Item 34 - Public Hearing - Appeal Application No. 2024-01 for Construction of a 23’-4” Tall Accessory Building (2221 N Heliotrope Drive)

Home Browse Search

EXHIBIT A Response to Appeal Comments for Appeal Application No. 2024-01 Appeal Application No. 2024-01 Pursuant to Section 41-645 of the SAMC, the appellant is requesting that: (1) the City Council overturn the Planning Commission's decision approving CUP No. 2022-06; (2) require all new and/or outstanding City of Santa Ana building permit deficiencies be resolved before further consideration of the proposed pavilion; and (3) that the HRC review all landmark/historical/mills act compliance deficiencies and identify actions required to bring the property back to original standard. Specifically, the appellant states that: 1. The structure will significantly exceed the existing six-foot high fence and it will be clearly visible from Santa Clara Avenue, despite existing planting and required plantings; 2. The approval of the CUP provides a dangerous precedent providing "tacit" permission to other residents (both within Floral Park and in other neighborhood within Santa Ana) to erect structures that may clearly fall outside the architectural compatibility of the historic neighborhood; 3. The existing accessory structures on the site and the proposed pavilion are not consistent with the Art Moderne style and detract from the historical designation of the home and the neighborhood as a whole; 4. The property owners have shown a proclivity to violate the statutory requirements of designation as an historical landmark as well as violating the SAMC; 5. The property owner's use of the site as a cultural center (e.g., seasonal cultural gatherings, festivals, and tours) that bring high volume of cars and school buses; and 6. Questions whether the Planning Commission visited the site prior to approving CUP No. 2022-06 to view the property and surrounding homes and whether the Planning Commission gave any consideration of the recent designation of Floral Park as a National Historic District. Moreover, the appellant provides further questions about whether the owners will be held accountable for obtaining retroactive building permits for an ADU, as well as maintenance/upkeep of the "historically important home," and how the City will monitor the site to ensure it is not being used as a cultural center. The appellant does not provide any evidence to substantiate that the proposed project would adversely impact the community, pursuant to Section 41-638 of the SAMC. Specifically, the appellant does not provide evidence that the project will be a detriment to the general wellbeing of the neighborhood or the community; detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; would adversely affect the present economic stability or future economic development of property in the Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 7 of 16