetings Meeting
Time
Agenda
Items
Comments Support Oppose Neutral
City Council 08-26-25
18:00
45 3 1 1 1
City Council
08-26-25 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 0 1 1
9.1. Establishment of Permit Parking Area "AD" to be compromised of the east side of S. Swidler Place from E. Chapman Avenue to E. Almond Avenue and E. Almond Avenue from S. Swidler Place to S. Olympia Way.
Resolution No. 11630.
1 1 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.
Overall Sentiment
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 10:42am 08-25-25
Dear Council Members,
I am very concerned about the ongoing crashes at the Old Towne Orange Circle fountain area. Despite the barriers that were added, vehicles are still hitting the fountain, and the most recent accident shows that the current measures are not enough to keep drivers or pedestrians safe.
I urge the city to consider stronger safety improvements. Some options could include making the Circle pedestrian-only (which everyone loved during Covid), adding large flashing lights or reflective signage to alert drivers, lots of speed bumps on the blocks entering the circle, installing sturdier bollards or barriers around the fountain, and adding more traffic calming features at the entrances to slow vehicles down. More police on weekends at night conducting DUI checks would help as well! The Circle is a historic and beloved gathering place, and it should be safe for everyone to walk, shop, and enjoy without fear of ongoing accidents. I ask that the Council take action to protect this community space.
Thank you!
Guest User
Location:
Submitted At: 9:57am 08-25-25
Council blamed for the City’s financial predicament based on the false and misleading claim that the DRC is keeping business revenue out of the City by taking too long to process applications.
The DRC is only responsible for a small portion the entitlement process, and the vast majority of delays are beyond the purview and control of the DRC. Incomplete submittals, inaccurate plans, missing architectural basics, lack of design consistency, legal challenges, lack of financing, change of business plans, shift in market conditions, zoning anomalies, easement challenges, neighborhood pushback, and City staff shortages are just some of the issues that can cause delays; none of which are within the purview or control of the DRC.
Council stated: “there is absolutely no reason the DRC should hang up a project in the industrial zone for years …for one tree”.
Check the record on the Prologis project: there were three SMART committee reviews in eight months before the item reached the DRC with the staff report citing landscaping as an issue item. The applicant was required, by the OMC, to have 125 trees but only proposed 30.
A deficiency of 95 trees, not “one tree”.
The truck transfer terminal would entail covering nearly the entire site with concrete, an unusually large expanse of uninterrupted pavement. Trees are critical for shade and screening especially considering the community center and apartment neighbors. The DRC is required to make a finding that any project meets all the codes, including landscaping requirements.
After 90 days they returned with a revised project with additional, and larger sizes of trees, but were still short.
With the applicant’s agreement and considering the nature of the truck terminal use, neighboring community kitchen and multi-family residential project, the DRC approved the revision with conditions: to increase sizes and add trees for a total of 80 new trees; 45 fewer than the benchmark of 125.
The dental office on west Chapman from 2017 was designed by an electrical engineer without architectural qualifications and repeatedly presented to the DRC with inaccurate and incomplete documents for a disproportionate building with multiple construction issues and an unworkable site plan. It was poorly designed and was never built.
The Chik-fil-A project spent years in the planning department before coming to the DRC in 2019. It did not meet the landscape standards; nor did it provide the architectural prominence required for that corner site as laid out in the thematic design standards for the medical corridor as designated in the City’s General Plan. The DRC must make findings that a project is in conformance with all applicable city codes and standards. Chick-fil-A was approved when the applicant returned with an appropriate redesign.
Of the hundreds of projects the DRC has reviewed during my tenure the vast majority were approved in a single meeting. Reaching back to cherry-pick these three issue-laden projects as evidence of “handcuffing businesses” is both disingenuous and a misrepresentation of the record.
The DRC is neither business friendly nor business un-friendly. The DRC is not responsible for revenue generation, nor the City’s fiscal mismanagement. The purview of the DRC is design: the quality and integrity of the architecture, the landscaping, the consistency and compatibility with the neighborhood.
Please stand up for the truth. Get the facts straight. Ask the DRC.
Agenda Item: eComments for 9.1. Establishment of Permit Parking Area "AD" to be compromised of the east side of S. Swidler Place from E. Chapman Avenue to E. Almond Avenue and E. Almond Avenue from S. Swidler Place to S. Olympia Way.
Resolution No. 11630.
Overall Sentiment
Natalie Perez
Location:
Submitted At: 5:43pm 08-26-25
We are residents of Swidler Place, and we want to bring to your attention the increasing difficulty we face with parking on our street. Over the years, it has become more challenging, particularly due to nearby residents of an apartment complex across Chapman who occupy most of the parking spaces on our street and the neighboring areas.
Additionally, we’ve noticed a lack of respect for property, with littering and car repairs taking place on the street late into the evening. The residents of the apartments across from Chapman, park in a way that prevents others from accessing parking in front or behind them, contributing to a hostile environment for those of us who actually live here. In the attached photo, you can see that an apartment resident intentionally bumped into the other vehicle to force them to move. In this example, the car behind the white truck was attempting to park, but the truck was deliberately positioned in the middle to hold spots for two vehicles.
This situation is particularly concerning for our family, as we have a special needs adult son who relies on OC Access transportation from Monday-Friday. We have experienced difficulties with their accessibility to our home, as apartment residents often block the street while moving their cars in order to save parking spots.
We sincerely appreciate your attention to these concerns and respectfully request your consideration for the implementation of permitted parking in our neighborhood.