Laserfiche WebLink
Appeal Application No. 2024-01 for Construction of a 23'-4" Tall Accessory Building (2221 <br />N Heliotrope Drive) <br />November 19, 2024 <br />Page 5 <br />approximately 20 feet in height, while the garden house is a maximum 15 feet in height <br />to the tallest ridge point. <br />As described by the applicants, the pavilion was previously built in Vietnam. The <br />structure is built in a traditional Vietnamese design and was fabricated by Vietnamese <br />artisans. The pavilion structure was disassembled, shipped to Santa Ana, and would be <br />reconstructed on the subject property. As proposed, the pavilion would share a similar <br />design, materials, and cultural characteristics as various other structures on the site, <br />including an existing garden house. Specifically, the structure would include <br />prefabricated wood post members, traditional Vietnamese hand -carved wood details, <br />and would include clay roofing tile. Lastly, the installation of the structure would be <br />designed and overseen by a licensed structural engineer and the structure would not <br />include mechanical or plumbing equipment. The structure would include two electrical <br />outlets and limited accent lighting, including two to four light fixtures within the structure <br />and three to six landscape/up-lights at the base. <br />Analysis of Appeal <br />Appeal Application No. 2024-01 <br />Pursuant to Section 41-645 of the SAMC, the appellant is requesting that: (1) the City <br />Council overturn the Planning Commission's decision approving CUP No. 2022-06; (2) <br />require all new and/or outstanding City of Santa Ana building permit deficiencies be <br />resolved before further consideration of the proposed pavilion; and (3) that the HRC <br />review all landmark/historical/Mills Act compliance deficiencies and identify actions <br />required to bring the property back to original standard. Specifically, the appellant states <br />that: <br />1. The structure will significantly exceed the existing six-foot high fence and it will <br />be clearly visible from Santa Clara Avenue, despite existing planting and required <br />plantings; <br />2. The approval of the CUP provides a dangerous precedent providing "tacit" <br />permission to other residents (both within Floral Park and in other neighborhoods <br />within Santa Ana) to erect structures that may clearly fall outside the architectural <br />compatibility of the historic neighborhood; <br />3. The existing accessory structures on the site and the proposed pavilion are not <br />consistent with the Art Moderne style and detract from the historical designation <br />of the home and the neighborhood as a whole; <br />4. The property owners have shown a proclivity to violate the statutory requirements <br />of designation as an historical landmark as well as violating the SAMC; <br />5. The property owner's use of the site as a cultural center (e.g., seasonal cultural <br />gatherings, festivals, and tours) that brings a high volume of cars and school <br />buses; and <br />6. Questions whether the Planning Commission visited the site prior to approving <br />CUP No. 2022-06 to view the property and surrounding homes and whether the <br />Planning Commission gave any consideration of the recent designation of Floral <br />