HomeMy WebLinkAbout5-17-17 ZA AGENDA PACKETCITY OF SANTA ANA
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AGENDA
MAY 17, 2017
City Hall
20 Civic Center Plaza
Ross Annex, Conference Room 1600
Santa Ana, California
10:30 A.M.
Zoning Administrator: Christopher Cardinale
Recording Secretary: Sarah Bernal
BUSINESS CALENDAR
1.MINOR EXCEPTION 2017-01 {STRATEGIC PLAN NOS. 3, 2} – Vince Fregoso,
Principal Planner for Hally Soboleske, Senior Planner
Michael Ness is requesting approval of a minor exception to exceed fence height
standards for a single-family residence located at 1904 N. Heliotrope Drive located in
the Single-Family Residence (R-1) zoning district.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a resolution approving Minor Exception No.
2017-01 as conditioned.
Consideration of the matter was continued from the May 10, 2017 Zoning
Administrator meeting. At said meeting, the Public Hearing was opened, testimony
was heard and the Public Hearing was closed. The Zoning Administrator continued the
matter to the May 17, 2017 Zoning Administrator meeting for the sole purpose of
announcing a decision.
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS (non-agenda items)
ADJOURNMENT
If you wish to submit a comment on any item on the Agenda, please submit to eComments@santa-ana.org (reference Zoning Administrator)
by 8:00 a.m. the day of the meeting; emails received after said time will be on file for public viewing the day after the meeting.
If you need special assistance to participate in this Zoning Administrator meeting, please contact Michael Ortiz, City ADA Program
Coordinator, at (714) 647-5624. Please call prior to the meeting date, to allow the City time to make reasonable arrangements for
accessibility to this meeting. [Americans with Disabilities Act, Title II, 28 CFR 35.102]
Members of the public are allowed three (3) minutes to speak on each agenda item, but when any group desires to address the committee,
the committee may request that its members agree on a spokesperson to make the presentation.
This page left blank intentionally.
Updated 5/10/17 *Deadline: 05/10/2017 @8:00 a.m.
Zoning Administrator Correspondence
May 17, 2017
Item No. 1 - MINOR EXCEPTION 2017-01
Date Sender Received after
deadline
5/12/17 Nancy & William Gallivan No
5/12/17 David Buster No
5/13/17 Miranda Toscano No
5/14/17 Angel Barnes No
5/16/17 Nancy & William Gallivan (second letter
submitted)
No
5/16/17 Ann Andres No
This page left blank intentionally.
From:Bernal, Sarah
To:"Christopher Cardinale"
Subject:FW: Zoning variance
Date:Tuesday, May 16, 2017 9:59:00 AM
See below for your review and consideration.
From: Mitre-Ramirez, Norma
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 9:42 AM
To: Bernal, Sarah; Barela, Rosa
Subject: FW: Zoning variance
Good Morning Ladies,
The following communication has been received for your review and consideration.
From: Goeasybill@aol.com [mailto:Goeasybill@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 6:12 PM
To: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.org>
Subject: Zoning variance
The granting of a zoning variance to the owners of 1904 Heliotrope will be in
direct contradiction to the Mils Act status granted to the owner of this
property. The owner is prohibited by this contract from inhibiting in any way
the public viewing of this property.
Please look at the Mills Act contract and recommend compliance. It
definitely prohibits a 5 foot wall, hedge or fence.
A 3 foot wall is not unreasonable and the public can enjoy the Historic
Home.
Surely the opinions of a large number of neighbors and nearby residents
should be considered.
Nancy and William Gallivan MD
From:Huizar, Maria
To:Neal, Candida; Barela, Rosa; Bernal, Sarah
Subject:FW: Zoning Adminstrator
Date:Monday, May 15, 2017 6:05:24 PM
From: Meridian Property Management [mailto:meridianprop@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 4:03 PM
To: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.org>
Subject: Zoning Adminstrator
from: Meridian Property Management meridianprop@gmail.com
to: "Soboleske, Hally" <hsoboleske@santa-ana.org>
date: Tue, May 9, 2017 at 3:15 PM
subject: 1904 N. Heliotrope Dr.
Dear Hally,
For the record, we withdraw our previous opposition to the proposed wall for the home located
at 1904 N. Heliotrope Dr.
In review of the diagrams and idealized structure of the completed wall, it seems that this wall
will not be a common grey (ugly) block structure as we had originally been led to believe and
that it may, in fact, prove to be an enhancement to the property and hence the surrounding
neighborhood, given the stylized structural proposal of the wall.
Sincerely,
David H Buster
--
Meridian Property Management
611 W. 17th Street
Santa Ana, CA 92706
BRE 01258547
Tel (714) 836-1968
Fax (714) 836-9066
www.meridianprop.com
E-mails sent or received shall neither constitute acceptance of conducting transactions via
electronic means nor create a binding contract until and unless a written contract is signed by
the parties.
From:Bernal, Sarah
To:"Christopher Cardinale"
Subject:FW: Zoning Administrator - Michael Ness - fence height exception
Date:Tuesday, May 16, 2017 8:52:00 AM
See below comment for your review and consideration. Thank you.
From: Huizar, Maria
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 6:05 PM
To: Neal, Candida; Barela, Rosa; Bernal, Sarah
Subject: FW: Zoning Administrator - Michael Ness - fence height exception
FYI
From: Miranda Toscano [mailto:mirandar07@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2017 11:55 AM
To: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.org>
Subject: Zoning Administrator - Michael Ness - fence height exception
Hello,
I'm submitting my comments in regard to Michael Ness' fence height exception request. I am
totally against the fence height increase, and feel that the exception will set precedent, opening
up the possibility of other fences going up in the neighborhood, affecting the charm and
historical value of our neighborhood.
I've lived in this neighborhood all my life. My father moved onto Heliotrope as a teenager, and
then bought a house across the street from the home he grew up in. My family, as well as
guests to the neighborhood fall in love with it immediately for it's unique and historical homes
and gardens. Many people who live in the neighborhood have been drawn to it from other
cities like Newport and Irvine. It is such a charming draw to Santa Ana, and frankly, reminds
people that Santa Ana isn't all bad, as news and media portrays it. This neighborhood, and
specifically, the house in question, have hosted high profile individuals...in fact, this
house hosted major political parties throughout the 40s, 50s and 60s, where politicians, actors,
and media personalities would gather. The house has also been a film and commercial filming
location. In all of these times, there was never a fence. Why now?
If Michael Ness was concerned for his privacy, then he should not have bought a home on an
exposed corner lot. The beauty of this house contributes to the charm of our
neighborhood, which also contributes to the property values. IT IS NOT FAIR THAT
NEIGHBORS BE NEGATIVELY AFFECTED BY A HIGH WALL, WHEN THE
HOME WAS BOUGHT WITH FULL KNOWLEDGE OF IT'S EXPOSURE AND
CORNER LOT SITUATION. If the buyer did not like it's corner lot, or absence of high
wall, then he should not have purchased that home, and should have looked for a home in a
secured or gated community.
Floral Park IS NOT a gated, closed off community. Historically it's been a charming, open,
and inclusive neighborhood in a diverse city. Home Tours, Street Fairs, and Block Parties are
a part of this neighborhood's culture. If our neighbors are allowed to build high walls around
their homes, precedent is set, and the neighborhood becomes closed off, exclusive, and the
culture is negatively affected.
I'd like to add that Michael Ness' argument of safety does not seem to hold much weight. I live
a few doors down from his home, and I've never seen any strange incidents. I've never
witnessed strange cars parked out front during the night, I've never seen or heard about any
prowlers. In fact, all the neighbors I've discussed this with have not heard or seen anything
either, and in fact, have made an effort to keep an eye out for any unusual activity. We do this
because we are neighbors, and throughout this neighborhood's history, we openly look out for
one another, without the need for high walls or exclusivity.
Higher profile people have lived throughout this neighborhood, and none have ever built walls
the way Michael Ness is proposing.
Again, we are not a closed-off, walled in community. Please help us preserve the historical
charm of our street, and realize that the precedence of high walls will only begin a
McMansion-ing trend that has blighted other cities, but so far, not ours.
thank you.
Miranda Toscano
From:Bernal, Sarah
To:"Christopher Cardinale"
Subject:FW: 1904 No. Heliotrope "Minor" Exception No. 2017-01
Date:Monday, May 15, 2017 9:01:00 AM
Comment received for the 5/17/17 for your review and consideration.
Note: 5/17/17 meeting is not a Public Hearing but we do still accept public comments for any item
on the agenda.
Thank you.
From: Barnes, Angel@DIR [mailto:ANBarnes@dir.ca.gov]
Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2017 7:14 PM
To: e-comments@santa-ana.org; Pulido, Miguel; Bernal, Sarah
Subject: 1904 No. Heliotrope "Minor" Exception No. 2017-01
Dear Zoning Administrator and Mayor Pulido:
Although my Courtroom is only a three-minute walk from the site of your May
10 and May 17 meetings regarding the above subject property, I was and will
be in Trial both mornings. Therefore, I send this letter in lieu of my
appearance. It is sent in
no judicial capacity apart from my standing as a Floral Park homeowner for the
past 17 years located at 2006 Victoria Drive also on the Historical Registry.
My husband and I strenuously oppose the five-foot high stucco wall. Despite
the fact that both your meetings have both been scheduled in the middle of a
work day morning which, in and of itself, prevents a number of us from
attending due to work obligations, there were at least 15 other homeowners
voicing their opposition last week whose valid objections were completely
ignored.
.
You may recall the last historical home which generated such a neighborhood
response was a year or two ago on this very same street. The hearing
regarding the "Maharaja" house on the corner of Heliotrope and Santa Clara
was held at 6 or 7 p.m. to allow for full participation by the community.
Notice of that proceeding was also sent to all Floral Park residents as I recall,
not just those within 500 feet of the subject property. As a consequence, the
City Council Hall was nearly filled to capacity. I observed those
proceedings at which the two Asian physician homeowners pled that their roof
and upstairs window modifications were needed due to chronic leaking.
Frankly, the modifications they sought would not have been nearly as obvious
to the casual observer standing on the sidewalk as the overall effect of a five
foot high stucco wall around the entire perimeter of a huge corner lot,
Nevertheless, the physicians met with a categorical denial of their request, as
was appropriate due to the regulations governing Historical properties.
According to Ms. Soboleske's report, she recommends the wall to so this
homeowner can utilize his front yard with more privacy. We realize that no
structural modification is being made to the house itself, but how can obscuring
the bottom half of that expansive house conform to the spirit of the historical
regulations? The notion that a historical property owner can erect a wall
around his house as long as he doesn't change a window frame is not only in
violation of the Mills Act, but sets such a dangerous precedent that in future, all
similar frivolous reasons for erecting walls will need to be granted.
Please consider what Floral Park will look like after others erect walls. There
is no question that property values will decline since the entire look of this, the
most beautiful neighborhood in the City, will be completely changed. Further,
treating the aforementioned couple on the same street in such a disparate
fashion invites litigation, as will the affected property values. Is there an
agreement to have this homeowner indemnify our City for those costs?
Consider the precarious posture that the approval of this huge wall puts Santa
Ana in. There is already speculation that the City has not been dealing with
the subject homeowner "at arm's length" as evidenced by the fact that he was
tacitly allowed to leave a hideous six foot high green construction fence around
the entire perimeter of his property for nearly two years before any fine was
levied during which those of us who walked by his house regularly rarely saw
signs of work being performed in the 2nd year which would warrant such a
fence.
I respectfully urge you to consider the precedents we would be setting here
which fly in the face of the spirit of the Historical property regulations and in
total disregard of the feelings of the rest of Floral Park which pulls together
repeatedly throughout the year for the betterment of the City of Santa Ana.
Sincerely,
Angel Barnes
From:Mitre-Ramirez, Norma
To:Bernal, Sarah; Barela, Rosa
Subject:FW: reference Zoning Administrator
Date:Tuesday, May 16, 2017 3:28:41 PM
Hello Ladies,
The following communication has been received for your review and consideration.
Kind Regards,
Norma Mitre
Sr. Deputy Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana | Clerk of the Council Office
20 Civic Center Plaza | Santa Ana, CA 92701
714-647-5237| nmitre@santa-ana.org
From: Goeasybill@aol.com [mailto:Goeasybill@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 2:33 PM
To: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.org>
Subject: reference Zoning Administrator
Zoning Administrator
We wish to again register our opposition to granting a zoning variance to the
owners of the property at 1904 Heliotrope. Drive in Santa Ana
The owners will by law and contract lose their status for tax considerations
under the provisions of the Mills. Act. #3C
. The proposed 5 foot wall will almost totally obliterate visually this historic
property. This fact is in direct contradiction to the Mills Act requirements for
Historic Properties. (that no wall , fence or hedge may obstruct the public
right to view the property from the public right of way). I will be sending by
separate email photos of this historic property taken with a 6 foot fence
surrounding it. You can see for yourselves that a wall only 1 foot lower will
still obliterate the public view of this lovely Historic Home. No one wants to
see just the upper window and roof---- the lovely balustrades will not be
visible.
We are NOT opposed to a 3 foot wall as currently permitted by city code. It
would not be out of scale with the home if suitable landscaping is planted.
Nancy and William Gallivan MD.
From:Mitre-Ramirez, Norma
To:Bernal, Sarah; Barela, Rosa
Subject:FW: Fence height variance 5/17 10:30 am
Date:Tuesday, May 16, 2017 3:07:01 PM
Hello Ladies,
The following communication has been received for your review and consideration.
Kind Regards,
Norma Mitre
Sr. Deputy Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana | Clerk of the Council Office
20 Civic Center Plaza | Santa Ana, CA 92701
714-647-5237| nmitre@santa-ana.org
From: Ann Andres [mailto:aaandres@andreslaw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 1:51 PM
To: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.org>
Subject: FW: Fence height variance 5/17 10:30 am
From: Ann Andres [mailto:aaandres@andreslaw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 1:46 PM
To: 'www.ecomments.@santa-ana.org' <www.ecomments.@santa-ana.org>
Subject: Fence height variance 5/17 10:30 am
I am very much opposed to the city approving the Ness application to build a 5’ fence around their
property. In fact, it appears that such a fence would violate
their Mills Act contract. Usually, the Mills Act contract states: “c. A view corridor enabling the
general public to see the Historic Property from the public right-of-way SHALL be maintained, and
Owner SHALL not be permitted to block the view corridor to the property with any new structure
such as WALLS, FENCES or shrubbery, so as to prevent the viewing of the historic landmark by the
public.”
I think you should review the Ness’s contract before approving any variance.
Ann Avery Andres
1-1
May 17, 2017
1-2
1-3
This page left blank intentionally.
EXHIBIT 4: AERIAL VIEW
EXHIBIT 5: SITE PLANEXHIBIT 5: SITE PLAN
EXHIBIT 6: PROPOSED WALL RENDERING
EXHIBIT 7: PROPOSED WALL RENDERING
EXHIBIT 8: PROPOSED WALL RENDERING
Updated 5/10/17 *Deadline: 05/10/2017 @8:00 a.m.
Zoning Administrator Correspondence
May 10, 2017
Item No. 1 - MINOR EXCEPTION 2017-01
No. Date Sender Received after deadline
1 04/02/2017 Linda Grant No
2 04/03/2017 Patricia & Edward Tornell No
3 04/04/2017 Stephen Amsler No
4 04/05/2017 Alberta Christy No
5 04/05/2017 Nancy & William Gallivan No
6 04/10/2017 Kevin Shuler No
7 04/11/2017 Steve Richardson No
8 04/11/2017 Mason Nakamura No
9 04/11/2017 Herbert Silva & Rhonda Nalisnik No
10 04/11/2017 Alex Hart No
11 04/11/2017 Angel Barnes No
12 04/11/2017 Gigi Blas No
13 04/11/2017 David Buster No
14 04/12/2017 Erik Hernandez No
15 04/18/2017 Tom Lutz No
16 05/01/2017 Kenny & Leah Schmidt No
17 05/04/2017 Linda Grant (second letter submitted) No
18 05/04/2017 Eric Larson No
19 05/08/2017 Leslie Kato No
20 05/09/2017 Shawn & Sharon Milnikel No
21 05/09/2017 Michael R.W. Houston No
22 05/09/2017 Debbie McEwen No
23 05/09/2017 Tim Rush No
24 05/09/2017 Unknown No
25 05/09/2017 Annie Mai Bevacqua No
26 05/09/2017 Donna & Joe Duffy No
27 05/09/2017 Michael Gallivan No
28 05/09/2017 Leeta White No
29 05/09/2017 Joni Barr & Bela Somogyi No
30 05/09/2017 Nicole Chiarini No
31 05/09/2017 Marcus Gallager No
32 05/09/2017 Jade Chiarini No
33 05/10/2017 Bobbi Keenan No
34 05/10/2017 Andrew Peat No
35 05/10/2017 Jayne Munoz No
36 05/10/2017 Cheryl Peat No
This page left blank intentionally.
1
2
3
3
4
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
11
11
11
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
From: Lin Grant <grantlinnie70@gmail.com>
Date: May 4, 2017 at 9:29:26 PM PDT
To: <eComments@santa-ana.org>
Subject: TO: Zoning Administrator
Dear Sir or Madame:
I would like to contest the zoning variance requested by Mr. Ness for his Santa
Ana house. He knew when he moved into Floral Park, having lived here
previously, that it is a unique neighborhood with many historical homes. And
with many restrictions. We take pride in this neighborhood. Mr.Ness is asking
for something that others have been denied and it would establish a dangerous
precedent if granted. Many in the neighborhood feel that he is trying to capitalize
on his semi-celebrity status for special treatments not guaranteed to the rest of us
in Floral Park.
The Ness home is a beautiful one and should be seen from the street. A fence of
the height he is requesting poses a danger for the neighborhood because the
intersection does not have a stop sign and the view of traffic is compromised.
Speed is already a problem in Floral Park and this would make it worse.
I respectfully request that Mr. Ness' variance be denied.
Linda Grant Floral Park
17
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric J. Larson [mailto:ericjlarson@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2017 5:16 PM
To: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.org>
Subject: Residential Fence on NW Corner of Heliotrope and 19th St.
To Whom It May Concern -
I am writing this letter on support of the front fence that Mr. Michael Ness is proposing to construct in the front yard
of his personal residence on the NW corner of 19th street and Heliotrope Dr. in the City of Santa Ana in the
neighborhood of Floral Park.
I have been a resident of Floral Park for 17 years. I have lived in 2 separate residences in said neighborhood. From
2000 to 2010 I resided at 315 W. Santa Clara, where I redesigned and extensively remodeled the house at that
address. I currently reside at
1907 Heliotrope Dr.
My previous house on 315 W. Santa Clara was the proud winner of 2 civic awards from the Santa Ana City Council
and from the Santa Ana City Planning Commission. I have also spent 25 years as an Art Director and Production
Designer for Theatre, Film and Television.
I only mention the above, because I have gone through historical remodels and rebuilds both in my private life and
as a professional. I understand historical preservation and design.
I am in full support of the fence that Mr. Ness is proposing to construct in the front of his personal residence. I have
seen and discussed the design of the fence with Mr. Ness and his wife on several occasions. The fence is certainly
not out of character for our neighborhood.
The design is historically sensitive and will blend in beautifully with the character and historical charm that Floral
Park exudes. I would not hesitate to exclaim that those who view the new construction, after it is complete, will not
be able to discern that it is indeed new construction and will assume it has been part of the neighborhood for as long
as the houses have stood in Floral Park.
It should also be noted that Mr Ness and his wife have gone out of their way to include the neighbors of Floral Park
to collaborate and approve the design of the fence. They have been great neighbors in regards to keeping all
neighbors informed of their intentions.
Unfortunately , as I have prior engagements, I cannot attend the approval meeting this coming Wednesday
concerning the fence. Please do not hesitate to contact me either by phone or email if you need my opinion verbally
or have any questions concerning my support of this welcome addition to our neighborhood.
Thank You - Respectfully submitted.
Eric J. Larson
Production Design/Art Direction 213-944-4699 c.
ericjlarson@sbcglobal.net
18
From: Leslie Kato [mailto:leslie.kato@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Monday, May 8, 2017 6:27 AM
To: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.org>
Subject: Ref: Zoning Administrator - May 10, 2017 - Public Hearing, minor exception 2017-01
(Strategic Plan Nos: 3, 2)
Please present/submit the following letter during the public hearing slated for May 10, 2017
regarding a variance allowance for property 1904 North Heliotrope Drive, Santa Ana, CA
92706.
Unfortunately neither myself or my husband are able to attend the hearing but want to present
our concerns.
Sincerely,
Leslie Kato
Mr. Cardinale & Ms. Bernal,
Regarding the fence/wall variance requested by the residents of 1904 North Heliotrope Drive,
neither my husband, nor myself, support the request for reasons listed below.
The family has lived in the neighborhood before and having built a fence on that previously
owned property, they were aware of the city's fence/wall height restrictions prior to purchasing
their current property.
Similar requests by Floral Park residents have been denied.
The green rental fence should have been removed after the outside construction was completed,
yet it remained in place for over a year.
How would the city be able to deny future fence/wall variance requests if this request is
permitted?
Wouldn't allowance of this variance render the present fence/wall ordinance null and void?
What makes this particular request special enough to override the ordinance?
Sincerely
Stacey & Leslie Kato - 20 Year Residents 2119 North Heliotrope Drive
Santa Ana, CA
19
From:Soboleske, Hally
To:Bernal, Sarah
Subject:Fwd: 1904 Heliotrope, Santa Ana, California - Mike and Christine Ness exception/ variance
Date:Monday, May 08, 2017 8:46:22 PM
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Sharon Lindsay-Milnikel <slm0704@roadrunner.com>
Date: May 8, 2017 at 8:24:21 PM PDT
To: <ecomments@santa-ana.org>, <hsoboleske@santa-ana.org>
Subject: 1904 Heliotrope, Santa Ana, California - Mike and Christine Ness
exception/ variance
Hello`
My name is Sharon Milnikel. I live at 1904 Greenleaf, Santa Ana (Floral
Park).
I am writing this e-mail in regards to the exception on the wall Mike and
Christine Ness (1904 Heliotrope, Santa Ana) are proposing to build on their
property.
My husband, Shawn Milnikel, and I not only cast a yes vote in favor of the
wall with the exception, but also a vote of confidence in the Nesses as to
their building a wall that will not only be aesthetically pleasing but
historically appropriate.
Thank you for your consideration,
Shawn and Sharon Milnikel
1904 Greenleaf
Santa Ana, California 92706
20
From:Mitre-Ramirez, Norma
To:Bernal, Sarah; Barela, Rosa
Cc:Huizar, Maria; Orozco, Norma
Subject:FW: Zoning Administrator re Minor Exception 2017-01
Date:Tuesday, May 09, 2017 7:22:06 AM
Good Morning Ladies,
I’m passing along comment for your review and/or comment.
Kind Regards,
Norma Mitre
Sr. Deputy Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana | Clerk of the Council Office
20 Civic Center Plaza | Santa Ana, CA 92701
714-647-5237| nmitre@santa-ana.org
From: Michael Houston [mailto:michael.robert.houston@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 8, 2017 7:47 PM
To: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.org>
Subject: Zoning Administrator re Minor Exception 2017-01
To whom it may concern,
I write in support of the staff recommendation to approve Minor Exception No. 2017-01. I
fully support Mr. Ness's application.
My wife and I live on the corner of Flower and 19th St. We are neighbors of Mr. And Mrs.
Ness. I have reviewed the plans on file as part of the staff report and have spoken with the
property owner. I believe the architectural plans he has provided meet the character of the
surrounding neighborhood and will be consistent with the architectural characteristics of his
house. While this proposed wall will be a new architectural feature, a number of homes in the
neighborhood have new features on their property. Additionally, the wall feature appears to be
consistent with the architectural characteristics of the existing property structures. It is set back
from the sidewalk in the street and will still allow for view corridors to exist.
I also support Mr. Ness's interest in need to have usable yard space and to preserve his privacy
and security. It is important for the neighborhood to promote designs which advance the
architectural features of the home while also allowing for the privacy of one's use of their
yard. I believe the proposed architectural designs balance those interests. Likewise, the safety
of the neighborhood is enhanced by allowing for this architectural feature to be built in a way
that will screen some view from the public sidewalk Wall not significantly inhibiting view
corridors from a farther distance perspective.
21
By way of background, not only am I a neighbor, but I am a land-use and municipal law
attorney with over 17 years of experience and have worked on historic structures as part of my
background. Please take my opinion into account.
Again, I support this project in the staff recommendation.
Michael R.W. Houston
21
From:Debbie McEwen
To:Bernal, Sarah
Subject:Fence ordinance Floral Park
Date:Tuesday, May 09, 2017 10:53:08 AM
I believe calling this a minor variance does a huge disservice to all except the applicant. We are at a terrible time in
our City, without a permanent City Manager or Police Chief and our Council is a divided faction. Now is not the
time to cherry pick though the long standing ordinances put in place at a more stable time. There is already so much
instability and political horse trading going on, please let us, the neighborhood associations continue to rely on the
protections we have in place.
Thank you.
Debbie McEwen
President
Historic French Park
Sent from my iPhone
22
From:Tim Rush
To:Bernal, Sarah; Huizar, Maria
Subject:Zoning Administrator Hearing May 10th, 2017, Item No. 2017-01,
Date:Tuesday, May 09, 2017 2:58:37 PM
Attachments:image003.png
image004.png
image005.png
Zoning Administrator
RE: Real Property located at 1904 Heliotrope Drive, Floral Park, Santa Ana, Ca
Request for Minor Exception, Perimeter Fencing
Dear Sir;
Please let me start by being clear……I am 100% opposed to the applicants request. My opposition
includes the following reasons.
1. The requested variance is hardly minor. Going from a permissible 36” to 60”………is a
tremendous increase. Not sure whose dictionary one is using to arrive at the term MINOR?
2. It will alter the exterior appearance of the historic home dramatically………thereby
destroying the original appearance.
3. Given what I stated in item No. 2, that would call into question a violation of the Mills Act
application, and the listing on the City Historical Register.
4. This will diminish the view shed afforded by a significant amount when you consider this
home in on such a prominent corner.
5. The most damaging part of this request if it is granted will be the Niagara of requests by
others in the city who have requested similar variances over the years. And they will all
point to the new precedent being set by the Ness property as reason that they should be
granted a similar such variance.
The City Council many years ago sought to counter this blight of mini fortressing that was occurring
in our city by creating standards which have worked well to reign in this problem. We create a
great city and great neighborhoods block by block, and house by house. What Mr. Ness requests
will simply further entrench more bad decisions with regard to overblown fencing. We are told
that Mr. Ness is fearful for his personal safety and that is the reason for the large fence. Others will
make the same argument……….to that I would suggest you not live in Santa Ana where we value
our historic neighborhoods. This fence will not generate the security he seeks, and when Mr. Ness
realizes that and moves on……..we are left with this terrible legacy to poor decision making.
This fence is detrimental to the home, the neighborhood and for what it will create in Floral Park
and beyond, a neighborhood of fortresses not homes. Please DENY this request.
Tim Rush
Historian, Past President of Washington Square and Wilshire Square Neigh. Assoc.
Neighborhood Hero, 30 Yr. Resident
23
From:Soboleske, Hally
To:Bernal, Sarah
Subject:Fwd: 1904 N. Heliotrope Drive
Date:Tuesday, May 09, 2017 11:32:45 AM
FYI
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: <imhump@aol.com>
Date: May 9, 2017 at 11:31:52 AM PDT
To: <hsoboleske@santa-ana.org>
Subject: 1904 N. Heliotrope Drive
The Property owners have been a favored (4 homes in Floral Park) member of our
community for over 25 years. They have left every home they purchased better than the
way they found it while preserving the integrity of the property. I trust our planning and
building agency (along with the homeowner) to propose and build an aesthetically pleasing
and architecturally proper wall for this grand property. Kudos to Halle Soboleske and her
team for coming up with this proposal.
24
May 9, 2017
2008 N. Heliotrope Dr.
Santa Ana, CA 92706
Ms. Hally Soboleske
City of Santa Ana
RE: Public Hearing regarding fence at 1904 N. Heliotrope Drive, Santa Ana
Dear Ms. Soboleske,
I am writing in support of approving Mr. Michael Ness’ request to increase the height his front
yard fence at his property on 1904 N. Heliotrope Drive, Santa Ana, CA.
In speaking with Mr. Ness, I have learned of the efforts and time he has invested in the design
concept for the proposed front yard fence on his property. Mr. Ness has been researching design
ideas and working closely with his design team to create an architectural feature with his front
yard fence and surrounding landscaping that will enhance the overall appeal and beauty of his
unique and historic property. The rendering that he shared with me depicts a fence that has been
thoughtfully designed with mature trees and ground coverings to complement and bring out the
natural beauty of his home.
I am confident that his fence will bring more value to his property as well as the neighboring
homes on his street, which includes my own home. I believe the integrity of his home and those
of his neighbors’ homes will not be compromised, and the fence will create a certain of decorum
mirroring the high expectations within the Floral Park neighborhood.
I support Mr. Ness’s proposed plans for his front yard fence and hope his proposal will be
approved. Do contact me with any questions.
Regards,
Annie Mai Bevacqua
Annie Mai Bevacqua
714-478-5557
25
From:Soboleske, Hally
To:Bernal, Sarah
Subject:Fwd: Zoning Administrator - Support of Minor Exception No. 2017-01 in Floral Park
Date:Tuesday, May 09, 2017 3:32:44 PM
Attachments:OutlookEmoji-1472493877118_Truthlogo_email_sg_100x100px_150dpi.png.png
Another one
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Donna Duffy <dduffy@truthemail.com>
Date: May 9, 2017 at 3:16:06 PM PDT
To: "ecomments@santa-ana.org" <ecomments@santa-ana.org>,
"hsoboleske@santa-ana.org" <hsoboleske@santa-ana.org>
Subject: Zoning Administrator - Support of Minor Exception No. 2017-01 in
Floral Park
To whom it may concern,
We support the Exception for 1904 N. Heliotrope Drive.
We have been residents of Floral Park for 28 years and instrumental in
forming/supporting the community that exists today. One of the reasons we
chose to live here was the character and charm of each individual home. Some
are surrounded by white picket fences, some with large trees centering the
property or tall hedges lining properties, some with walls both short and tall and
some with nothing at all. There is not one solution that fits all here. I would
hope our zoning department recognizes this.
The Heliotrope home is one of the most beautiful homes in the neighborhood.
And it sits higher than most in comparison. I've seen the drawings for the
proposed landscaping/wall which is undeniably beautiful and in proportion of a
taller wall/landscaping.
We've known Mike and Christine Ness for more than 20 of the years we've lived
here. We know they are passionate preservationists. Everything they do/have
26
done is of the highest quality of standards and appropriate for the vintage
architectural style of our neighborhood.
We would consider this exception an upgrade to the neighborhood and hope
that you agree.
Donna & Joe Duffy
2208 N. Ross Street
Santa Ana, CA 92706
donna duffy
714-542-8778, ext. 13
www.truthandadvertising.com
26
From:Michael Gallivan
To:ccardinale@santa-ana.org; Soboleske, Hally; eComment
Cc:Bernal, Sarah; Carvalho, Sonia R.; Mitre-Ramirez, Norma; Storck, Lisa; mMLawrence@snata-ana.org; hhassan@santa-ana.org; Pulido, Miguel; Neal, Candida; lverino@santa-ana.org
Subject:RE: MINOR EXCEPTION 2017-01 {Strategic Plan Nos 3,2} REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF 5-FOOT HIGH WALL IN FRONT YARD AT HISTORIC LANDMARK RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 1904 N. HELIOTROPE DRIVE
Date:Tuesday, May 09, 2017 4:36:33 PM
Attachments:Michael Gallivan Letter with Highlighted Comments to Staff Recommended Action Package and Finding of Facts for Proposed 5 Foot Wall at 1904 N Heliotrope Drive 5-9-17.pdf
Dear Mr. Cardinale and to whom else it concerns:
I grew up and my parents still reside at 1912 Heliotrope Drive. This email and attached letter are sent to respectfully request that you deny the request to the proposed minor
Exception Approval to permit a 5 foot high wall at the Historic Elliot Residence located at 1904 N. Heliotrope Drive in Floral Park.
It seems egregious that City staff is considering recommending approval to permit a five-foot high fence in the front of the Historic residence as it will very clearly be a threat
to public safety, diminish adjacent and area property values, and obscure visibility of the one of the most architecturally significant historic landmarks in Santa Ana (the
architecturally significant balustrades will be completely obscured). I have reviewed the Recommended Action Letter prepared by Staff and the Finding of Facts which are
attached to the Public Hearing package and have noted that much of the analysis and fact stated are simply not correct. Please find my specific notes and comments in red and
highlighted in yellow below and attached to the staff report and Findings of Fact.
It would be appreciated if you will take this email, letter and attached comments into further consideration with your recommendation on the requested approval to build a 5-
foot wall around this historic residence. I respectfully request that the request for the 5-foot wall and Minor Exception be denied for all the reasons set forth in this email, letter
and noted below and in the attached notes.
Sincerely,
Michael J. Gallivan
Cell (213) 300-1030
Attachments
RECOMENDATION
Adopt a resolution approving Minor Exception No. 2017-01. Request of Applicant
The applicant, Michael Ness is requesting approval of Minor Exception No. 2017-01 to allow the
construction of a five-foot high front yard fence at 1904 North Heliotrope Drive. The applicant is proposing a minor exception from Santa Ana Municipal Code
(SAMC) § 41-61O(a)(1) which limits residential fencing on non-arterial streets to three feet in height. Pursuant to SAMC § 41-632(3)(i), minor exceptions related
to fences are determined by the Zoning Administrator.
Property Description and Site Location
The General Plan land use designation for this site is Low Density Residential (LR-7), with a zoning designation of Single Family residence (R1). The property is
located within the Floral Park neighborhood, and is listed on the Santa Ana Register of Historical Properties. The structure is known as the Elliot House and
is categorized as a Landmark. Additionally, the existing two-story house was constructed in 1931 and is 4,149 square feet. The property has a detached
two-car garage to the west of the house. The 17,670-square-foot property is located on the northwest corner of Heliotrope Drive and Nineteenth Street.
Surrounding land uses include single family residential to the north, south, east and west (Exhibits 1, 2, 3 and 4).
Project Description
The applicant proposes to construct a five-foot tall decorative fence (wall)four feet in from the front and side property lines at the residential property located
at 1904 North Heliotrope Drive (Exhibit 4). Pursuant to Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC) § 41-61O(a)(1), front yard fences are limited to three feet in height on
residential properties located on non-arterial streets. Although the final design will be reviewed
Administratively n,
the proposed fence is designed to match the historic house in terms of material, color and design (Exhibit 5). Exhibit 5 which is attached to Zoning Administrator package(labeled as Site Plan) shows a solid wall with no compatibility with historical Italian Renaissance Architecture of house or existing balustrades on the front of the house.
Project Background
The applicant purchased the property in 2015 and has been in the process of renovating and rehabilitating the interior of the home. The applicant
did not live in the home during the renovation process, but visited frequently to view the progress. During renovations, the applicant installed a
fabric covered chain link construction fence to protect the site and stored building materials. The City received complaints from nearby residents
about the extended period of time the construction fence was in place and the property owner was cited. With interior work nearing completion, the
applicant has moved into the residence and is prepared to begin exterior improvements such as fencing and landscaping.
Project Analysis
The applicant would like to construct a five-foot tall (wall) fence along the front and side yards that include a solid stucco wall with a decorative wrought iron
gate facing the corner of the site (Exhibit 6). Design is in stark contrast to Architectural Renaissance design of House.
The purpose of the fence is to obtain privacy and usable yard space. This residence and detached garage is located on a corner lot, and is set back to
the northwest corner of the lot greatly reducing the size of the usable rear yard. The Property has a beautiful useable back yard with pool
and has not changed in size since owner’s purchase of the home. Being a corner lot, two sides of the lot are adjacent to streets further
reducing the amount of private yard area. The detached garage and driveway are positioned in the rear part of the lot, reducing the usable rear yard area
by approximately 800 or more square feet. Back yard is greater than 800 sqaure feet. Additionally, the prevailing setback along Heliotrope Drive is
more than 50 feet. Therefore, for the majority of properties along Heliotrope, the front yard area functions as part of the usable yard space. The majority
of Front yards on Heliotrope Drive create an open environment that is unique to Santa Ana creating value to the neighborhood and desirability
for living in the Floral Park area, specifically on Heliotrope Drive. The house is a large, two-story residence, and the Italian Renaissance style of
architectural style is ornate and box-shaped. As such, a typical three-foot tall fence would look incongruous with this architectural style This is ridiculous
as the wall will be certainly be incongruous with the Architectural style, let alone the 5 foot wall will completely block views of the historically
significant balustrades surrounding the beautiful property. . The proposed front yard fence allows the property owner to enjoy their property
rights including private yard space and to have the fence match in scale to the residence. Please note that the proposed “fence” is a wall and owner’s
property rights have not changed. Owner was well aware of the architectural significance of the house when purchased recently
The site is identified as a historic property categorized as Landmark due to its unique architectural significance in the Italian Renaissance style. Its
classic design is typical of the revival styles constructed in the Floral Park neighborhood during the 1920's and 30's. The residence is quite large,
and is a striking presence from the right-of-way; a three-foot tall fence would appear diminutive and not be in proportion to the house. Again this
27
is absurd, since the wall will be incongruous with Property’s Architectural style, let alone the 5 foot wall which will completely block views of
the historically significant balustrades surrounding the beautiful property. The applicant proposes a five-foot tall wall so that the line of site of the
top of the wall matches the two-foot tall balustrade surrounding the terrace which surrounds the front facade when viewed from the right-of-way
(Exhibit 7) The five foot tall wall will completely block the view of the historically significant balustrades surrounding the terrace as clearly
illustrated in Exhibit 8 Proposed Wall Rendering provided in Zoning Administrators package (attached), and thereby meeting the requirements
and objectives of Chapter 13 (Historic Structures) of the Citywide Design Guidelines and the policy of the Historic Resources Commission to maintain
a view shed of the historic residence. The wall certainly does not meet and is contradictory to the requirements and objectives of Chapter 13
(Historic Structures) of the Citywide Design Guidelines and the policy of the Historic Resources Commission to maintain a view shed of the historic
residence. This decorative fence provides a formal appearance complementing the appearance of the residence and would serve to accent the view of
the historic property without blocking it because of the slope of the yard. With acceptation of the driveway side of their
property the yard is flat (there is very little or no slope. The proposed wall will detract
and certainly not complement the appearance of the residence. The material and design of the wall proposed
will complement the existing style of architecture (smooth stucco texture) while offering the property owner private yard space. The five foot high
stcucco wall will certainly detract from the Italian Renaissance design integrity of the house.
Public Notification
The project site is located within the boundaries of the Floral Park Neighborhood Association. Staff contacted the president of the Floral Park
Neighborhood Association to ensure they were notified of this project and to identify any areas of concern. The president did not identify any
concerns at this time. The project site itself was posted with a notice advertising this public hearing, a notice was published in the Orange County
Reporter and mailed notices were sent to all property owners and tenants within 500 feet of the project site. At the time of this printing, 16 e-mails have
been received by members of the public; three in support and 14 in opposition of the recommended action (Exhibit 8).
CEQA Complaince
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the proposed project is categorically exempt per §15303(e) as it is a proposed accessory
structure on a residentially zoned property. Environmental Review No. 2017-20 will be filed for this project.
Strategic Plan Alignment
Approval of this item supports the City's efforts to meet Goal #5 (Community Health, Livability, Engagement & Sustainability), Objective #4 (support
neighborhood vitality and livability). The five foot wall will certainly not and work in contrast to City's efforts to meet Goal #5 (Community Health, Livability,
Engagement & Sustainability), Objective #4 (support neighborhood vitality and livability). The five foot wall if approved will result in the following:
1) Less safe neighborhood –· New blind traffic intersection will be created.
· Unobstructed corridor views from 19th Street and Heliotrope Drive will be impeded.· Reduction of side yard set-back from 10 to 4 feet on North side of Property will obstruct views from adjacent driveway that could result in pedestrian
injuries or even fatalities. Floral park residents that walk northbound on sidewalk will be at much greater risk to be hit from cars backing up on adjacent
driveway located on the north side of the Property.· Reduction of front and side yard set-backs from 10 to 4 feet (and from 50 foot prevailing set-back in front yard) will obstruct corridor views for
vehicles traveling on Heliotrope Drive and 19th Street creating a greater risk of vehicle accidents and/or potential vehicle/pedestrian accidents.
2) Community Livability and Enagement will be greatly reduced· Front yards on Heliotrope Drive create an open environment that is unique to Santa Ana creating value to the neighborhood and
desirability for living in the Floral Park area, specifically on Heliotrope Drive.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends approval of Minor Exception No. 2017-01 to allow a five-foot tall fence in the front and side yards to allow the applicant to enjoy his property right to
usable private yard area
Findings of Fact
A. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the
strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of
the provisions of this chapter.
There are special circumstances applicable to the subject property where the strict interpretation of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the
subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of the zoning code. The subject site is a
corner lot with the house and garage located in the rear (northwest) of the lot on a street with large setbacks thereby significantly reducing the
size of private backyard area. The Property has a beautiful private back yard with a pool and has not changed since the Owner recent purchase
of the Property.
The purpose and intent of the code requirement is to prevent a “fortress-like” appearance in residential areas; however, the size and scale of
this historic Italian Renaissance style of residence is large thereby making a typical three-foot tall front yard fence appear miniscule in
comparison. The five-foot tall fence would complement the size and scale of this of structure. This is not true! The wall will be incongruous
with the Architectural style, let alone the 5 foot wall which will completely block views of the historically significant balustrades surrounding
the beautiful property. Furthermore, The five foot tall wall will completely block the view of the historically significant balustrades surrounding
the terrace as clearly illustrated in Exhibit 8 Proposed Wall Rendering provided in Zoning Administrators package (attached).
B. That the granting of a minor exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights.
The approval of this minor exception maintains the rights of the property owners to utilize their property as other residential property owners to
have a private and secure usable yard area (Property has a private and secure usable yard area. Property has a beautiful private back yard with
a pool and has not changed since the Owner recent purchase of the Property). Since the subject lot is a corner lot, the fence is required to be
constructed ten feet in from the side yard property line which would not optimize the private and secure usable area. (The code provides for a
10 foot minimum set-back on the north Property line – reduction of this to 4 feet is impeding on adjacent owner’s property rights and creating a
unsafe condition that is detrimental to public welfare (pedestrian traveling northbound on sidewalk for evening strolls which be much more
susceptible to being struck from vehicle backing up from adjacent driveway located on north side of the Property. The fence is proposed to be
built in four feet from the side lot line so as to maintain the pedestrian scale. Do not understand the preceding comment as solid wall will be
detrimental to pedestrian scale. Owner’s preservation and enjoyment of Property has not changed. The Property has a beautiful private back
yard with a pool and has not changed since the Owner recent purchase of the Property.
C. That the granting of a minor exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property.
27
The project will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare as the proposed front yard fence/wall will be designed to complement the
historic residence in terms of material and style. This is not true! The wall will most certainly be incongruous with the Italian Renaissance
Architectural style. The 5 foot wall will completely block views of the historically significant balustrades surrounding the terrace as clearly illustrated in
Exhibit 8 Proposed Wall Rendering provided in Zoning Administrators package (attached). Further, the view of the historic landmark residence will
not be obstructed due to it being constructed at a higher grade than the sidewalk. With acceptation of the driveway side of their property, the
yard is flat (there is very little or no slope). The proposed wall will detract and certainly not complement the appearance of the residence. Side
yard fences are allowed to be up to eight feet in height; (The preceding comment is Not relevant as the prevailing front yard setback on
Heliotrope Drive is more than 50 feet) however, the applicant proposes five feet in height to maintain the pedestrian scale. The four-foot
landscape buffer in front of the proposed front yard fence will soften the edges of the fence and maintain the residential nature of the site. The
portion of fence on the northern side of the property will be tapered so as not to be injurious or detrimental to the neighboring site. The code
provides for a 10 foot set-back on the north Property line – reduction of this to 4 feet is impeding on adjacent owner’s property rights and creating
a unsafe condition that is detrimental to public welfare (pedestrians traveling northbound on sidewalk for evening strolls will be much more
susceptible to being struck from vehicle backing up from adjacent driveway located on north side of the Property. The reduction of the set back
from 10 to 4 feet, even with the so called taper (which does not conform to prevailing setback), will be very detrimental to adjacent property to
north, especially with decreased view and visibility from driveway when backing up onto Heliotrope Drive.
D. That the granting of a minor exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City.
The requested minor exception will not adversely affect the General Plan, as it is consistent with the goals and policies of the document. The
proposed exception will most certainly adversely effect the General Plan by setting precedence. Goal 2.0 of the Urban Design Element states
that new development should be proportionally and aesthetically related to its district setting. This is not a new development; the House which
was originally constructed in 1931 is categorized as an Historical Landmark and was renovated. The proposed fence is proportional to the
residence and for a residential area. Goal 2.7 of the Urban Design Element states that projects must exhibit a functional, comfortable scale in
relation to the neighborhood. The proposed wall is certainly not in scale to in relation to the neighborhood. The prevailing front yard setback on
Heliotrope Drive is more than 50 feet and the three other homes that share the Heliotrope Drive and 19th Street intersection all have open areas
with fences that conform to Code (See Exhibit 2 Zoning Map). This proposal is in scale with existing structures in the neighborhood, and
specifically with the large scale of the existing historic residence. Goal 3.5 of the Urban Design Element Policy Plan encourages residential
alterations that are consistent with the architectural character of the neighborhood. The proposed wall will be detrimental to Goal 3.5 of the Urban
Design Element Policy Plan. Front yards on Heliotrope Drive create an open environment that is unique to Santa Ana creating value to the
neighborhood and desirability for living in the Floral Park area, specifically on Heliotrope Drive. The residence is Italian Renaissance which utilizes
large scale to convey its grand style. The proposed five-foot tall fence is congruous to the scale of the residence. The residence is a
historical designated Landmark with an elevated terrace with balustrades. The proposed wall will be in stark contrast in keeping with the Italian
Renaissance style and will obscure views of the beautiful residence and completely block views of the historically significant balustrades that are
noted with its historic designation.
27
From:Soboleske, Hally
To:Bernal, Sarah
Subject:Fwd: 1904 N Heliotrope Dr.
Date:Tuesday, May 09, 2017 10:28:08 PM
Another
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Lee & Leeta Wilhite <home@wilhite5.com>
Date: May 9, 2017 at 10:00:05 PM PDT
To: Hally Soboleske <hsoboleske@santa-ana.org>
Cc: Leeta Wilhite <home@wilhite5.com>
Subject: 1904 N Heliotrope Dr.
Hello Hally,
I’m a Floral Park resident who objects to the proposed minor exception regarding
construction of a 5 foot wall surrounding 1904 N Heliotrope Drive. I just learned
about tomorrow’s hearing, which I cannot attend in person.
My husband and I have lived in Floral Park for almost two years, moving to
Orange County from the Seattle area. We could have lived in many different
cities—my husband works in La Mirada and our kids attend school in Huntington
Beach—but we chose Floral Park (and therefore, Santa Ana) because it’s
completely set apart from everything else we looked at. It truly feels like a
neighborhood … people walking their dogs at all hours, greeting one another by
name, sharing hospitality with neighbors who also happen to be friends, and
generally caring for one another in a way we’ve never experienced in any place
we've lived. When we moved in, people told us that Floral Park was like this—
and it really is the case!
Of course a neighborhood cannot exude friendliness in this way, simply by the
residents being interested in one another. As you know, physical cues play a
critical role in how a neighborhood feels—in Floral Park’s case: varied
architectural styles, tidy homes and yards of all sizes, tree-lined streets, charming
landscapes, set back garages, etc. But probably what contributes most of all to
Floral Park’s friendly feel are the clear sight lines from one end of a street to the
other—the open spaces between homes seem to say: we are part of a community.
After all, this was the way of life for the families who built our homes, i.e. when
people engaged with one another rather than with their smart phones. I hadn’t
really thought about the importance of physical cues until I pictured the proposed
wall at one end of Heliotrope. I’m concerned that a compound-like wall
surrounding a prominent Floral Park property—and any others that follow suit—
will detract from the neighborhood’s strong community feel. Again, the physical
cues carry weight whether we’re conscious of them or not.
28
Thank you for considering my thoughts at the hearing on Wednesday.
Leeta Wilhite
2002 N Victoria Drive
Santa Ana, CA 92706
(657) 232-3290
28
From:Soboleske, Hally
To:Bernal, Sarah
Subject:Fwd: The Wall at 1904 N. Heliotrope/ Corner of 19th St,
Date:Tuesday, May 09, 2017 11:53:02 PM
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: <JONIBELA@aol.com>
Date: May 9, 2017 at 11:21:33 PM PDT
To: <ecomments@santa-ana.org>, <hsoboleske@santa-ana.org>
Subject: The Wall at 1904 N. Heliotrope/ Corner of 19th St,
We highly urge you to approve and make an the exception for this proposed wall height at
1904 N. Heliotrope Drive. The design is simply beautiful ! It will be equated to a gorgeous
piece of "Art Work" and add to the enhancement of the corner of Heliotrope Drive and 19th
Street, and to the entire Floral Park neighborhood. It is also be an enhancement to this
beautiful gorgeous historical home as the design is has been well researched and
is historically architectural correct. Because of the elevation of the home, this beautiful wall
and will not block the home frontal view from the corner of Heliotrope Dr. and 19th St
Another aspect: 19th Street from Broadway to Flower has to be one of the most
traveled Street in Floral Park... Owning property that faces 19th we are well aware of the
tremendous negative impact the traffic on 19th Street has to the quality of life and privacy to
its 19th Street facing residents.. And and my "Dear Lord", 1904 N. Heliotrope is at the very
corner--- which is all the more reason for this height limitation to be exempt.
Thank You
Joni Marie (Barr) and Bela Somogyi
714 835 8989 Office
714 376 4825 Cell
jonibela@aol.com
29
From:Mitre-Ramirez, Norma
To:Bernal, Sarah; Barela, Rosa
Cc:Huizar, Maria; Orozco, Norma
Subject:FW: 1904 N Heliotrope Dr
Date:Wednesday, May 10, 2017 6:42:09 AM
Good Morning Ladies,
I’m passing along comment for your response and/or review.
Kind Regards,
Norma Mitre
Sr. Deputy Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana | Clerk of the Council Office
20 Civic Center Plaza | Santa Ana, CA 92701
714-647-5237| nmitre@santa-ana.org
From: nchiarini [mailto:nchiarini@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 11:36 PM
To: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.org>
Subject: 1904 N Heliotrope Dr
To Whom it May Concern,
I am writing to express my full APPROVAL of the minor exception to the fence height at
1904 N Heliotrope Drive. I have lived in Santa Ana my entire life and am a Floral Park
resident for over 12 years. Every home in this area is unique in its charm, history, and beauty.
Some of the homes are quaint, some are larger estates.The plans are not only elegant, they are
proportional to the size of the home. The proposed fence will add artistic significance and will
accent the beauty of this historic home.
Best Regards,
Nicole Chiarini
1920 N Heliotrope Dr.
30
From:Marcus
To:eComment
Subject:Zoning Administrator
Date:Tuesday, May 09, 2017 11:21:35 PM
I am writing to support the proposed minor exception for the property at 1904 N. Heliotrope. The description given
under the project analysis is reason enough to grant the exception. The finished product will not only give the owner
more usable yard it will also give that corner the beauty that it deserves. The proposed design will compliment the
property and the neighborhood together.
Marcus Gallagher
31
From:Mitre-Ramirez, Norma
To:Bernal, Sarah; Barela, Rosa
Cc:Huizar, Maria; Orozco, Norma
Subject:FW: Zoning Administrator - 1904 N. Heliotrope
Date:Wednesday, May 10, 2017 6:46:22 AM
I’m passing along additional comments for your review and/or response.
Thank you
From: jadechiarini@gmail.com [mailto:jadechiarini@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 11:16 PM
To: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.org>
Subject: Zoning Administrator
I'm writing in support of the approval of the Minor Exception at 1904 N. Heliotrope.
The homeowner should be approved to build the proposed 5ft wall as a shorter wall would not
compliment the grandeur of the home.
32
From:Mitre-Ramirez, Norma
To:Bernal, Sarah; Barela, Rosa
Cc:Huizar, Maria; Orozco, Norma
Subject:FW: Zoning Administrator: Re: This morning"s Public Hearing on "Minor" Exception to exceed fence height
Date:Wednesday, May 10, 2017 6:59:37 AM
I’m passing along comment for your review and/or comment.
Kind Regards,
Norma Mitre
Sr. Deputy Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana | Clerk of the Council Office
20 Civic Center Plaza | Santa Ana, CA 92701
714-647-5237| nmitre@santa-ana.org
From: bobi keenan [mailto:fosca94@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 6:54 AM
To: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.org>
Subject: Zoning Administrator: Re: This morning's Public Hearing on "Minor" Exception to exceed
fence height
I am not able to attend the meeting this morning, but want to express my opinion.
I am very opposed to granting the request to raise the fence height around the property at 1904
N. Heliotrope Drive. If I remember correctly, the owner wants to put a 6 foot fence around this
distinctive and beautiful house on a large corner lot. No matter how "sensitive" the design of
such a structure is to the architecture of the house, it will make it look more like a compound
than a historic property.
I was under the impression after attending the HRC special meeting where this request was
presented to the commission, that they recommended denial. Now I see staff is recommending
approval.
This is puzzling.
There is a very good reason that the neighbors are against granting this variance. Heliotrope
Drive is one of the most beautiful streets in Southern California. This fence will have an
adverse effect on all the properties on that street....it will stick out like a sore thumb. It is not
fair to the other property owners.
This is just one property, but if you approve this request, it will serve as an open invitation for
others to seek similar variances which will be difficult to deny. It will set a very undesirable
precedent and adversely affect the character of our neighborhoods.
I urge you to deny this request.
33
Sincerely,
bobi keenan
919 Louise Street
Santa Ana, CA 92703
33
From:Mitre-Ramirez, Norma
To:Bernal, Sarah; Barela, Rosa
Cc:Huizar, Maria; Orozco, Norma
Subject:FW: Michael Ness variance
Date:Wednesday, May 10, 2017 7:12:58 AM
I’m passing along the comment for your review and/or comment.
Kind Regards,
Norma Mitre
Sr. Deputy Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana | Clerk of the Council Office
20 Civic Center Plaza | Santa Ana, CA 92701
714-647-6520 | nmitre@santa-ana.org
From: Andrew Peat [mailto:jpeat@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 7:03 AM
To: eComment <eComment@santa-ana.org>
Subject: Michael Ness variance
To Whom it May Concern,
My name is Andrew Peat and I have lived in Floral Park since January of 1998. I met Michael Ness soon after I
moved into the neighborhood. Michael has owned two previous homes in Floral Park, both of which he restored in
keeping with the vintage tradition of the neighborhood. The wall variance he is asking for on the property he is
residing at (1904 N. Heliotrope), in my opinion, is also in keeping with the vintage tradition of the neighborhood.
The residence is a grand Spanish colonial revival home and the plan drawings of the wall variance are proportioned
to the scale of the home. The 24" inch variance will look appropriate to the size of the home and property. Michael
has thoughtfully done his research and has plenty of experience at restoring and adding to vintage homes and the
difference between 3 feet and 5 feet is not going to deter from this process.
Regards,
Andrew Peat
34
From:jayne munoz
To:eComment
Subject:Property of Mike Ness
Date:Wednesday, May 10, 2017 7:35:08 AM
Dear Santa Ana City Council Members,
This letter is in support of neighbor Mike Ness’s request to build a fence (or wall) around his property on the corner
of 19th and Heliotrope Drive in Santa Ana.
My husband and I have lived in Santa Ana for the past 32 years; we own two homes here: one on Freeman Lane and
our current home on Victoria Drive. We love Santa Ana; we value our neighbors; and we are proud of our
neighborhood. Within the past year it has come to our attention that two of our neighbors have attempted to make
improvements on their properties, including building walls around the front yards. Our next door neighbor was even
considerate enough to actually show us the landscape architect’s plan. Unfortunately, the City did not approve the
plan, so the Langs were forced to compromise their original dream. Now, it seems that another neighbor, Mike
Ness, is facing a similar conflict with the City concerning his hope to build a wall.
I am confused about the City’s position and I would like to state for the record that there are several homes in Floral
Park that are surrounded by attractive walls, two are on our street. What makes Floral Park so special is that no two
homes are exactly alike. Our uniqueness is one of the reasons why many people from all over Orange County and
beyond flock to participate in our annual Home Tour.
Lastly, I would like to ask you to be as open to Mike Ness as you once were to Sandy DeAngelis, who build a
garage in front of her home, which was forbidden to other residents on Victoria Drive. Your consideration for Ms.
DeAngelis proved to be a good decision; she designed a beautiful home that truly enhanced our neighborhood. I am
confident that Mr. Ness with show the same good judgement, and I am also certain that the council will be as fair
and gracious to Mr. Ness as it was to Ms. DeAngelis. (just please don’t make it so unaffordable for him that he too
will be forced to abandon his dream).
Sincerely,
Jayne Munoz
2105 N Victoria Drive
35
From:Andrew Peat
To:eComment
Subject:Michael Ness Variance
Date:Wednesday, May 10, 2017 7:27:34 AM
To Whom It May Concern,
Regarding the variance at 1904 N. Heliotrope, this property is a corner lot and is more exposed than a non corner lot.
We want to preserve our beautiful neighborhood, but I saw the architiecural pictures of future wall and it looked
nice. Two feet is not that much more heighth to add, in my opinion.
Sincerely,
Cheryl Peat
36
This page left blank intentionally.
Findings of Fact
A. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size,
shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is
found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent
and purpose of the provisions of this chapter.
There are special circumstances applicable to the subject property where the strict
interpretation of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of
privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of
the zoning code. The subject site is a corner lot with the house and garage located in
the rear (northwest) of the lot on a street with large setbacks thereby significantly
reducing the size of private backyard area.
The purpose and intent of the code requirement is to prevent a “fortress-like”
appearance in residential areas; however, the size and scale of this historic Italian
Renaissance style of residence is large thereby making a typical three-foot tall front
yard fence appear miniscule in comparison. The five-foot tall fence would
complement the size and scale of this of structure.
B. That the granting of a minor exception is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
one or more substantial property rights.
The approval of this minor exception maintains the rights of the property owners to
utilize their property as other residential property owners to have a private and secure
usable yard area. Since the subject lot is a corner lot, the fence is required to be
constructed ten feet in from the side yard property line which would not optimize the
private and secure usable area. The fence is proposed to be built in four feet from the
side lot line so as to maintain the pedestrian scale.
C. That the granting of a minor exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to surrounding property.
The project will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare as the proposed
front yard fence/wall will be designed to complement the historic residence in terms of
material and style. Further, the view of the historic landmark residence will not be
obstructed due to it being constructed at a higher grade than the sidewalk. Side yard
fences are allowed to be up to eight feet in height; however, the applicant proposes
five feet in height to maintain the pedestrian scale. The four-foot landscape buffer in
front of the proposed front yard fence will soften the edges of the fence and maintain
the residential nature of the site. The portion of fence on the northern side of the
property will be tapered so as not to be injurious or detrimental to the neighboring site.
EXHIBIT 10
D. That the granting of a minor exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of
the City.
The requested minor exception will not adversely affect the General Plan,
as it is consistent with the goals and policies of the document. Goal 2.0 of
the Urban Design Element states that new development should be
proportionally and aesthetically related to its district setting. The proposed
fence is proportional to the residence and for a residential area. Goal 2.7
of the Urban Design Element states that projects must exhibit a functional,
comfortable scale in relation to the neighborhood. This proposal is in scale
with existing structures in the neighborhood, and specifically with the large
scale of the existing historic residence. Goal 3.5 of the Urban Design
Element Policy Plan encourages residential alterations that are consistent
with the architectural character of the neighborhood. The residence is
Italian Renaissance which utilizes large scale to convey its grand style.
The proposed five-foot tall fence is congruous to the scale of the
residence.
Resolution No. 2017-01
Page 1 of 5
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OF
THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING MINOR
EXCEPTION NO. 2017-01 TO ALLOW A FIVE FOOT TALL
FRONT YARD FENCE AT 1904 NORTH HELIOTROPE
DRIVE
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Zoning Administrator of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds,
determines and declares as follows:
A. Applicant is requesting approval of Minor Exception No. 2017-01 to allow a
five foot tall front yard fence at 1904 North Heliotrope Drive.
B. Minor Exception No. 2017-01 came before the Zoning Administrator of the
City of Santa Ana for a duly noticed public hearing on May 10, 2017, to
consider all testimony, written and oral.
C. Minor Exception No. 2017-01 has been filed with the City of Santa Ana
seeking allowance from the three foot tall front yard fence standards set by
Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-610(a)(1).
D. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-632(3)(i) authorizes the application
for a minor exception for zoning provisions pertaining to walls and fences.
E. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638 authorizes the Zoning
Administrator to grant a minor exception upon making certain findings.
Section 2. The Zoning Administrator of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds,
determines and declares as follows:
A. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property,
including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, that the strict
application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property
of privileges not otherwise at variance with the intent and purpose of the
provisions of this Chapter.
There are special circumstances applicable to the subject property
where the strict interpretation of the zoning ordinance is found to
deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at variance
with the intent and purpose of the provisions of the zoning code. The
subject site is a corner lot with the house and garage located in the
EXHIBIT 11
Resolution No. 2017-01
Page 2 of 5
rear (northwest) of the lot on a street with large setbacks thereby
significantly reducing the size of private backyard area.
The purpose and intent of the code requirement is to prevent a
“fortress-like” appearance in residential areas; however, the size and
scale of this historic Italian Renaissance style of residence is large
thereby making a typical three foot tall front yard fence appear
miniscule in comparison. The five foot tall fence would complement
the size and scale of this of structure.
B. That the granting of a minor exception is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights.
The approval of this minor exception maintains the rights of the
property owners to utilize their property as other residential property
owners to have a private and secure usable yard area. Since the
subject lot is a corner lot, the fence is required to be constructed ten
feet in from the side yard property line which would not optimize the
private and secure usable area. The fence is proposed to be built in
four feet from the side lot line so as to maintain the pedestrian scale.
C. That the granting of a minor exception will not be materially detrimental to
the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property.
The project will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare as
the proposed front yard fence will be designed to complement the
historic residence in terms of material and style. Further, the view of
the historic landmark residence will not be obstructed due to it being
constructed at a higher grade than the sidewalk. Side yard fences
are allowed to be up to eight feet in height; however, the applicant
proposes five feet in height to maintain the pedestrian scale. The
four-foot landscape buffer in front of the proposed front yard fence will
soften the edges of the fence and maintain the residential nature of
the site. The portion of fence on the northern side of the property will
be tapered so as not to be injurious or detrimental to the neighboring
site.
D. That the granting of a minor exception will not adversely affect the General
Plan of the City.
The requested minor exception will not adversely affect the General
Plan, as it is consistent with the goals and policies of the document.
Goal 2.0 of the Urban Design Element states that new development
should be proportionally and aesthetically related to its district
setting. The proposed fence is proportional to the residence and
for a residential area. Goal 2.7 of the Urban Design Element states
Resolution No. 2017-01
Page 3 of 5
that projects must exhibit a functional, comfortable scale in relation to
the neighborhood. This proposal is in scale with existing structures in
the neighborhood, and specifically with the large scale of the existing
historic residence. Goal 3.5 of the Urban Design Element Policy
Plan encourages residential alterations that are consistent with the
architectural character of the neighborhood. The residence is
Italian Renaissance which utilizes large scale to convey its grand
style. The proposed five-foot tall fence is congruous to the scale of
the residence.
Section 3: Environmental Findings:
A. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the
proposed project is exempt from further review pursuant to Section 15301,
which is a categorical exemption applying to projects which consist of
minor alterations to existing facilities including exterior modifications and re-
tenanting of an existing building. Categorical Exemption Environmental
Review No. 2017-20 will be filed for this project.
B. In support of the Categorical Exemption, the following findings have been
made as referenced in CEQA, Section 15300.2:
1.Cumulative Impact. The project, along with successive projects of
the same type in the same area, over time shall not result in a
cumulative impact.
The minor exception will allow the construction of a five foot tall
front yard fence. The use of a four foot landscape buffer and
wrought iron gate mitigate cumulative visual impacts. This property
has a special circumstance of being on a sloped lot with the house
being higher than the right-of-way. Therefore, the proposed minor
exception to allow a five foot tall front yard fence will not result in a
cumulative impact on the surrounding area.
2.Significant Effect. The project shall not be used for an activity
where there is reasonable possibility that the activity will have a
significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.
The minor exception will allow for the construction of a five foot tall
front yard fence around a historic property with a small rear yard
and a large front yard setback. The house is built at the top of a
sloped yard set higher than the right-of-way, and will not have any
unusual or significant effect on the environment.
3.Scenic Highways. The project shall not result in damage to scenic
resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock
Resolution No. 2017-01
Page 4 of 5
outcropping, or similar resources, within a highway officially
designated as a state scenic highway.
The project is located within a residential neighborhood, and no
scenic highways are located within this area.
4.Hazardous Waste Sites. The project shall not be located on a site
which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5
of the Government Code.
The Official Hazardous Waste and Substance Site “Cortese” list
was consulted and the project site is not included on any known
hazardous waste site. This list is updated by the State Department
of Toxic Substances and reflects all available information on
hazardous sites.
5.Historical Resources. The project may not cause substantial
adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
The subject property does contain a historic structure known as the
“Elliot House” and it is listed on the Santa Ana Register of Historical
Properties as a “Landmark” structure. The applicant proposes a five-
foot tall fence so that the line of site of the top of the fence matches
the two-foot tall balustrade surrounding the terrace surrounding the
front façade when viewed from the right-of-way (Exhibit 8) thereby
meeting the requirements and objectives of Chapter 13 (Historic
Structures) of the Citywide Design Guidelines and the policy of the
Historic Resources Commission to maintain a viewshed of the historic
residence. This decorative fence provides a formal appearance
complementing the appearance of the residence, and would serve to
accent the view of the historic property without blocking it because of
the slope of the yard. The material and design of the fence are
proposed to complement the existing style of architecture while
offering the property owner private yard space.
Section 4. The Zoning Administrator, after conducting the public hearing, hereby
approves Minor Exception No. 2017-01 to allow for a five foot tall front yard fence at
1904 North Heliotrope Drive. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the
public hearing, which includes, but is not limited to: the Request for Zoning
Administrator action dated May 10, 2017, and exhibits attached thereto; and the public
testimony, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference.
Resolution No. 2017-01
Page 5 of 5
ADOPTED this 10th day of May, 2017.
_______________________
Zoning Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney
By:________________________
Lisa Storck
Assistant City Attorney
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, SARAH BERNAL, Zoning Administrator Secretary, do hereby attest to and certify the
attached Resolution No. 2017-01 to be the original resolution adopted by the Zoning
Administrator of the City of Santa Ana on May 10, 2017.
Date: ________________ ____________________________________
Zoning Administrator Secretary
City of Santa Ana