Item No. 2 Public Comment_Luthin

Home Browse Search

Santa Ana Planning Commission Re: Amendment Application No. 2022-01 and Conditional Use Permit No. 2022-14 October 10, 2022 Page 3 Focus Area Interim Development Standards. Interim Development Standards have been prepared (Appendix A). The purpose of the Interim Development Standards is to provide a mechanism to review development applications and ensure development projects are consistent with the vision of the general plan and focus areas. The Interim Development Standards provide framework for connecting the general plan land use designations for each focus area with the City's existing zoning ordinance, specific plan(s), and/or specific development(s) plan provisions in regards to the use and mixed-use development standards (i.e. density, building type, parking, open space, etc.). Flexibility is allowed for the developer to select one of respective Interim Development Standard options for designing the development, which may be the least restrictive of the multiple allowable options referenced in Appendix A (Table LU-A-1) for the respective general plan land use designation. The Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-668 regarding Development Project Plan Approval and applications required pursuant to SB 330, as amended from time to time, apply to development projects applying the Interim Development Standards. Once the Development Code Update (Implementation Action Item 1.1) is adopted and/or new zoning is established, the Interim Development Standards shall become null and void. Changing the zoning of this parcel will not be consistent with the General Plan. With respect to the Conditional Use Permit Application, conditional use permits should not be used to effectuate a zoning change. In addition, they are only considered with respect to a specific use and only if the City Municipal Code authorizes such specific use within the zoning district of the property. Here, we have no idea what the property will be used for because the applicant has not identified any specific use. Thus, any Conditional Use Permit application must necessarily be incomplete. In addition, because the Applicant failed to identify a specific use, neither City staff, the Planning Commission, nor the public has any ability to determine if the (unidentified) “use” is an approved use within the zoning district of the Subject Property. Thus the Planning Commission cannot approve a conditional use permit where, as here, the proposed use is not identified. GPOPA renews its objections to the CEQA “determination,” as there was no environmental assessment performed at all, and none can be performed until or unless the scope of the project is identified. City staff’s claim that the environmental effects of an unidentified, zone-change and CUP-required project have been identified and considered in the EIR for the City’s General Plan amendment is nonsensical and wrong.