Responses to Comments - Agenda Item No. 34

Home Browse Search

Ibarra, Evelyn From: STACEY KATO <stacey.leslie@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2024 1:59 PM To: eComment Subject: Objection to Approval of CUP 2022-06 Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. My name is Stacey Kato and I reside within the required notification zone for CUP 2022-06. I have resided in this area since 1997. I am submitting a written response as I am not sure I will be able to attend the Council meeting this evening. I have had a chance to review some of the commentary from prior discussions regarding objections to this CUP and will not recap my observations here. Other than to summarize the concerns voiced by other commentators including: Potential safety concerns. 2. The ability for all residents to the right to the quiet enjoyment of their property. 3. Potential nuisance issues. While probably not germane to the discussion regarding the CUP I think it is worth highlighting that this is SK-1 probably the most important consequential property within the Floral Park National Historic District. It's my opinion that the additional structures on the property have had a detrimental impact on the historical landmark designation and are potentially not compliant with National Park Service guidelines. As noted in the April 25, 2022 Planning Commission Minutes resolution, Exhibit A, point 11, "Prior to building permit final, the property shall be brought into full maintenance compliance with all applicable SAMC standards. Maintenance shall include, but is not limited to: the repair and upkeep of the property; cleanup of trash and debris; repair and upkeep of any damaged and/or weathered components of the SK-2 historic building (e.g., siding, windows, historic features); repair and upkeep of exterior paint; landscaping and related landscape, furnishing, and hardscape improvements." As noted in the public records there have been at least two, what appear to be, significant code violations for unpermitted construction and are summarized below. The unauthorized removal and replacement of iron casement windows original to the property in violation of the SAMC as cited in the March 28, 2022 Planning Commission Package. I have a couple of comments regarding: As far as I can tell, this replacement was apparently concealed by termite tenting -I thought it was odd that the termite tenting was up for an extended period of time -think it was a couple weeks. While it has been stated that a settlement was reached with the city regarding this violation it does not appear that the Historic Resource Commission was consulted regarding. In public comments made by the applicant at the August 24, 2024 Planning Commission meeting, the cost of compliant casement windows would cost $1 million, however, it appears that no documentation was provided nor requested in support of this estimate. A similar statement was made when the