My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
75A - PH KARA GRANT APPEAL
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2019
>
10/15/2019
>
75A - PH KARA GRANT APPEAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/10/2019 5:26:14 PM
Creation date
10/10/2019 4:53:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Planning & Building
Item #
75A
Date
10/15/2019
Destruction Year
2024
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
450
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
1. The Car Wash Project Will Not Provide a Service or Facility that Will <br />Contribute to the General Well Being of the Neighborhood/Community. <br />The Council should deny the CUP if the proposed use would be detrimental to the general <br />welfare or have undesirable effects in the community. (Harris v. City of Costa Mesa (1994) 25 <br />Cal.App.4th 963, 973; Tustin Heights Assn v. Board of Supervisors (1959) 170 Cal.App.2d 619, 626.) <br />In Harris v. City of Costa Mesa, the Court of Appeal described the "public welfare" standard as follows: <br />"`The concept of the public welfare is broad and inclusive. [citations omitted]. The values <br />it represents are spiritual as well as physical, aesthetic as well as monetary. It is within <br />the power of the legislature to determine that the community should be beautiful as well <br />as healthy, spacious as well as clean, well-balanced as well as carefully patrolled.' <br />[Citations.]" (Id. at p. 741.) <br />Similarly, in Guinnane v. San Francisco City Planning Com. (1989) 209 Cal.App.3d 732, the <br />Court of Appeal rejected the petitioner's contention that "... the commission's decision [was] <br />unsupported by the findings [ ] based on the argument that the findings relate[d] exclusively to the <br />private concerns of the neighbors (traffic, parking and visual impact) rather than the requisite public <br />concerns of health, safety and welfare." The Court found this argument specious, and explained that <br />"[w]hile parking, traffic and visual impact were problems expressed by some of the neighbors, clearly <br />they represent concerns that fall well within the domain of the public interest and welfare. [Citations.]" <br />(Id. at p. 743.) <br />Santa Ana currently has at least 22 car washes, including the small gas station model car wash <br />currently in operation on 325 N. Tustin Avenue. Attached as Exhibit A is a list of car washes within the <br />City of Santa Ana and their respective distances to the Project. There are 3 more car washes located <br />within 1 mile of the Project in the City of Tustin. In fact, the Tustin Bay Wash is located on the very <br />same block as the proposed Russell Fischer Car Wash Project, and the Mobile Express Wash located on <br />Irvine Blvd., is only about 1,000 feet from the Car Wash Project. Moreover, there are 13 mobile car <br />wash facilities in Santa Ana in addition to the 22 car washes, which bring the total existing car wash <br />facilities in Santa Ana to 35. (See Exhibit A.) To further illustrate how oversaturated the car wash use <br />is in Santa Ana, there are only 13 Starbucks in in the entire City, and at that it feels like they are on <br />every corner. <br />Clearly, the car wash service is already amply provided to the community. There is no need to <br />trade the small gas station car wash at 325 N. Tustin for a massive standalone car wash facility at 301 N. <br />Tustin Avenue, as proposed by the Russell Fischer Car Wash Project. Doing so will not contribute any <br />new or needed service or facility to the community. In contrast, the project currently approved for 301 <br />and 325 N. Tustin Avenue —the retail center with drive thm restaurant —would provide new services <br />and facilities to the neighborhood and community. Moreover, that location is a gateway to the City of <br />Santa Ana from the freeway. It would be infinitely more appealing, welcoming and desirable to have a <br />75A-15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.