Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-22RESOLUTION NO. 2006-022 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2006-04 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2032 NORTH MAIN STREET WHICH IS WITHIN SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT NO. 78 (SD-78) KO -6/30/06 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. The Applicant is requesting site plan approval to replace tree species in the courtyard/entrance area for the Bowers Museum Expansion which is located at 2032 North Main Street which is within Specific Development No. 78 (SD-78). B. The Bowers Museum expansion was reviewed by the Planning Commission on July 25, 2005. At that time, a landscape plan was presented for the new expansion and the parking lot. A grove of orange trees was shown in the courtyard/entrance area to represent a cultural connection to Southern California and the Bowers Museum. The applicant is requesting to replace the Orange trees with the Naked Coral tree, E hrina coralloides. C. 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. D. Site Plan Review No. 2006-04 came before the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on August 21, 2006. E. The project is in compliance with all applicable development standards outlined within the Specific Development Plan (SD-78). F. In accordance with the Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed change out of trees for this project has been determined to have no significant impact to the mitigated negative declaration that was prepared as Environmental Review No. 2005-45. Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby approves Site Plan Review No. 2006-04. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the abovesaid hearing, which includes but is not limited to: the Request for Resolution No. 2006-022 Page 1 of 3 C. Planning Commission Action dated August 14, 2006 and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. ADOPTED this 14th day of August, 2006 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: Benavides, Cribb, De La Torre, Gartner, Leo, Lutz (6) NOES: Commissioners: None (0) ABSENT: Commissioners: Betancourt (1) ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: None (0) Christo er Leo Chairman • APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney '._- By: Kylee O. Ott Assistant Ci y Attorney CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARTHA RAMIREZ, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2006-022 to be the original resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on August 14, 2006. Date: ~'~-4 ~ tanning Commission retary City of Santa Ana Resolution No. 2006-022 Page 2 of 3 i 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 August 31, 2006 I served the foregoing document described as: ~tion No. 2006-022 (Site Plan Review No. 2006-04~ in this action by a true copy t ereo enc ose in sea e enve opes a ressed as follows: John I. Grace Development Manager Lutzky Associates Development, LP 2915 Redhill Avenue, Suite C 104 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 [ ] 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 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 August 31, 2006 at Santa Ana, California. MARTHA RAMI