Agenda Packet_2024-11-19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 Ocampo, Nuvia From:Jeff Melching <jeffmelching@att.net> Sent:Friday, August 23, 2024 12:25 PM To:eComments, PBA Cc:qk4kids@gmail.com Subject:August 28, 2024 Planning Commission Agenda, Public Hearing Item No. 3: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2022-06 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2221 NORTH HELIOTROPE DRIVE Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Honorable Chair and Members of the Santa Ana Planning Commission: We are 15-year residents of the City of Santa Ana, and owners of the property at 2205 N. Heliotrope Dr. Our neighbors, Chan Q and Quynh D. Kieu, own the property at 2221 N. Heliotrope Dr, immediately adjacent to our property on the north. Chan and Quynh have applied for a Conditional Use Permit (No. 2022-06) to authorize the installation of a 23’4” Vietnamese pagoda at 2221 N. Heliotrope Dr. The pagoda is proposed for installation in the northeast corner of the rear yard of the property, a few feet inside the wall that abuts Santa Clara Avenue. We support, and urge the Planning Commission to approve, the application. Over the years, Chan and Quynh have enhanced their front and rear yards with artworks and decorations that reflect Vietnamese culture (stone works of art and a sitting bench in the front yard, larger structures in the rear yard). While the pagoda will be behind a fence, to the extent it is visible it will be consistent with, and a positive addition to, the theme and appearance of the structures already in place. In the words of your zoning ordinance, it will provide a “facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or the community.” In fact, in our view, the pagoda will contribute the well being of both the neighborhood and the community. For similar reasons, we think you can easily make the second finding for granting the CUP because the pagoda will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity. To the contrary, the pagoda is consistent with, and improves upon, the appearance of the property. We also believe that it celebrates Chan and Quynh’s culture in a tactful and aesthetically pleasing way. Without belaboring the point, we believe that the Planning Commission can and should make the remaining three findings for granting the conditional use permit. But for the sake of completeness, we note:  The pagoda will not “adversely Affect the present economic stability or future economic development of property in the surrounding area.” Floral Park is a well established residential neighborhood. The pagoda poses no threat to the economic stability of the property, the neighborhood, or the surrounding area.  The pagoda will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in Chapter 41 of the Municipal Code. We trust that City staff has prepared conditions to ensure compliance.  The pagoda will not adversely affect the general plan of the City or any specific plan applicable to the area of the proposed use. Here again, we can see no way that the pagoda could adversely affect the general plan; it is an architectural enhancement to an already beautiful home and yard. Last, we want to emphasize that Chan and Quynh are polite, thoughtful, and generous neighbors. They hold periodic events at their home where they share their yard and their culture with their friends and the community. In the 15 years that we City Council 34 – 196 11/19/2024