|
Planning Commission's decision was not an abuse of discretion by the Planning
<br />Commission and that the Planning Commission's decision was supported by substantial
<br />evidence in the record.
<br />Section 3. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
<br />and the CEQA Guidelines, the project was reviewed and determined to be categorically
<br />exempt from further review per Section 15303 (Class 3 — New Construction or Conversion
<br />of Small Structures). Class 3 exemption applies to the construction of accessory
<br />structures, including, but not limited to, garages, carports, patios, swimming pools, and
<br />fences. Based on this analysis, a Notice of Exemption, Environmental Review No. 2022-
<br />11 will be filed for this project.
<br />Section 4. The Applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold the City
<br />and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, authorized
<br />volunteers, and instrumentalities thereof, harmless from any and all claims, demands,
<br />lawsuits, writs of mandamus, and other and proceedings (whether legal, equitable,
<br />declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature), and alternative dispute resolution
<br />procedures (including, but not limited to arbitrations, mediations, and such other
<br />procedures), judgments, orders, and decisions (collectively "Actions"), brought against
<br />the City and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies,
<br />and instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set aside, void, or
<br />annul, any action of, or any permit or approval issued by the City and/or any of its officials,
<br />officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof
<br />(including actions approved by the voters of the City) for or concerning the project,
<br />whether such Actions are brought under the Ralph M. Brown Act, California
<br />Environmental Quality Act, the Planning and Zoning Law, the Subdivision Map Act, Code
<br />of Civil Procedure sections 1085 or 1094.5, or any other federal, state or local constitution,
<br />statute, law, ordinance, charter, rule, regulation, or any decision of a court of competent
<br />jurisdiction. It is expressly agreed that the City shall have the right to approve, which
<br />approval will not be unreasonably withheld, the legal counsel providing the City's defense,
<br />and that Applicant shall reimburse the City for any costs and expenses directly and
<br />necessarily incurred by the City in the course of the defense. City shall promptly notify
<br />the Applicant of any Action brought and City shall cooperate with Applicant in the defense
<br />of the Action.
<br />Section 5. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby denies Appeal
<br />Application No. 2024-01, thereby upholding the Planning Commission's approval of
<br />Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 2022-06, with modified conditions of approval to further
<br />clarify and make reference to Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC) sections limiting the
<br />use of the subject site to single-family residence. This decision is based upon the
<br />evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes, but is not limited to: the
<br />Request for City Council Action dated November 19, 2024, and exhibits attached thereto,
<br />including the Response to Appeal Comments for Appeal Application No. 2024-01 in
<br />Exhibit A of this resolution, and the public testimony, written and oral, all of which are
<br />incorporated herein by this reference.
<br />[Signatures on the following page]
<br />Resolution No. 2024-xx
<br />Page 4 of 16
<br />
|