Correspondence - PH #34 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

had found there had been other types of code/permit violations in 2022. I also saw that there was significant cooperation by the City and the owner’s staff addressing these other types of possible building code violations. I found information that the responsibility to limit activities to private use at the owner’s residence was specifically addressed by the Planning Department and owner's staff. particularly with the owners or owners’ staff. The record also shows that there have been other property related code and building proceedings and decisions such as placing properties in trusts. (E.g. PCA STL 806301; OC 30-2012-00607998-CU-BC-CJC; OC 30-2019-01076395-CU-NP- CIC.) Given the past public use, as well as the possibility of future misunderstanding, a signed and witnessed notice or agreement may help to ensure compliance. It may be helpful to secure an independent examiner to secure an accurate and impartial assessment of this matter. *Consider the correspondence about the project secured in my City Public Records Request (CPRR#24- 1822 September 17, 2024), the information on the nonprofit located at 2221 Heliotrope from the California SOS website(https://bizfileonline.sos.ca.gov/search/business; www.bizfile.net), and the Heritage Foundation website (http://vietheritage.org) before approving the resolution. *Contrary to the Planning Agency's finding and recommendation that future use is and must remain private, some other publicly available information also suggests that the pavilion will not be used only for the quiet enjoyment of the owner's family for personal use in their backyard. The property was placed in trust in 2014. (p.14, Mills Act Application, (CPRR#24-1822)’ The owners founded the nonprofit Viet Heritage Foundation located at their home address in 2017. (https://bizfileonline.sos.ca.gov/search/business,) Per the owner, the City acknowledged the owner and the Viet Heritage Foundation for valued civic service (City staff owner memo 3-14-23 (CPRR#24-1822) enclosed). The Heritage Foundation has publicized on its website that “(w)e host cultural exhibitions, community cultural events, and youth-oriented educational activities, and includes the Viet Heritage Garden, with a scene of one of the traditional buildings in the owner’s backyard. Donations and volunteers are requested (http://vietheritage.org) The nonprofit organization and website may not be active at present. *This publicly available information does not seem completely consistent with the resolution approving Conditional Use Permit (CUP No. 2022-06), which refers to Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC) sections limiting the use of the subject site to single-family residence. As drafted, the condition of approval restricts the use of the pavilion as a structure for private use and enjoyment by the private property owners and requires that it not be designed or be intended for public access or viewing or use by members of the public. Moreover, the condition of approval states that the use of the structure and the subject property shall be prohibited from use for commercial purposes, including but not limited to, tours, museum use, festivals, etc. The site will be required to remain and operate as a single-family residential site, or the conditional use permit may be subject to revocation as outlined in Section 41-651 of the SAMC. * Unless new information is provided, the CUP should be denied or remanded now, because the resolution appears to rely on information that may be incomplete, out of date, or just plain wrong. Given the information now available that the Moon pavilion may be among several structures in the Heritage Garden at the Heritage Foundation that have been opened for public access and viewing, and for use for members of the general public, and that tours, exhibits, and festivals have been hosted there, the Department and the Owner should seek and provide additional information in support of the finding that this project is for private use only. 4. Revocation process outlined in Section 41-651 of the SAMC is an inadequate remedy for neighbors affected by public use 4