My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2024-071 Allow The Construction Of An Accessory Structure Exceeding Fifteen Feet In Height Within The Rear Yard
Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
CITY COUNCIL
>
2011 -
>
2024
>
2024-071 Allow The Construction Of An Accessory Structure Exceeding Fifteen Feet In Height Within The Rear Yard
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2025 3:27:35 PM
Creation date
7/23/2025 3:27:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Resolution
Agency
Planning & Building
Item #
34
Date
11/19/2024
Destruction Year
P
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
EXHIBIT A <br /> Response to Appeal Comments for Appeal Application No. 2024-01 <br /> Appeal Application No. 2024-01 <br /> Pursuant to Section 41-645 of the SAMC, the appellant is requesting that: (1) the City <br /> Council overturn the Planning Commission's decision approving CUP No. 2022-06; (2) <br /> require all new and/or outstanding City of Santa Ana building permit deficiencies be <br /> resolved before further consideration of the proposed pavilion; and (3) that the HRC <br /> review all landmark/historical/mills act compliance deficiencies and identify actions <br /> required to bring the property back to original standard. Specifically, the appellant states <br /> that: <br /> 1. The structure will significantly exceed the existing six-foot high fence and it will be <br /> clearly visible from Santa Clara Avenue, despite existing planting and required <br /> plantings; <br /> 2. The approval of the CUP provides a dangerous precedent providing "tacit" <br /> permission to other residents (both within Floral Park and in other neighborhood <br /> within Santa Ana) to erect structures that may clearly fall outside the architectural <br /> compatibility of the historic neighborhood; <br /> 3. The existing accessory structures on the site and the proposed pavilion are not <br /> consistent with the Art Moderne style and detract from the historical designation of <br /> the home and the neighborhood as a whole; <br /> 4. The property owners have shown a proclivity to violate the statutory requirements <br /> of designation as an historical landmark as well as violating the SAMC; <br /> 5. The property owner's use of the site as a cultural center (e.g., seasonal cultural <br /> gatherings, festivals, and tours) that bring high volume of cars and school buses; <br /> and <br /> 6. Questions whether the Planning Commission visited the site prior to approving <br /> CUP No. 2022-06 to view the property and surrounding homes and whether the <br /> Planning Commission gave any consideration of the recent designation of Floral <br /> Park as a National Historic District. Moreover, the appellant provides further <br /> questions about whether the owners will be held accountable for obtaining <br /> retroactive building permits for an ADU, as well as maintenance/upkeep of the <br /> "historically important home," and how the City will monitor the site to ensure it is <br /> not being used as a cultural center. <br /> The appellant does not provide any evidence to substantiate that the proposed project <br /> would adversely impact the community, pursuant to Section 41-638 of the SAMC. <br /> Specifically, the appellant does not provide evidence that the project will be a detriment <br /> to the general wellbeing of the neighborhood or the community; detrimental to the health, <br /> Resolution No. 2024-071 <br /> Page 6 of 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.