Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />8 <br />5. The CUP Must Be Denied. <br />Pursuant to SAMC 41.377.5, the CUP must be denied because the Commission is unable to <br />make the five findings set forth above, each of which are required in order to grant the CUP. <br />II. THE COMMISSION SHOULD CONTINUE THIS MEETING FOR 120 DAYS <br />BECAUSE THE CITY’S NOTICE WAS INSUFFICIENT TO AFFORD AFFECTED <br />PERSONS A FAIR OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND. <br />The Commission did not provide notice of this Project until August 30, 2019 – only 10 days <br />before the subject Planning Commission hearing on the Project (the “Notice”). The Notice, however, <br />was mailed only to property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the project site, plus posting at the <br />site and a newspaper publication. The Conklins, as well as most if not all other car wash owners in the <br />City, were not within the notification radius and yet they will be directly and detrimentally affected by <br />the Commission’s proposed approval of the CUP allowing development of the new express car wash at <br />the Project site. In fact, Karina only indirectly obtained the Notice because she made every effort to <br />monitor the subject Project. It is believed that most if not all other car wash owners within the City have <br />no knowledge of this hearing before the Commission. <br />In this case, due process protections required the Commission to provide notice of this hearing, <br />and that notice “must be reasonably calculated to afford affected persons the realistic opportunity to <br />protect their interests.” (Horn v. County of Ventura, (1979) 24 Cal.3d, 605, 617.) Ten days was an <br />insufficient amount of time for the Conklins or other affected persons to adequately prepare by way of <br />document review, research, experts and research into the proposed Project, which completely changed <br />from the retail and restaurant development approved by the City in November 2018, to a supersized <br />express car wash, that will directly and detrimentally impact Speedie Wash. The Conklins were unable <br />to obtain documents from the City, hire experts, conduct research, and even meet with other affected <br />business owners before this meeting. <br />Moreover, the very end of June, Karina heard a rumor in the car wash community that Russell <br />Fisher LP was proposing to build a new, supersized express car wash on his Property. At that time, <br />Karina contacted the City to inquire if that was the case because the Project documents available on the <br />City website reflected the 2018 Retail Project. The City informed Karina that only the 2018 Retail <br />Project was before the City. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is email correspondence reflecting <br />communications between Karina and the City regarding plans to develop the Project with a car wash. <br />Contrary to the City’s representation at that time, it appears that the City had received a “Revised <br />Focused Traffic Impact Analysis Report” from the Applicant, dated May 17, 2019. The first paragraph <br />of that report states: <br />“This Focused Traffic Impact Analysis report addresses the potential traffic impacts and <br />circulation needs associated with Tustin Avenue Retail Project (hereinafter referred to as <br />Project) in the City of Santa Ana and has been prepared in response to the City of Santa