HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-27
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-027
KO- 9/20/06
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING SITE PLAN REVIEW NO.
2006-05 TO EXPAND THE PRODUCTION FACILITIES
BUILDING BY AN ADDITIONAL 1,555 SQUARE FEET AT 625
NORTH GRAND AVENUE
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA
ANA AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Planning Commission does hereby find, determine and declare
as follows:
A. The Applicant is requesting approval to expand the production facilities
building by an additional 1,555 square feet at 625 North Grand Avenue
which is within Specific Development No. 21 (SD-21) zoning district.
B. Section 41-593.5(c) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code requires a review by
the Planning Commission of all plans within a specific development plan
• area to ensure the project is in conformity with the Specific Plan.
C. Site Plan Review No. 2006-05 came before the Planning Commission of the
City of Santa Ana on September 25, 2006.
D. The project is in compliance with all applicable development standards
outlined within the Specific Development Plan (SD-21).
E. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the
recommended action is exempt from further review per Section 15301.
This Class 1 exemption allows the expansion of existing structures.
Categorical Exemption Environmental Review No. 2006-43 will be filed for
this project.
Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby
approves Site Plan Review No. 2006-05 as conditioned in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and
incorporated herein.
ADOPTED this 25thday of September, 2006 by the following vote:
Resolution No. 2006-027
Page 1 of 3
AYES: Commissioners: Benavides,Betancourt,Cribb,Gartner,Leo,Lutz(6)
NOES: Commissioners: None (0)
ABSENT: Commissioners: De La Torre (1)
ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: None (0)
~, /
Christo r Leo
p
Chairma
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney
By: _ ,, ~~"_._._
Kylee O. , to
Assistanf„~ity Attorney
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, MARTHA RAMIREZ, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby attest to and certify
the attached Resolution No. 2006-027 to be the original resolution adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on September 25, 2006.
Date: -~ ~ U~
Planning ' sio ecretary
City of Santa Ana
2
Resolution No. 2006-027
Page 2 of 3
.~
Conditions of Approval for Site Plan Review No. 2006-05
Site Plan Review No. 2006-05 is approved subject to compliance, to the reasonable
satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with applicable sections of the Santa Ana
Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the Uniform Fire Code, the Uniform
Building Code, and all other applicable regulations. In addition, it shall meet the
following conditions of approval:
The applicant must comply with each and every condition listed below rior to exercising
the rights conferred by this site plan approval.
The applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the
life of the development project. Failure to comply with each and every condition may
result in the revocation of the site plan review approval.
A. Planning Division
1. The project must remain in compliance with the provisions of Site Plan
Review (DP No. 06-18).
c:
Exhibit A
Resolution No. 2006-027
Page 3 of 3
..
PROOF OF SERVICE
(C.C.P. SECTION 1013(a), 2015.5)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE
I am employed in the aforesaid county; I am over the age of eighteen and
not a party to the within action; my business address is 20 Civic Center Plaza,
Ross Annex 2"d ,Santa Ana, California 92702.
On November 14, 2006 I served the foregoing document described as:
elution No. 2006-027 Site Plan Review No. 2606-05) in this action by
mg a true copy t ereo enc~d-m sea a enve opes a ressed as follows:
John Secor
Freedom Orange County Information, Inc.
625 North Grand Avenue
Santa Ana, CA 92701
[ ] I caused to be delivered by courier, such envelope by hand to the office of the
addressee(s).
[X] BY MAIL I am readily familiar with my employer's practice of collection and
t processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited
with U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at
Santa Ana, California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on
motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date
or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in
affidavit.
[ ]The document was transmitted by facsimile transmission and was reported as
complete and without error.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California
that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on November 14, 2006 at Santa Ana, California.
MARTHA Z
n