Agenda Packet_2026-02-03 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

k ' f f Anthony Gutierrez Trustee of the Sally C. Gutierrez Trust 5401 W. Tampion Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92704 November 5, 2025 Planning and Building Agency Planning Division City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza P.O.Box 1988 (M-20) Santa Ana, CA 92702 Re: Appeal of Planning Commission Decision - CUP No. 1982-18-MOD-1 Dear City Clerk: I respectfully submit this formal appeal of the Santa Ana Planning Commission's decision approving Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 1982-18-MOD-1, concerning the proposed expansion of the institutional use located at 5311 W. McFadden Avenue. I am submitting this appeal as the Trustee and Authorized Representative for all Trust Beneficiaries, and Authorized Representative of the adjacent R-1 Trust residence at 5401 W. Tampion Avenue, the property most directly and uniquely affected by the approved modification. Enclosed is the full Appeal Packet for filing and inclusion in the official administrative record. I respectfully request that the City Clerk transmit this appeal to the appropriate reviewing authority in accordance with established procedures for Council consideration. The basis for this appeal arises from material deficiencies in the process and the resulting approval, which did not meet required standards of fairness, transparency, residential protection, or environmental review. While the full Appeal Packet provides detailed findings and documentation, the key grounds for this appeal may be summarized as follows: 1. Due Process Deficiencies: Notice irregularities, limited review time, and imbalanced hearing structure prevented meaningful public participation and fair consideration prior to approval. 2. Misapplication of CEQA Class 14 Exemption: The exemption was applied as a final determination rather than a threshold of inquiry, bypassing required environmental review despite clear indicators warranting further analysis. 3. Failure to Evaluate Cumulative Impacts: The project was reviewed in isolation rather than in the context of the multi-institutional corridor along W. McFadden Avenue, resulting in an incomplete assessment of compounded impacts on the adjacent R-1 residence. 4. Lack of Alternatives .Analysis: The City approved the applicant's preferred design without evaluating feasible, less intrusive, or lower-impact alternatives that could have achieved educational objectives while reducing residential harm. 5. Public Interest and Equity Concerns: The approval placed disproportionate impacts on a single R-1 residence occupied by senior and ADA-protected individuals, without adequate safeguards or equitable consideration of residential rights. City Council 18 - 12 2/3/2026