Laserfiche WebLink
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XXX <br />A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE <br />CITY OF SANTA ANA DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT <br />NO. 2023-18 AS CONDITIONED TO ALLOW ANCHOR STONE <br />CHRISTIAN CHURCH TO OPERATE AT 2938 SOUTH <br />DAIMLER STREET <br />BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA <br />ANA AS FOLLOWS: <br />Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, <br />determines, and declares as follows: <br />A. Property Owner Anchor Stone Christian Church ("Applicant") is requesting <br />approval of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 2023-18 to allow a church to <br />operate at an existing office space located at 2938 South Daimler Street. <br />B. Pursuant to Section 41-313.5(n) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC), <br />churches located in the P zoning district require approval of a CUP. <br />C. Pursuant to SAMC Section 41-638(a)(1), the Planning Commission shall grant <br />approval of a CUP only if all five of the specified findings of fact contained <br />therein are satisfied. <br />D. On January 23, 2023, the Applicant submitted a development project <br />application to the City for the change of use from office to a church. Following <br />a thorough analyses during the Development Project Review (DP) process, <br />the Development Review Committee (DRC) identified that the proposed use <br />was not consistent and furthered conflicts negatively impacting enjoyment and <br />uses of the property within the Industrial/Flex-Medium (Flex-3) General Plan <br />land use designation. <br />E. Based on the project's General Plan inconsistency, staff is unable to <br />recommend approval of the Applicant's request due to the inability to satisfy all <br />five findings of fact required by the SAMC, among which includes the subject <br />property's General Plan land use designation of Industrial/Flex-Medium (Flex- <br />3) that does not allow community assembly uses such as the subject church. <br />F. Requiring consistency of a CUP with a local jurisdiction's general plan is well <br />established by California case law. The California Supreme Court and Court of <br />Appeal have consistently found that the discretionary approval of a CUP must <br />be consistent with a general plan (Neighborhood Action Group v. County of <br />Calaveras, 156 Cal. App. 3d 1176, 1185 (1984)), and that the general plan is <br />atop the hierarchy of local government land use law, acting as a constitution <br />for all future developments. (De Vita v. Cty. of Napa, 9 Cal. 4th 763, 773 (1995); <br />citing Neighborhood Action Group, 156 Cal.App.3d at 1183.) <br />Resolution No. 2023-XXX <br />Page 1 of 7 <br />9/11 /2023 <br />Planning Commission 1 — 9 <br />