Exhibit 10 - Planning Commission Agenda Packet with Public Comments — Santa Ana City Council, January 16, 2024 (part 2 of 2)

14724D-02 TG Memo

PROPOSED PROJECT
The Project site currently contains an existing 5,837 square -foot industrial building that will be converted into a n administrative office building. A 12,186 SF building was demolished and redeveloped into parking spaces as part of the expansion. In addition, the applicant is proposing to improve the site with 17,497 square feet of student outdoor spaces, on -site parking, and landscaping. Vista Heritage Global Academy is not increasing the maximum number of students with this expansion.

TRIP GENERATION
Trip generation represents the amount of traffic which is both attracted to and produced by a development. Determining traffic generation for a specific project is therefore based upon forecasting the amount of traffic that i s expected to be both attracted to and produced by the specific land uses being proposed for a given development. In order to develop the traffic characteristics of the existing land use and the proposed Project, trip -generation statistics published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11
th Edition) were used.

EXISTING USE
As noted previously, the site is designated as Light Manufacturing (M1) and is currently developed with a 5,837 square foot industrial building on-site. The trip generation for the existing use is summarized in Table 1. As shown in Table 1, the existing industrial building generates a total of 28 two-way trips per day with 4 AM peak hour trips and 4 PM peak hour trips.

TABLE 1: EXISTING USE TRIP GENERATION

PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed Project includes the re development of the existing building into a 5,764 school district office building . The trip generation summary illustrating daily, and peak hour trip generation estimates for the proposed Project are also summarized in Table 2. The proposed Project is anticipated to generate 84 two-way trips per day with 14 AM peak hour trips and 12 PM peak hour trips.

ITE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use1 LU Code In Out Total In Out Total
Manufacturing 140 TSF 0.52 0.16 0.68 0.23 0.51 0.74 4.75 Daily
Land Use Quantity Units2 In Out Total In Out Total
Manufacturing 5.837 TSF 3 1 4 1 3 4 28
1 Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual , Eleventh Edition. 2 TSF = thousand square feet
PM Peak HourAM Peak Hour
Units2 Daily
Ingrid Canedo, Red Hook Capital Partners
July 24, 2023

Page 3 of 3 ends

14724D-02 TG Memo
TABLE 2: PROPOSED PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY

TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON
Table 3 compares the trip generation of the proposed Project to the existing use ( currently adopted). The resulting net change in trips is also identified in Table 3 and has been calculated by subtracting the existing use from the proposed Project. As shown, the Project is anticipated to generate a net increase of 56 two-way trips per day, 10 more AM peak hour trips, and 8 more PM peak hour trips as compared to the existing use.

TABLE 3: TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON

FINDINGS
The development of the proposed Project (school district office) is anticipated to generate more trips than the existing (currently approved) industrial use. The net increase in trip generation and total trips generated are below 50 peak hour trips. As such, additional traffic analysis beyond this trip generation assessment does not appear to be necessary as the effects on transportation operations (level of service) are not significant.

If you have any questions or comments, I can be reached at [email protected].

Respectfully submitted,
URBAN CROSSROADS, INC.

Jose Alire, P.E. Robert Vu, P.E.

Senior Traffic Engineer Transportation Engineer ITE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use1 LU Code In Out Total In Out Total
School District Office 528 TSF 1.18 1.18 2.36 1.02 1.02 2.04 14.37 Daily
Land Use Quantity Units2 In Out Total In Out Total
School District Office 5.837 TSF 7 7 14 6 6 12 84
1 Trip Generation Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual , Eleventh Edition. 2 TSF = thousand square feet
Units2 Daily
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use In Out Total In Out Total Daily
Existing Use 3 1 4 1 3 4 28
Proposed Project 7 7 14 6 6 12 84
Net Change (Proposed - Existing) 4 6 10 5 3 8 56
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Exhibit 8 - Community Meeting Documents

Vista Charter Public Schools
District Office & Outdoor Space
Coming 2024

INTRODUCTION TO THE VISTA ORGANIZATION
Who we are: Purpose of District office Space:
• Vista Charter Public Schools operates 6 free public
charter schools in Los Angeles and Orange County
serving a total of 1,500 students.
• Vista Charter Public Schools Headquarters
Host Monthly Board Meetings•

WHY SANTA ANA?
Location:
68% of VCPS student enrollment is currently in
Orange County
Organizational Hub:
• • Auto shop acquisition created an
opportunity to have a district office
located next to our largest school.

Vista District Office

COMMUNITY IMPACT
•
•
Reducing homeless presence
Significantly more parking vs. when Auto Shops were
present
• Beautifying dilapidated auto shop building

OUTDOOR SITE IMPROVEMENTS
•
•
Addresses the needs the community requested
Introduces outdoor play space for physical
activities
•
•
Provides safe, beautiful outdoor space
Provides additional parking spaces

FAIRVIEW BUSINESS CENTER SITE PLAN

ENLARGED SITE PLAN
• Increased Parking: 52 New Stalls
• Increased Landscaping
• Increased Outdoor Play Space
• New beautiful Offices
• New Fencing
KEY
Outdoor
landscaping
District office
Fencing

OUTDOOR SPORTS

PLAYFIELD & PLAY YARD
Gate
Ingress/Egress

PROJECT DETAILS
• Additional lot to provide support functions (does not increase school capacity) • Provides 72 additional parking spaces/reduces impact to Business Park • Enhances student drop‐off/pick‐up functions
• Encourages commercial use that is consistent with Business Park uses • Requires additional Sunshine Meeting (similar to this meeting) • Requires zone change for automotive parcel and amendment to Operational Standards to allow outdoor play area
• Planning Commission review and recommendation
• City Council action

DISTRICT OFFICE IMPROVMENTS

WEST ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION

DISTRICT OFFICE IMPROVMENTS

NORTH ELEVATION

SOUTH ELEVATION

DROP OFF AND PICK ROUTE MODIFICATIONS

CURRENT ROUTE PROPOSED ROUTE

DROP OFF AND PICK ROUTE MODIFICATIONS

CURRENT ROUTE PROPOSED ROUTE

THANK YOU!

Exhibit 9 - Parcel Map in Recording 86-284222

O R A N G E C O U N T Y R E P O R T E R
OR#
~SINCE 1921~
To the right is a copy of the notice you sent to us for publication in the ORANGE COUNTY REPORTER. Thank you for using our newspaper. Please read this notice carefully and call us with any corrections. The Proof of Publication will be filed with the County Clerk, if required, and mailed to you after the last date below. Publication date(s) for this notice is (are):

Daily Journal Corporation
Serving your legal advertising needs throughout California.

Mailing Address : 600 W SANTA ANA BLVD STE 812, SANTA ANA, CA 92701 Telephone (714) 543-2027 / Fax (714) 542-6841
Visit us @ www.LegalAdstore.com

NUVIA OCAMPO

CITY OF SANTA ANA/PLANNING & BUILDING AGENCY
20 CIVIC CENTER PLAZA 2ND FLR
SANTA ANA, CA 92702

GPN GOVT PUBLIC NOTICE
601 North Fairview
11/27/2023
Publication
Total
$146.85
$146.85
ORANGE COUNTY REPORTER, SANTA ANA (714) 543-2027
BUSINESS JOURNAL, RIVERSIDE (951) 784-0111
DAILY COMMERCE, LOS ANGELES (213) 229-5300
LOS ANGELES DAILY JOURNAL, LOS ANGELES (213) 229-5300
SAN FRANCISCO DAILY JOURNAL, SAN FRANCISCO (800) 640-4829 SAN JOSE POST-RECORD, SAN JOSE (408) 287-4866
THE DAILY RECORDER, SACRAMENTO (916) 444-2355
THE DAILY TRANSCRIPT, SAN DIEGO (619) 232-3486
THE INTER-CITY EXPRESS, OAKLAND (510) 272-4747
Notice Type:

Ad Description

COPY OF NOTICE
3760824
!A000006461553!
The charge(s) for this order is as follows. An invoice will be sent after the last date of publication. If you prepaid this order in full, you will not receive an invoice.

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

BEFORE THE SANTA ANA PLANNING

COMMISSION
The City of Santa Ana encourages the
public to participate in the decision -
making process. We encourage you to
contact us prior to the Public Hearing if
you have any questions .

Planning C ommission Action : The
Planning Commission will hold a Public
Hearing to receive public testimony, and
will take action on the item described
below. Decision on this matter will be final
unless appealed within 10 calendar days
of the decision by any interes ted party or
group.

Project Location
: 601 North Fairview
Street located within the Light Industrial
(M1) zoning district.

Project Applicant: Enrique Diaz with Red
Hook Capital Partners, LLC (Applicant) on
behalf of Vista Heritage Charter Schools
(Property Owner)
Proposed Project: Applicant is
requesting approval of Amendment
Application (AA) No. 2023 -04 (Zone
Change) and Zoning Ordinance
Amendment (ZOA) No. 2023 -03, to
rezone the subject property from Light
Industrial (M1) to Specific Development
No. 82 (SD -82), expand the boundaries of
SD -82 to include the subject property, and
to modify SD -82 to allow Administrative
Offices as a permitted use and Outdoor
Play Areas as a permitted use, ancillary to
schools. The requested approvals would
accommodate the conv ersion of an
existing 5,837 -square -foot industrial
building into an administrative office
building for Vista Heritage Charter School,
and allow an outdoor play area adjacent
to the existing school.

Environmental Impact: Pursuant to the
California Environme ntal Quality Act
(CEQA) guidelines, this project is
exempt from further review under
Section 15301 (Existing Facilities),
Class 1 exemption, as it involves
negligible or no expansion of an
existing or former use. Additionally,
the project is also exempt pu rsuant to
Section 15183 (Projects Consistent
with a Community Plan, General Plan,
or Zoning) of the CEQA guidelines.

Notice of Exemption No. 2023 -40 will
be filed for this project.

Meeting Details: This matter will be
heard on Monday, December 11, 2023 at
5:30 p.m . in the City Council Chambers,
22 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA
92701. Members of the public may
attend this meeting in person or join
via Zoom. For the most up -to -date
information on how to participate virtually
in this meeting, please visit
https://www.santa -ana.org/planning -and -
building -meeting -participation/.

Written Comments: If you are unable to
participate in the meeting, you may send
written comments by e -mail to
PBAeComments@santa -ana.org
(reference the Agenda Item # in the
subject li ne) or by mail to Nuvia Ocampo,
Recording Secretary, City of Santa Ana,
20 Civic Center Plaza – M20, Santa Ana,
CA 92701. Deadline to submit written
comments is 3:30 p.m. on the day of the
meeting. Comments received after the
deadline may not be distribute d to the
Commission but will be made part of the
record.

Where To Get More Information :

Additional details regarding the proposed
action(s), including the full text of the
discretionary item, may be found on the
City website 72 hours prior to the public
he aring at https://santa -
ana.primegov.com/public/portal.

Who To Contact For Questions: Should
you have any project questions, please
contact case planner Fernanda Arias with
the Planning Division by phone at (714)
667 -2792 or by email at FArias@santa -
ana.org .

Note : If you challenge the decision on the
above matter, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone
else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written
correspondence delivered to the Planning
Commission or City Council of the City of
Santa Ana at, or prior to, the public
hearing.

Si tiene preguntas en español, favor de
llamar a Nuvia Ocampo (714) 667 -2732.

N u c n liên l c b ng ti ng Vi t,
xin i n tho i cho Tony Lai s (714)
565 -2627.
11/27/23
OR-3760824#

CITY OF SANTA ANA
Planning and Building Agency
20 Civic Center Plaza ● P.O. Box 1988
Santa Ana, California 92702
www.santa-ana.org/pba

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

BEFORE THE SANTA ANA PLANNING COMMISSION

The City of Santa Ana encourages the public to participate in the decision-making process. This notice is being sent to those who live or own property within 1000 feet of the project site or who have expressed an interest in the proposed action. We encourage you to contact us prior to the Public Hearing if you have any questions.

Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission will hold a Public Hearing to receive public testimony, and will take action on the item described below. Decision on this matter will be final unless appealed within 10 calendar days of the decision by any interested party or group.

Project Location: 601 North Fairview Street located within the Light Industrial (M1) zoning district.

Project Applicant: Enrique Diaz with Red Hook Capital Partners, LLC (Applicant) on behalf of Vista Heritage Charter Schools (Property Owner)
Proposed Project: Applicant is requesting approval of Amendment Application (AA) No. 2023- 04 (Zone Change) and Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZOA) No. 2023-03, to rezone the subject property from Light Industrial (M1) to Specific Development No. 82 (SD-82), expand the boundaries of SD-82 to include the subject property, and to modify SD -82 to allow Administrative Offices as a permitted use and Outdoor Play Areas as a per mitted use, ancillary t o schools. The requested approvals would accommodate the conversion of an existing 5,837-square-foot industrial building into an administrative office building for Vista Heritage Charter School, and allow an outdoor play area adjacent to the existing school.

Environmental Impact: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines, this project is exempt from further review under Section 15301 (Existing Facilities), Class 1 exemption, as it involves negligible or no expansion of an existing or former use. Additio nally, the project is also exempt pursuant to Section 15183 (Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan, or Zoning) of the CEQA guidelines. Notice of Exemption No. 2023-40 will be filed for this project.

Meeting Details: This matter will be heard on Monday, December 11, 2023 at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 22 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701. Members of the public may attend this meeting in person or join via Zoom. For the most up-to-date information on how to participate virtually in this meeting, please visit https://www.santa-ana.org/planning-and-building-meeting- participation/.

Written Comments: If you are unable to participate in the meeting, you may send written comments by e-mail to [email protected] (reference the Agenda Item # in the subject line ) or by mail to Nuvia Ocampo, Recording Secretary, City of Santa Ana, 20 Civic Center Pl aza – M20, Santa Ana, CA 92701. Deadline to submit written comments is 3:30 p.m. on the day of the meeting.

Comments received after the deadline may not be distributed to the Commission but will be made part of the record.

Where To Get More Information: Additional details regarding the proposed action(s), including the full text of the discretionary item, may be found on the City website 72 hours prior to the public hearing at https://santa-ana.primegov.com/public/portal.

Who To Contact For Questions: Should you have any project questions, please contact case planner Fernanda Arias with the Planning Division by phone at (714) 667- 2792 or by email at FArias@santa- ana.org.

Note: If you challenge the decision on the above matter, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission or City Council of the City of Santa Ana at, or prior to, the public hearing.

Si tiene preguntas en español, favor de llamar a Nuvia Ocampo (714) 667-2732.

Nếu cần liên lạc bằng tiếng Việt, xin điện thoại cho Tony Lai số (714) 565-2627.

1000’ RADIUS NOTIFICATION MAP

1 Ocampo, Nuvia
From: Barry Einck <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, December 8, 2023 4:18 PM
To: eComments, PBA
Cc: Angie Gmail Cano; Dave Hunt; Scotty Lee; Anh Le; Paola Marrufo; Robin Owens Subject: Opposition to Vista Charter proposal (DP No. 2023-10) Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hello members of the SA Planning Commission.

My name is Barry Einck. My property address is 523 North Fairview. I along with 11 other owners are located on the exact property which is being impacted by the Vista Charter proposal.

We are all located within a planned HOA community governed by CC&R and recorded documents that protect the common areas of this community.

The recorded Reciprocal Easement Agreement (86‐284222) contains the following language, which is in direct conflict with Vista charter proposal:
“This agreement allows parking across all parcels.” “This agreement explicitly prohibits the construction of barriers, such as fences or walls.”

When the SD 82 was revised to allow the school to occupy their current location, there was a specific line item added to the zoning, which indicated “no outdoor recreation area would be allowed”. I don’t understand why that line item is now being ignored, and potentially allowing the school to fence off and occupy common area property for an outdoor recreation area.

Please remember, this is a Commercial Business Park, which has typical industrial operations, which are potentially hazardous and dangerous in nature. We have semi trucks, delivery trucks and forklifts operating in the immediate vicinity of the proposed outdoor recreation area.

By the removal of additional parking spaces for the use of an outdoor recreation area is going to greatly impact the parking situation in the park and increase the level of danger due to the additional congestion created.

Also section 2.2.4 of our association's Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) mentions that the common interest in the Common Area cannot be altered without the consent of all Unit Owners and 75% of first Mortgagees of Units. I know alterations or changes to the Common Area, as presented by Vista Charter School, must adhere to these established rules.

I feel that it is very important that the planning commission considers these rules from our HOA recorded documents in making a decision regarding this proposal.

Please include this letter to be on file with all of the pertaining information for this planning commission proposal.

Thank you for your time and
consideration.

Regards,
Barry Einck
523 N Fairview
714‐697‐8730

2 Sent from my iPhone
1 Ocampo, Nuvia
From: Angie Cano <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 6, 2023 2:11 PM
To: Carl Benninger; Alan Woo; Isuri Kennedycommission; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: Bernal, Sarah; eComments, PBA; Barry Einck; Dave Hunt; Arias, Fernanda Subject: Opposition of Vista’s Proposed Project (DP No. 2023-10): Planning Commissioner Meeting on 12.11.23
Attachments: 12.6.23 Opposition of Vista’s Proposed Project (DP No. 2023-10) Planning.pdf;

07.02.1986 Agreement of Reciprocal Easement .pdf
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Good afternoon Commissioners,

Attached you will find a copy of my opposition letter regarding Vista Heritage Charter School’s Proposed of Project (DP No. 2023-10) for your consideration during your Planning Commission meeting on Monday, December 11, 2023 at 5:30pm (There is no agenda yet posted on the city's website). Furthermore, I attached a copy of the association's Agreement of Reciprocal Easements that has been hidden by Vista Heritage Charter in their arguments to build a playground in our association's parking lot.

A similar letter in opposition was sent to the three board members of the Civic Center Business Owners' Association today, Wednesday, December 6th since section 2.2.4 of our association's Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) mentions that the common interest in the Common Area cannot be altered without the consent of all Unit Owners and 75% of first Mortgagees of Units. I know alterations or changes to the Common Area, as presented by Vista Charter School, must adhere to these established rules. Please see the attached letter for more details about historical information of our Association.

ANGIE CANO
BUSINESS ADDRESS: 563 North Fairview St. Santa Ana, CA 92703 CELL: 714.957.5744

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Angie Cano <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: Civic Center Board Meeting Notification 12-6-23 5:00 PM To: Danny deLeon Jr. <[email protected]>, Scotty Lee <[email protected]>, Don Wilson <[email protected]>
Cc: Ingrid Canedo <[email protected]>, Enrique Diaz <[email protected]>, Dhan Mhaskar <[email protected]>, Collin Felch <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, Perla Marrufo <[email protected]>, Barry Einck <[email protected]>, Dave Hunt 2 <[email protected]>, Cutis Tom <[email protected]>, John Shen <[email protected]>, Anh Le <[email protected]>, Wil Marrufo <[email protected]>, Paola Marrufo <[email protected]>, Vince Fregoso <[email protected]>, William Marrufo <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, Mom <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, Robin Owens <[email protected]>

Good morning,

I realized the file I emailed last night is grainy and so I've attached a clear version of my comments in this email for the Civic Center Business Park Owner's Association scheduled for Wednesday, December 5 at 5pm via Zoom. Please consider these comments during the meeting today.

ANGIE CANO
BUSINESS ADDRESS: 563 North Fairview St. Santa Ana, CA 92703 CELL: 714.957.5744

On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 10:28 PM Angie Cano <[email protected]> wrote:

Good evening,
I am attaching my comments for the Civic Center Business Park Owner's Association scheduled for Wednesday, December 5 at 5pm via Zoom. Please consider these comments during the meeting tomorrow.

ANGIE CANO
BUSINESS ADDRESS: 563 North Fairview St. Santa Ana, CA 92703 CELL: 714.957.5744

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 12:39 PM <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Civic Center Business Owners Association,

Attached is the Agenda for the subject meeting with the zoom link below for your convenience. If you have any questions please call Affinity Property Services, Inc. at 714.505.5400.

3 Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/95928265511

Meeting ID: 959 2826 5511

VIA EMAIL
Angie Cano and Levi Cano
563 North Fairview St.

Santa Ana, CA 92703

Wednesday, December 6, 2023

To the Members of the Santa Ana Planning Commission:

Subject: Opposi�on to Agenda items regarding Vista Heritage Charter School’s Proposed of Project (DP No. 2023-10).

Dear Commissioners,

My father, Levi Cano, and I, Angie Cano, located at 563 North Fairview St., Santa Ana, CA 92703, as concerned members of the Civic Center Business Park, want to express our con�nued opposi�on to the proposed construc�on of fences and a playground proposed by Vista Heritage Charter School and Red Hood Capital Partners in our parking spaces and common areas. The plans to build fences and a playground in our shared spaces will nega�vely aﬀect our associa�on’s character and safety.

This opposi�on is grounded in the historical and legal precedents set forth by our associa�on, as well as the explicit terms outlined in our Covenants, Condi�ons, and Restric�ons (CC&Rs), and other legally binding documents governing our community. We wish to bring to your aten�on several key points that directly conﬂict with Vista Charter’s proposal:

1. Restric�ons on Erec�ng Fences (Ar�cle VII, Sec�on 7.3 of the CC&Rs, Page 27): On October 18, 2002, Civic Center Business Park Owner’s Associa�on’s legal counsel determined that unit owners are not permited to erect a fence or other boundary around any parking space. This directly contradicts Vista Charter’s inten�on to build fences in common areas. We would like to con�nue to highlight Sec�on 2.2.4 of the CR&R, speciﬁcally, the requirement that the common interest in the Common Area cannot be altered without the consent of all Unit Owners and 75% of ﬁrst Mortgagees of Units. We believe any altera�ons or changes to the Common Area, as presented by Vista Charter School, must adhere to these established rules.

2. Reciprocal Easement Agreement: The removal of parcels 3 and 4 from the Associa�on in Amendment 1 recorded on January 3, 1986, led to formal arrangements, known as “Agreement of Reciprocal Easements (July 2, 1986, the ‘Agreement,’ Document Number B6-284222).” This Agreement allowed parking across all parcels, including parcels 3 and

4. This agreement explicitly prohibits the construc�on of barriers, such as fences or walls, that would impede access. Vista Charter's plan would violate this agreement.

3. Unanimous Writen Consent of Members Document (June 9, 1993): This document, which repealed previous bylaws and adopted new ones, clearly delineates the shared common areas, including parking spaces, as communal property not owned individually but for the enjoyment of all unit owners. The construc�on of a playground in these areas would infringe upon the rights and privileges of all unit owners.

4. Correc�on of Terminology misused by Legal Counsel paid for by Vista Charter School: it has been claimed that "Restricted Area" means "Ownership" when Page 4 of the Second Amendment ﬁled in 2016, Sec�on 1.29 gives a straigh�orward deﬁni�on of what is a Restricted Common Area: "Restricted Common Area shall mean and refer to those por�ons of the COMMON AREA." Addi�onally, sec�on 1.30A men�ons "Special Beneﬁt Areas'' are a group of one or more Condominiums WITHIN the Project as designated BY THE BOARD that receive services or beneﬁts FROM THE ASSOCIATION that beneﬁt only those Condominiums within such Special Beneﬁt Area rather than all the Condominiums within the Project. The Unit Owners within the Special Beneﬁt Area BEAR THE COSTS incurred by the Associa�on for maintenance, repair, replacement, and provision of services for the beneﬁt of all unit owners within this area. Exhibit D to the Second Amendment establishes MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES within the COMMON AREAS of the Associa�on, not Ownership rights to any unit owner. Neither the Second Amendment nor any related board mee�ng in the discussions suggest that the term "Restricted Common Area" implies ownership. Instead, documents, and board mee�ngs from previous presidents of the Civic Center Business Park consistently focused on maintenance responsibili�es.

5. Poten�al Impact on Community: Beyond legal arguments, the prac�cal implica�ons of Vista Charter’s proposed construc�on are deeply concerning, especially in terms of health and safety. The presence of a Tile and Marble shop directly facing the parking lot, behind the school, involves the use of chemicals that are hazardous, par�cularly to our youth. These chemicals can include Silica Dust which is generated during cu�ng or grinding �les and can lead to respiratory problems if inhaled, Adhesives and Sealants that contain vola�le organic compounds (VOCs) which can cause headaches, dizziness, and other health issues, Cleaning Solvents o�en used in the ﬁnishing process, which can be toxic if inhaled without the proper equipment. Suppor�ng a playground in the common area used for parking would in turn support the exposure of children to these substances. A playground in this type of se�ng would be irresponsible and poten�ally harmful.

In addi�on to health risks, our common areas serve a crucial role in allevia�ng parking pressure. This is par�cularly important given the proximity of both a church and a school in our associa�on. The reduc�on of available parking spaces and the conversion of these areas into recrea�onal zones and gated areas would inconvenience other unit owners, lead to unsafe conges�on, and increase the risk of accidents in non-gated areas.

Therefore, we urge the board to consider these facts and the historical context of our community’s governance in your delibera�ons on this mater. We must uphold the integrity of our agreements and the rights of all unit owners to ensure the con�nued harmony and well-being of our community.

1 Ocampo, Nuvia
From: Alcala, Abigail
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 3:00 PM
To: Ocampo, Nuvia; eComments, PBA
Subject: FW: Planning Commission Agenda Item No. 3, December 11, 2023 Hello:

The City Clerk’s Oﬃce received the following comment for the Planning Commission meeƟng for December 11, 2023.

Respecƞully,

Abigail Y. Alcala, MBA, CMC | Assistant City Clerk
City of Santa Ana - City Clerk’s Office
20 Civic Center Plaza | Santa Ana, CA 92701
714-647-6520 | [email protected]
City Hall hours are 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Thursday, and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. every other Friday. Click here for a list of observed holidays and Friday closure dates.

The mySantaAna mobile app puts the power of the Santa Ana city government in the palm of your hand! The free app allows residents to quickly and easily report issues to the City, access City services, and find news and events. It is available to download from the Apple App Store and on Google Play.

Click here to report an issue directly from the City website.

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 12:21 PM
To: eComment <ecomment@santa‐ana.org>
Cc: Thai, Minh <mthai@santa‐ana.org>; Pezeshkpour, Ali <APezeshkpour@santa‐ana.org> Subject: Planning Commission Agenda Item No. 3, December 11, 2023

Dear Chairman & Planning Commission Members;

I am wriƟng to ask you to support the request of Vista Heritage School in their request for a zone change and related
approvals needed to expand their footprint and fully build out their campus at 5th & Fairview. This is a tremendous asset to the community and to the greater improvement of this area taking a rundown automoƟve center and making it a center of learning and faith development.

Thank you in advance for your careful consideraƟon of this worthwhile change.

Sincerely,

Tim
Rush
Wilshire Square

Tim Rush
Chief People Connector
2 Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices California Properties The Maple Building, Corporate Offices
16911 South Bellflower Boulevard
Bellflower, CA 90706‐5903
(714) 299‐4455
17 Branch Sales Offices, Serving 6 Southern California Counties

1 Ocampo, Nuvia
From: Chase Arthur <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 2:14 PM
To: eComments, PBA
Subject: Vista Heritage Global Academy - 601 North Fairview Street - Air Quality Memo Attachments: Vista Charter_Response to Comment Memo_120823.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hi Planning Commissioners,

Please see attached for an air quality memo in response to a comment letter by Anige and Levi Cano.

Let us know if you have any questions or need any additional information.

Thank you,
Chase

5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 500, Santa Ana, CA 92707
Office: 949.472.3505 | Fax: 949.472.8373

M E M O R A N D U M

To: City of Santa Ana
Vista Charter Public Schools

From: Frances Yau, AICP, Michael Baker International
Alan Ashimine, Michael Baker International

Date: December 8, 2023

Subject: Response to Comment Letter on Vista Heritage Charter Public Schools District Office and Outdoor Space Project

A comment letter prepared by Angie and Levi Cano, dated December 6, 2023, was sent to the Civic Center Business Park Owners Association Board opposing the Vista Heritage Charter Public Schools District Office and Outdoor Space Project (project) and raising several concerns regarding the proposed development.

Michael Baker International (Michael Baker) was retained by Vista Charter Public Schools to prepare the environmental documentation under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the proposed project. Given our role as environmental consultants, the focus of this memorandum is on Item #5 of the comment letter, as it pertains to potential air quality impacts; refer to attachment. The commenter raises concerns regarding potential health risks to students in the proposed outdoor play field and play yard area from existing operational activities associated with a tile a nd marble business within the same business park. The commenter states that the business involves the use of chemicals that are hazardous and can include silica dust generated during cutting or grinding tiles, which can lead to health problems for the students.

The existing business, NG (New Generation) Tile & Marble, is located at 563 North Fairview Street and is the north end unit within the industrial building to the south of the project site and west of the Vista Heritage Global Academy building. Based on our research and project understanding, operational activities associated with the business would not result in adverse health impacts to future students playing in the proposed outdoor play areas. Specifically, potential marble grinding and cutting ac tivities are performed indoors (i.e., no open air activities in the business park). Therefore, the amount of dust and odor traveling outdoors would be nominal. Moreover, Vista Heritage Global Academy students would spend time outdoors for a limited period of time per day, likely up to one to two hours per day. Health risk is highly dependent on the time exposed to the toxics and one to two hours per day is short -term compared to 24 hours per day considered for typical health risk assessments. Additionally, South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) rules apply to the existing business, including Rule 1113 regulating coatings and tile and stone sealers, and Rule 40 3 regulating fugitive dust. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) also has regulations on silica exposure for workers. Standard 29 CFR 1926.1153 requires employers to limit worker exposures to respirable crystalline silica and to take other steps to protect workers. Although this regulation is to protect workers, the best practices reduce overall

dust in the air and would further reduce potential impacts to students in outdoor play areas near the existing business. As such, the indoor operational activities associated with the existing tile and marble business would not result in any substantial health risk to students playing in the proposed outdoor play areas.

Further, it should be noted that according to several CEQA court decisions, CEQA analysis is not required to analyze impacts of the existing environment on a proposed project unless the project risks exacerbating existing environmental hazards. California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369, Case No. S213478. Thus, the Vista Charter Public Schools District Office and Outdoor Space Project CEQA Exe mption 15183 – Environmental Documentation , prepared by Michael Baker International and dated December 5, 2023, adequately evaluates the project’s potential environmental impacts and findings from the document remain valid.

Attachment: Comment Letter, December 6, 2023

VIA EMAIL
Angie Cano and Levi Cano
563 North Fairview St.

Santa Ana, CA 92703
[email protected]
714-957-5744
Wednesday, December 6, 2023
Board of Directors
Civic Center Business Park Owners Associa�on Board
PO Box 131
T
rabuco Canyon, CA 92678
Subject: Opposi�on to Agenda Items - December 6, 2023, regarding Vista Heritage Charter School’s Proposed Construc�on Plans of Fences and Playground in Common Areas.

Dear Directors Scot Lee, Danny De Leon, and Don Donald S. Wilson, My father, Levi Cano, and I, Angie Cano, located at 563 North Fairview St., Santa Ana, CA 92703, as concerned members of the Civic Center Business Park, want to express our con�nued opposi�on to the proposed construc�on of fences and a playground proposed by Vista Heritage Charter School and Red Hood Capital Partners in our parking spaces and common areas.

4. This agreement explicitly prohibits the construc�on of barriers, such as fences or walls, that would impede access. Vista Charter's plan would violate this agreement.

Therefore, we urge the board to consider these facts and the historical context of our

1 Ocampo, Nuvia
From: Chase Arthur <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 11:07 AM
To: eComments, PBA
Subject: Vista Heritage Global Academy - 601 North Fairview Street Attachments: Cover Letter - Santa Ana Planning Commission.pdf; Hansberger & Klein CC&R Letter.pdf; Akerman - Vista Charter - CC&R Memo 12-8-23.pdf; Stradling Supplemental Letter - CC&Rs.pdf; Stradling - CC&R Review Letter 12.6.23.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hi Planning Commissioners,

Please see attached documents on behalf of Vista Heritage Global Academy in support of the school's project being heard at tonight's (12/11/23) Planning Commission meeting.

The documents attached are a cover letter written by the school's Deputy Superintendent, Collin Felch, along with three legal analyses pertaining to the CC&Rs of the project's site along with a supplemental letter.

Let us know if you have any questions regarding these documents.

Thank you,
Chase Arthur
73955492;1

ATTORNEY CLIENT WORK PRODUCT
Memorandum
From: Lisa Kolieb, Esq., Akerman LLP
To: Vista Charter Public Schools
Date: December 8, 2023
Subject: Civic Center Business Park CC&R and Reciprocal Easement Review You have asked us to review the "Industrial Condominium Enabling Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restricted for Civic Center Business Park, Santa Ana, California", dated April 1985, as amended, ("CC&Rs") and "Agreement of Reciprocal Easements," dated June 17, 1986 ("Easement Agreement"), to determine whether the CC&Rs or Easement Agreement prohibit or otherwise restrict the proposed development of a fenced play area for the Vista Charter School within the existing "Buildings A/B Common Area", as defined therein.1 We understand that the play area is proposed to be located within the Buildings A/B Common Area and additional improvements are proposed on Parcel 4.

In short, the CC&Rs only currently apply to Parcels 1 and 2, as Parcels 3 and 4 were removed from the CC&Rs pursuant to the First Amendment to the CC&Rs, approved in December 1985.

Accordingly, the improvements proposed on Parcel 4 are not limited by the CC&Rs. However, the play yard proposed within the Buildings A/B Common Area is subject to the CC&Rs. Pursuant to the Second Amendment to the CC&Rs, approved in May 2016, the "Buildings A/B Maintenance Area" (which includes the Buildings A/B Common Area) is now considered to be a "Restricted Common Area" for exclusive use by buildings A and B. The CC&Rs, as amended, designated the Common Area as "exclusive" to the owners of Buildings A and B and do not explicitly restrict the permitted uses within the Buildings A/B Maintenance Area. Therefore, as long as the proposed use is considered to be "common" to the owners of buildings A and B, there appear to be no 1 This Memorandum only analyzes the CC&Rs and Easement Agreement and does not analyze whether the proposed use is otherwise permissible pursuant to the City of Santa Ana's Municipal Code or previous approvals for the site.

This analysis is based solely on our review of the original CC&Rs, as well as the First and Second Amendments to the CC&Rs, as well as the Easement Agreement provided to us by you. M oreover, this memorandum does not constitute a formal legal opinion.

Akerman LLP
601 West Fifth Street
Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90071
T: 213 688 9500
F: 213 627 6342
akerman.com
December 8, 2023

Page 2 ends

__________________________
73955492;1
restrictions in the CC&Rs on the use of the area for a fenced play area if the owners of Buildings A and B agree on that use for the Common Area.

However, the Business Park is also subject to an Easement Agreement which establishes easements over Parcels 1 and 2 and Parcels 3 and 4 for ingress and egress, as well as for parkin g.

The Easement Agreement provides an exception for areas designated as "Restricted Common Area." Since the Buildings A/B Maintenance Area is considered a restricted common area, it should be exempt from the easement requirements.

AS ORIGINALLY APPROVED, THE CC&RS REQUIRED THE COMMON AREAS TO BE ACCESSIBLE TO ALL

BUSINESS PARK OWNERS, AND ONLY SPECIFICALLY DESIGNATED PARKING SPACES WERE CONSIDERED TO BE "RESTRICTED COMMON AREAS."
As originally approved in April 1985, the CC&Rs stated that the "Common Areas" were to be used/accessible by all of the Owners and only specifically designated parking spaces were designated "Restricted Common Areas" that were "set aside for exclusive use of a Unit Owner or Owners."2 Accordingly, with the exception of those designated parking spaces, all owners were meant to have access to all Common Areas. W ith respect to use, the CC&Rs stated that "Association, its members, employees, invitees and licensees shall have non-exclusive easements for ingress, egress and parking over the portions of the Common Area containing open space, and parking and driveway areas, except that parking may be restricted in the Restricted Common Area."3
Under the original CC&Rs, the "Restricted Common Areas" were limited only to "Parking spaces designated "P" followed by the number of the Unit to which appurtenant" and the remainder of the Common Areas were for use by all owners.4 If all of those restrictions were still in place, it could be argued that the proposed play area would not be permitted as the Common Area could not be used for anything other than parking and access and would need to be accessible to all owners.

Therefore, it could not be used for a play area and restricted to the use of only one owner. However, as discussed below, the CC&Rs have been amended such that the Common Areas are no longer subject to many of those restrictions.

We understand that a neighbor who opposes the proposed project has argued that the CC&Rs restrict the erection of fences with common areas. However, the CC&Rs only explicitly state that "no parking spaces shall be fenced off." (emphasis added). The CC&Rs do not contain other restrictions on fencing with the Business Park.
2 CC&Rs Section 1.29.
3 CC&Rs Section 6.3.
4 CC&Rs Section 2.2.5.

December 8, 2023

Page 3 ends

__________________________
73955492;1

THE BUSINESS PARK IS ALSO SUBJECT TO AN AGREEMENT RE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS THAT GRANTS NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENTS FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND VEHICULAR PARKING.

The site is also subject to a non-exclusive easement for ingress, egress and vehicular parking pursuant to the Agreement of Reciprocal Easements, dated June 17, 1986. T hat Easement Agreement establishes easements over Parcels 1 and 2 and Parcels 3 and 4 for "reciprocal, nonexclusive easements for ingress and egress to and from the respective Parcels, as well as easements for parking except on those areas of Parcels 1 and 2 which are Restricted Common Area." Importantly, the easements contain an exception for "portions which are designated as Restricted Common Area." As discussed below, since the entire Buildings A/B Maintenance Area is now designated as an "Exclusive Use Common Area" it should be excluded from the ingress, egress and parking requirements established in the Agreement.

The Easement Agreement predates the Second Amendment to the CC&Rs, and was approved prior to the formal separation of Buildings A and B from C and D. Accordingly, any restrictions on fencing between the two areas have arguably been superseded since the Second Amendment explicitly states that the Buildings A/B Common Area and all portions of the Buildings A/B Maintenance Area have been "set aside for exclusive use" of those buildings.

THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE CC&RS DESIGNATED THE ENTIRE BUILDINGS A/B MAINTENANCE AREA AS AN "EXCLUSIVE USE COMMON AREA" TO BE USED ONLY BY BUILDINGS A AND B WITHOUT ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS ON USE.

The Second Amendment to the CC&Rs, effective May 2016, divided the Common Areas for Buildings A and B from the Common Areas for Buildings C and D and reallocated and separated the maintenance obligations and costs for those common areas.5 In other words, the Buildings A/B Common Area became the "responsibility" of the owners of Buildings A and B and the Buildings C/D Common Area became the responsibility of the owners of Buildings C and D. Most critical, the Second Amendment explicitly modified the language in the CC&Rs so that the Buildings A/B Common Area and Buildings A/B Maintenance Area became a "Restricted Common Area" only for use by Buildings A and B. Specifically, the amendment stated that the "Buildings A/B Maintenance Area is hereby set aside and allocated for the exclusive use of the Buildings A/B Owner and shall constitute "Restricted Common Area" appurtenant to the condominium rights within Buildings A/B. S uch Restricted Common Area shall constitute "Exclusive Use Common Area" within the meaning of Section 6550 of the Commercial 5 The Second Amendment defines the Buildings A/B Common Area as "including exterior landscaping areas, parking areas, driveways and other pedestrian and vehicular access ways, trash enclosures and receptables and exterior lighting within the Buildings A/B Common Area…" CC&Rs Section 1.4A. The Second Amendment focuses on the maintenance obligations and expenses as they relate to the Common Areas. However, the Second Amendment did not change the ownership interests in the Common Areas. While the Common Area s may technically have remained under common ownership, the Second Amendment establishes that the Buildings A/B Common Area is now allocated for the exclusive use of Buildings A and B. As such, the owners of Buildings C and D arguably no longer have any use or access rights to that area and therefore it would no longer be considered "common" to all owners.

December 8, 2023

Page 4 ends

__________________________
73955492;1
Association Act."6 As amended, the section of the CC&Rs that discusses the "Restricted Common Area" no longer makes reference to parking spaces, does not require access or use by other owners and does not contain any specific description of the required uses within the Common Area.

Accordingly, the CC&Rs, as amended, do not appear to provide any restriction on the use of the Common Area that would prevent the use of the Common Area for a play yard accessible to the owners of both buildings A and B.
6 The exclusive use common area is a section of a common area that is designated for the use of one or more owners, but fewer than all, within a development.

VISTACHARTERPUBLICSCHOOLS
Wetransformtheschoolexperience2900WestTempleStreetLosAngeles, CA90026 DonWilsonEd.D., SuperintendentT213269-4767|F213269-4762 CollinFelch, Ed.D., DeputySuperintendentwww.vistacharterpublicschools.org KarenAmaya, Assistant Superintendent December8,2023
To:PlanningCommissioners:

Asyouareaware,VistaHeritageCharterSchoolhasanitemforyourconsiderationattheDecember11,2023publicmeeting.Iunderstandthattherehasbeensomecorrespondencetothecommissionfromacoupleoftheneighboringbusinessparkmembersregardingtheallocationofparkingatthebusinesscomplexwherewearelocated,andtheaccesstothatparkingbyAssociationmembers.Becauseourteamiscommittedtoworkingcollaborativelywithallourneighbors,andbecausetherehasbeensomeconfusionregardingthelegalrightstocertainportionsoftheparkingfield,wefeltitwasimportanttohavetheAssociation'sCC&Rsreviewedbythreedifferentattorneystoprovideanunbiasedassessment. ForyourreviewIhaveattachedthethreelegalanalysespertainingtotheCC&Rs.

Insummary, theconsistentinterpretationisthattheareawhereweintendtodevelopaplayfieldinthisproposedprojectisarestrictedcommonareafortheexclusiveuseofBuildingsA&B(Vista&TemploCalvarioChurch).

PleasenotethatIprovidethisinformationsimplytomakesurethatthefactsareaccuratelyreported.AstheDeputySuperintendentourmissionistocreateapositiveschoolenvironmentforourstudentsandfamilies,andtobeanaddedvaluetotheSantaAnacommunity. Iremaindedicatedtothisgoal.

Sincerely,
CollinFelch,Ed.D.DeputySuperintendentVistaCharterPublicSchools

Hansberger & Klein, A Professional Law Corporation
27475 Ynez Rd., Suite 357, Temecula, CA 92591
Erica Klein Direct: 818-281-5765 | Richard Hansberger Direct: 626-533-1891 www.hkschoollaw.com
December 7, 2023

SENT VIA E-MAIL
Dr. Donald Wilson, Superintendent
Dr. Collin Felch, Deputy Superintendent
Vista Charter Public Schools
Re: 2609 W 5TH STREET and Development of Parcels 2 and 4 Conditional Use Permit Application - Civic Center
Business Park
City of Santa Ana Planning Dept. Case No. 2023-10
Dear Drs. Wilson and Felch:

We are submitting this correspondence regarding the above-entitled planning case number. Please submit it as public comment at your planning hearing.

You have asked us to provide a non-confidential letter regarding two questions concerning the planned development at the 2609 W. 5th Street facilities (comprised of Parcels 1, 2, 3 and 4). The planned development affects Parcels 2 and 4, specifically.

With respect to the Conditional Use Permit Application affecting the Parcels identified above, we have reviewed the original Declaration recorded April 19, 1985 as Document No. 85-240398 of Official Records, the First Amendment to original Declaration recorded January 3, 1986 of Official Records and the Second Amendment to original Declaration recorded August 10, 2016 as Document No 2016-000375684 of Official Records applicable to the formation, management and operation of the Civic Center Business Park (collectively, the “CCRs”) by an Association as identified in the CCRs.

As a first matter, Parcels 3 and 4 are not part of the Association and are not governed by the Association. Parcels 3 and 4 were deleted from the Association pursuant to the First Amendment to Industrial Condominium Enabling Declaration for Civic Center Business Park. If you refer to Section 1 of that document, it states that “Exhibit ‘A’ is amended by the deletion of Parcels 3 and 4 from the description of the Property.” The reference to Exhibit A is to that Exhibit in the original Industrial Condominium Enabling Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and December 7, 2023

Page 2 of 4 ends

Hansberger & Klein, A Professional Law Corporation
27475 Ynez Rd., Suite 357, Temecula, CA 92591 | Office: 800-577-0663 | Fax: 909-498-5323 www.hkschoollaw.com
Restrictions for Civic Center Business Park (the “Original CC&RS) recorded April 19, 1985 which created the Association. The description of the property also does not include Parcels 3 and 4 in the Second Amendment to Industrial Condominium Enabling Declaration for Civic Center Business Park (see the “Legal Description” in that Second Amendment).

Regarding parking, Section 2.2.5 of the Original CC&Rs dedicated certain parking spaces to certain owners by labeling each restricted space with a “P” followed by the unit number. These spaces were reserved for the unit owner’s exclusive use. You have informed us that these markers are no longer visible.

However, apparently at one time certain spaces were so reserved, which runs contrary to any claims by the Buildings C/D owners that all parking spaces have always been available for all property owners use. The Second Amendment simply clarified further restrictions on the use of Buildings A/B Common Area by Buildings C/D owners.

The Second Amendment to Industrial Condominium Enabling Declaration for Civic Center Business Park (the “Second Amendment”) of the Original CC&Rs defines “Restricted Common Area” as “those portions of the Common Area, if any, set aside for exclusive use of any Unit Owner, pursuant to Section 2.2.5 below, and shall include the Buildings A/B Common Area and all other portions of the Buildings A/B Maintenance Area.” (See page 4 of the Second Amendment.)

The Second Amendment defines the “Buildings A/B Common Area” as “those portions of the Common Area located adjacent to Buildings A and B as depicted on Exhibit D attached hereto, including exterior landscaping areas, parking areas, driveways and other pedestrian and vehicular access ways, trash enclosures and receptacles and exterior lighting within the Buildings A/B Common Area, as well as any conduits, pipes, fire and irrigation sprinklers, plumbing lines, wires and other utility installations located outside of Buildings A/B required to provide power, light, telephone, gas, water, sewerage and drainage to the Buildings A/B which exclusively serve Buildings A/B. For purposes of this Declaration, the Buildings A/B Maintenance Area shall constitute Restricted Common Area appurtenant to ownership of the condominium units within Buildings A/B.”

The Second Amendment defines the “Buildings A/B Maintenance Area” as (a) the roofs, exterior walls, bearing walls, columns, girders, slabs and floors (to the unfinished surfaces thereof) and other structural elements and all other portions of Buildings A/B, (b) fire sprinkler systems, conduits, pipes, plumbing, wires and other utility installations required to provide power, light, telephone, gas, water, sewerage and drainage to Buildings A/B as well as (c) all portions of the Buildings A/B Common Area.”

December 7, 2023

Page 3 of 4 ends

Hansberger & Klein, A Professional Law Corporation
27475 Ynez Rd., Suite 357, Temecula, CA 92591 | Office: 800-577-0663 | Fax: 909-498-5323 www.hkschoollaw.com
Exhibit D to the Second Amendment pictorially represents the Buildings A/B Common Area and Buildings C/D Common Area. As noted above, Parcels 3 and 4 are not included in the Association anymore. As such, the Buildings A/B Common Area is set aside for the exclusive use of the Buildings A/B Owner pursuant to the Second Amendment.

We have included in this letter certain information regarding the financial responsibilities of Buildings A/B and Buildings C/D to each other pursuant to the Second Amendment.

It seems clear the intent of the Second Amendment was to relieve both the Buildings A/B and Buildings C/D owners of any financial responsibility for the maintenance costs for each other’s respective buildings. Section E of the Preambles to the Second Amendment makes that plain.

We can only surmise that the Buildings C/D owners wanted to limit their financial exposure to the maintenance costs associated with Buildings A/B and, to effectuate that goal, essentially “gave up” their respective rights to the Buildings A/B Common Area. Pursuant to the Second Amendment, Buildings C/D owners were relieved of any financial obligation to maintain the Buildings A/B Common Area and, in return, ceded the exclusive use of the Buildings A/B Common Area to the Buildings A/B owners. In my opinion, that appears to be the exchange the Association contemplated by the Second Amendment. By all terms of the CCRs, this agreement, in our opinion, seems fair and reasonable; the Buildings C/D Owners cannot demand to manage the use or operation of the Buildings A/B Common Area without maintaining fiscal responsibility for those areas.

We would note that a public comment submitted on or about December 6, 2023 to the commission references a “Unanimous Written Consent of Members Document” apparently dated June 9, 1993. In response, please note the following.

First, a unanimous written consent is not a document. It is a certificate memorializing a type of corporate action used to authenticate a document. In any event, the reference to the consent appears to be a unanimous written consent used to update the Association Bylaws sometime in 1993. However, the bylaws were last updated in 2009 so any previous versions are now void. Second, the Bylaws in any event could not override or confer any legal rights separate and apart from the CC&Rs. Whatever map may have been included as an exhibit to the 1993 bylaws are therefore irrelevant as a result. Have included a copy of the 2009 Bylaws as an Enclosure to this correspondence; we received these Bylaws directly from Dr.

Wilson who, we can attest, received them from the Association’s Property Management consultant.

Based on my review of the CCRs, it is our opinion that the owners of Buildings C/D owners do not have any property rights in Parcel 1, Parcel 2 and December 7, 2023

Page 4 of 4 ends

Hansberger & Klein, A Professional Law Corporation
27475 Ynez Rd., Suite 357, Temecula, CA 92591 | Office: 800-577-0663 | Fax: 909-498-5323 www.hkschoollaw.com
Parcel 4 that would impair Vista Charter Public School’s right to develop the property and process the Conditional Use Permit Application.

If you need anything further, please do not hesitate to let me know.

Sincerely,

HANSBERGER & KLEIN
A Professional Law Corporation

Richard J. Hansberger
Hansberger & Klein, PLC

ENCLOSURES

Sean B. Absher 415 283 2242 [email protected]
Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth A Professional Corporation 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 4200 San Francisco, CA 94104 415 283 2240 stradlinglaw.com

4877-2158-0437v1/201022-0002
December 6, 2023 VIA EMAIL Dr. Collin Felch Deputy Superintendent Vista Charter Public Schools 2609 West Fifth St. Santa Ana, CA 92703 Re: Vista Charter School Phase IV; Conditional Use Permit Application; Civic Center Business Park Dear Dr. Felch: It is our understanding that Vista Charter Public Schools (“VCPS”) has submitted a conditional use permit application (“CUP Application”) to the City of Santa Ana concerning the Vista Charter School Phase IV project (“Project”). The Project is located on Parcel 1, Parcel 2 and Parcel 4 as legally described and shown in Parcel Map No. 84-886, filed in Book 198, Pages 19-20 of Official Records (“Parcel Map”). With respect to the CUP Application and Project, you have asked us to evaluate what rights, if any, are held by the owners of Building C and Building D within the Civic Center Business Park that would impair VCPS’s right to develop the Project and process the CUP Application. In undertaking this evaluation, we have reviewed the original Declaration recorded April 19, 1985 as Document No. 85-240398 of Official Records, the First Amendment to original Declaration recorded January 3, 1986 of Official Records and the Second Amendment to original Declaration recorded August 10, 2016 as Document No 2016-000375684 of Official Records applicable to the formation, management and operation of the Civic Center Business Park (collectively, the “Materials”). Based on my review of the Materials, it is our opinion that the owners of Building C and Building D do not have any property rights in Parcel 1, Parcel 2 and Parcel 4 that would impair VCPS’s right to develop the Property and process the CUP Application. First, pursuant to the First Amendment to original Declaration, Parcel 4 is no longer a part of the Civic Center Business Park. Accordingly, the owners of Building C and Building D do not hold any property rights in Parcel 4 that would impair the right of VCPS to develop the Project and process the CUP Application. Second, the owners of Building C and Building D do not hold any property rights to common area located within the Civic Dr. Collin Felch, Deputy Superintendent Vista Charter Public Schools December 6, 2023 Page 2 4877-2158-0437v1/201022-0002
Center Business Park that is included within the Project. Based on our review of the CUP Application, the Project includes Civic Center Business Park common area that is designated “restricted common area” and set aside and allocated for the exclusive use of Building A/B Owner” under Section 2.2.5 of the Second Amendment to original declaration. It is our understanding that VCPS is the owner of Building B and the owner of Building A supports the Project and CUP Application. We further note that Section 2.2.5 of the Second Amendment to original declaration goes on to state that “restricted common area shall constitute ‘exclusive use common area’ within the meaning of Section 6550 of the Commercial Association Act.” (Id.) Section 6550, subdivision (a) of the Commercial Association Act defines “exclusive use common area” to mean “a portion of the common area designated by the declaration for the exclusive use of one or more, but fewer than all, of the owners of the separate interests and which is or will be appurtenant to the separate interest or interests.” Hence, the owners of Building C and Building D do not have any defined property rights in the exclusive use common area that is a part of the Project. Please let me know if you have any questions, or require further information. Very truly yours, STRADLING YOCCA CARLSON & RAUTH Sean B. Absher

Sean B. Absher
415 283 2242
[email protected]
Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth
A Professional Corporation
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 4200
San Francisco, CA 94104
415 283 2240
stradlinglaw.com

4859-1110-7478v1/201022-0002
December 7, 2023

VIA EMAIL

Dr. Collin Felch
Deputy Superintendent
Vista Charter Public Schools
2609 West Fifth St.

Santa Ana, CA 92703

Re: Vista Charter School Phase IV Proj ect; Civic Center Business Park

Dear Dr. Felch:

This letter addresses the objections to the above referenced Project submitted by Angie Cano and Levi Cano (together “Cano”) in a letter dated December 6, 2023 to the Board of Directors of the Civic Center Business Park Owners Association. We have listed below each of the five objections raised by Cano followed by our response. To summarize, we do not believe the objections have any merit.

1. Restrictions on Erecting Fencing. (Article VII, Section 7.3 of the CC&Rs, Page 27:

Cano claims the referenced CC&Rs provision restricts the right of Vista Charter Public Schools (“VCPS”) to erect fences as shown in the Project plans. We do not agree with the argument to the extent the argument is intended to reference fencing located within Building A/B exclusive use common area. Section 7.3 of the CC&Rs in relevant part states that “no parking spaces shall be fenced off.” This provision is intended to prohibit owners of units at Civic Center Business Park from interfering with other owners’ use of common area parking. As set forth in our December 6, 2023 letter, the CC&Rs were amended under Section 2.2.5 of the Second Amendment to CC&Rs to define common area parking appurtenant to Building A and Building as “restricted common area” for the “exclusive use of Building A/B owner.” (Emphasis added.) Cano cannot assert a claim that fencing located within Building A/B exclusive use common area interferes with their rights as they have no use rights in Building A/B restricted common area, including parking areas located thereon.

2. Reciprocal Easement Agreement:

Cano claims the Reciprocal Easement Agreement explicitly prohibits the construction of barriers, Dr. Collin Felch, Deputy Superintendent
Vista Charter Public Schools
December 7, 2023

Page 2 ends

4859-1110-7478v1/201022-0002
such as fences or walls and the Project would violate the Agreement. We disagree. The Reciprocal Easement Agreement grants to the owners of Parcel 1 and 2 non-exclusive easements for ingress and egress to public streets and highways and parking located on Parcel 3 and Parcel 4. Provided that the non-exclusive easements held by Cano are not impaired, nothing in the Reciprocal Easement Agreement prohibits the right of VCPS to develop the Project.

3. Unanimous Written Consent of Members Document June 9, 1993):

Cano claims the referenced document delineates the shared common areas, including parking spaces, and the Project playground within the common areas “would infringe upon the rights and privileges of all unit owners.” This is not correct. As discussed in our December 6th letter, the Second Amendment to the CC&Rs is the operative document concerning the rights of the owners of the Association to exclusive use common area that is appurtenant to Building A/B. As stated in our December 6
th letter, Cano has no right to use any portion of Building A/B exclusive use common area, including the area of the proposed playground located on a portion of the exclusive use common area.

4. Correction Terminology misused by Legal Counsel paid by Vista Charter School:

Cano claims that VCPS, through its legal counsel, has erroneously asserted that “Restricted Area” means “Ownership.” It is Cano who misunderstands VCPS’ position with respect to Building A/B restricted common area. VCPS has not asserted it “owns” the “Restricted Area.” As set forth in our December 6th letter, the Second Amendment to CC&Rs in Section 2.2.5 altered the definition of a portion of common area on Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 that is appurtenant to Buildings A/B to mean “restricted common area” for the “exclusive use of Building A/B owner.” (Emphasis added.) The ownership rights of Cano in Association common area is irrelevant. What is relevant with respect to VCPS’s right to develop the Project is that Cano has no right to use restricted common area appurtenant to Building A/B that is contained with the Project.

5. Potential Impact to the Community:

Cano makes a claim that there are “practical implications” of the proposed Project in terms of health and safety that go beyond legal arguments based on provisions in the CC&Rs. Any health and safety issues concerning the Project will be addressed through the conditional use permit application process for the Project. This process will as a matter of law include reviewing the Project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. (“CEQA”).

Dr. Collin Felch, Deputy Superintendent
Vista Charter Public Schools
December 7, 2023

Page 3 ends

4859-1110-7478v1/201022-0002
Please let me know if you have any questions, or require further information.

Very truly yours,

STRADLING YOCCA CARLSON & RAUTH

Sean B. Absher

Santa Ana City CouncilJanuary 16, 2024

Santa Ana City Council
January 16, 2024