My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 17 - Appeal No. 2023-06 appealing Planning Commission denial of modification to CUP No. 2019-41 and CUP No. 2023-03 – New Service Station at 2230 N Tustin
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2023
>
10/03/2023 Regular
>
Item 17 - Appeal No. 2023-06 appealing Planning Commission denial of modification to CUP No. 2019-41 and CUP No. 2023-03 – New Service Station at 2230 N Tustin
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/3/2023 11:57:08 AM
Creation date
10/3/2023 11:35:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Item #
17
Date
10/3/2023
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
223
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
City Response to Blake & Ayaz on behalf of Fred Cohen and Farzi Inc. LLC <br />Appeal No. 2023-06 <br />Response 7: This claim is similar to that made in Comment No. 6. No evidence claiming <br />otherwise was provided. <br />Comment 8: This comment states that the Planning Commission reviewed no evidence either <br />substantial or circumstantial to support their decision to deny the applicant's application. <br />Response 8: The Planning Commission provided verbal comment that the provided staff report <br />was insufficient in providing verified metric studies conducted by the applicant to ensure the site <br />could mitigate the effects of regular operations of the service station on the surrounding <br />community. Moreover, several community members spoke during the public hearing, at which <br />concerns were raised with the proposed project. Concerns regarding the station's health, <br />economic, traffic, and safety impact on the adjacent child-care facility and neighborhood were <br />discussed. Other concerns regarding overconcentration of service stations and the long-term <br />effect of the permanent presence of the unhoused population in the area. Lastly, as part of the <br />proposal, the applicant did not submit any studies or additional information to evaluate potential <br />impacts onto surrounding properties, including the adjacent child care facility. Technical studies <br />such as a health risk assessment, air quality assessment, or noise study were not provided with <br />the application. <br />Comment 9: This comment claims that the Planning Commission provided no written <br />determination/decision which as of the date of filing had not been provided to the application. <br />Response 9: This comment is similar to comment 4. The Planning Commission's determination <br />was supported by the making of two findings, which were verbally mentioned in the record. <br />Additionally, the recording of the commission's determination/decision is publicly available via the <br />city's website the following day. The Planning Commission voted 5:2 to approve the denial of <br />modification to CUP No. 2019-41 and CUP No. 2023-03. On the regularly scheduled August 28, <br />2023 Planning Commission meeting, staff prepared a resolution for denial of modification to CUP <br />No. 2019-41 and CUP No. 2023-03 for consideration by the Planning Commission to affirm the <br />action to deny the subject applications, which took place on June 26, 2023. <br />Exhibit 8 <br />Page 4 of 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.