HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-099 - Denying Appeal Application No. 2019-03LS 10.15.19
RESOLUTION NO. 2019-099
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA DENYING APPEAL APPLICATION NO. 2019-
03 AND UPHOLDING THE DETERMINATION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 2019-30 TO ALLOW A CAR WASH AT
301 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE, AMENDMENT TO
VARIANCE NO. 2018-10 TO ALLOW A REDUCED FRONT
YARD AT 301 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE, CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT NO. 2019-31 TO ALLOW THE 24 HOUR
OPERATION OF A CONVENIENCE STORE AT 325
NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE AND ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW NO. 2019-69
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines
and declares as follows:
A. On September 9, 2019, the Planning Commission held a public hearing as
required by law on Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 2019-30 to allow a car
wash at 301 North Tustin Avenue and amendment to Variance No. 2018-10
to a reduced front yard at 301 North Tustin Avenue and Conditional Use
Permit No. 2019-31 to allow a convenience store to operate 24 hours a day at
325 North Tustin Avenue. After listening to public testimony and
consideration of the facts, the Planning Commission approved CUP No.
2019-30, amendment to Variance No. 2018-10, CUP No. 2019-31 and
Environmental Review No. 2019-69 by a vote of 4:0 with one absence.
B. On September 19, 2019, Kara Grant on behalf of William and Karina Conklin
("the Conklins"), submitted an appeal to the City requesting that the City
Council reconsider the Planning Commission's decision and deny CUP No.
2019-30, amendment to Variance No. 2018-10, CUP No. 2019-31, and
Environmental Review No. 2019-69 based on four reasons:
I. The Commission failed to satisfy the five required criteria for granting
conditional use permits set forth in Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC)
Section 41-638 and thus should not have granted Conditional Use
Permit No. 2019-30.
Il. The Commission failed to perform review of the Car Wash Project's
environmental impacts under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) because it erroneously determined that the Project
Resolution No. 2019-099
Page 1 of 8
was categorically exempt from CEQA review as an infill
development project.
III. Amendment to Variance No. 2018-10 should have been denied
because it does not address "special circumstances" that deprive the
subject property of privileges enjoyed by similar properties, and instead
constitutes an impermissible grant of special privileges. (See SAMC
Section 41-638(a)(2); Gov't Code 65906)
IV. The notice distributed for the September 9, 2019 Planning
Commission public hearing, 10 days before the hearing and only to
properties within 500 feet of the project was not reasonably
calculated to afford affected persons, like the Conklins, the realistic
opportunity to protect their interests. The Conklins were not
included on the City's list of individuals/properties to review notice
of the hearing.
C. On October 15, 2019, the City Council conducted a duly noticed de novo
public hearing on Appeal Application No. 2019-03 and found that:
I. The required findings for Conditional Use Permit No. 2019-30 were made
in accordance with Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638 (Planning
Commission Resolution No. 2019-35) and are as follows:
1. That the proposed use will provide a service or facility which will
contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or
community.
The car wash will continue to provide a service to persons that
are working or residing in the area. The car wash will replace
the existing automated car wash at 325 North Tustin Avenue.
The new facility will be bigger than the existing operations and
provide vacuum stations for the customers' use. The site will
be redeveloped with a new building with a contemporary
design with smooth plaster finishes, metal canopies, ceramic
tile, and landscaping contributing to the aesthetics of the area.
2. That the proposed use will not, under the circumstances of the
particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, or general
welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity.
The proposed car wash will not be detrimental to the health,
safety or welfare of those residing or working in the vicinity.
The site plan was designed to meet the City's stacking
requirements and provides for queuing of approximately 15
vehicles. In addition, the stacking lane was placed at the rear
of the site to reduce the chance for overflow vehicular queuing
onto any public streets. There are no immediately adjacent
nearby residential land uses. The uses immediately adjacent
Resolution No. 2019-099
Page 2 of 8
to the site include a service station to the north, a medical
office building to the south (within the City of Tustin) and the
Costa Mesa Freeway to the east. The closest nearby
residential uses are over 500 feet from the project site,
including the Village Apartments (to the north and across
Fourth Street) at 521 North Tustin Avenue and The Orchard
(to the southwest and across Tustin Avenue) at 2151 East
First Street. The blowers/dryers will be set back 15 feet within
the car wash tunnel and the vacuums have been placed north
of the car wash tunnel to buffer noise from the office building
to the south. A traffic impact analysis was completed by
Linscott Law & Greenspan and reviewed by the Public Works
Agency and found that the project or cumulative project
conditions will not significantly impact any of the nearby street
intersections.
3. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the present
economic stability or future economic development of properties
surrounding the area.
The car wash will not adversely affect the economic stability
or future economic development of properties in the
surrounding area. The property is within the General
Commercial (C2) zoning district. Additionally, since 1973, a
car wash has been in operation at 325 North Tustin Avenue
which is immediately adjacent to the car wash site and
interrelated to the subject site as the sites would be
redeveloped concurrently. The automated car wash will
replace the existing car wash and the site will be
redeveloped with a new building with a contemporary design
and water efficient landscaping. The car wash will provide an
additional service to the community and will provide a
commercial business that will generate sales tax revenue for
the City.
4. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and
conditions specified in Chapter 41 for such use.
The proposed use complies with the regulations and
conditions in Chapter 41 including building heights and
parking. A condition of approval has been added to the
conditional use permit for a property maintenance agreement
to be recorded against the property which will ensure that the
property and all improvements are properly maintained.
5. That the proposed use will not adversely affect the General Plan
of the city or any specific plan applicable to the area of the
proposed use.
Resolution No, 2019-099
Page 3 of 8
The proposed car wash will not adversely affect the General
Plan. The project is located in a General Commercial (GC)
General Plan land use area which allows for commercial uses
such as car wash facilities. The project is consistent with
several goals and policies of the General Plan, including the
Land Use Element and Urban Design Element. Land Use
Element Goal 1 to promote a balance of land uses to address
basic community needs. Specifically, Land Use Element Goal
2 to promote land uses that enhance the City's economic and
fiscal viability. Furthermore, the project is consistent with
Policy 2.8, to promote rehabilitation of commercial properties,
and encourage increased levels of capital investment. The car
wash will redevelop the site with a new commercial business
that will provide a service to those working and living in the
City. Urban Design Goal 1 to improve the physical
appearance of the City through development of districts that
project a sense of place, positive community image and
quality environmental. Specifically, Policy 1.5 to enhance
architectural forms, textures, colors, and materials are
expected in the design of all projects. The vacant lot will be
redeveloped with a new building designed with
contemporary architecture and water efficient landscaping.
H. The Planning Commission determined that the project was categorically
exempt in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(Environmental Review No. 2019-69).
1. The project is exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15332, Class 32 (In -fill Development Projects). This exemption is
applicable to the project as the project is consistent with the
General Plan designation and all applicable general plan policies
as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations, the
project is within city limits and is less than five acres (1.46 acres)
and is surrounded by urban uses. The site was previously
developed with commercial uses and has no habitat for
endangered, rare or threatened species. The project would not
result in any significant effects related to traffic, noise, air quality
or water quality as indicated by the Traffic Study dated May 2019
prepared by Linscott, Law and Greenspan, the Noise Study
dated July 2019 prepared by LSA, and the Conceptual Water
Quality Management Plan prepared for the project. The project
can be served by all required utilities and public services.
III. The required findings for amendment to Variance No. 2018-10 were
made in accordance with Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-638
(Planning Commission Resolution No. 2019-36) and are as follows:
1. That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject
property, including size, shape, topography, location or
Resolution No. 2019-099
Page 4 of 8
surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is
found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise
at variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of this
Chapter.
There are special circumstances related to the property as
street dedications are required, site plan considerations for
the proposed use and the irregular shape of the lot. A 2-foot
dedication of the property is required along Tustin Avenue,
thereby reducing the size of the property and reducing the
landscaped setback to 10 feet for a portion of the street
frontage. The lot is constricted by the Costa Mesa Freeway
which binds the site to the east. Due to the freeway right-of-
way the depth of the lot narrows from the north to the south as
the freeway continues. In addition, complexities of car wash
stacking and circulation patterns make it difficult to create a
functional site plan that meets all the development standards
and does not create stacking on the adjacent streets.
2. That the granting of a variance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of one (1) or more substantial property rights.
Granting this variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of substantial property rights. The interrelated
property at 301 North Tustin Avenue is currently developed
with a car wash, service station and convenience store with
minimal landscaping. The proposed integrated development
will have more landscaping than what is currently on site and
will allow for continued operation of a car wash. Amending
the variance to allow for a portion of the lot to have a
reduced landscape setback would allow the property owner
to redevelop with a car wash and provide for adequate
stacking and vehicular turn movements.
3. That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental
to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding property.
Granting this variance will not be detrimental to the public or
surrounding properties. The proposed project will reduce the
number of driveways to the site. In addition, the building has
been designed to incorporate high quality materials,
enhanced landscaping and will continue to provide a service
to the nearby community and public. The surrounding uses
are commercial and professional uses and will not be
detrimentally impacted by the reduced yards.
4. That the granting of a variance will not adversely affect the
General Plan of the city.
Resolution No. 2019-099
Page 5 of 8
The variance for reduced yards will not adversely affect the
General Plan. The project is located in a General Commercial
(GC) General Plan land use which allows for commercial uses
such as car wash facilities and service stations. The project is
consistent with several goals and policies of the General Plan,
including the Land Use Element and Urban Design Element.
Land Use Element Goal 1 to promote a balance of land uses
to address basic community needs. Specifically, Land Use
Element Goal 2 promotes land uses that enhance the City's
economic and fiscal viability. Furthermore, the project is
consistent with Policy 2.8, to promote rehabilitation of
commercial properties, and encourage increased levels of
capital investment. The car wash will redevelop the site with a
new commercial business that will provide a service to those
working and living in the City. Urban Design Goal 1 aims to
improve the physical appearance of the City through the
development of districts that project a sense of place, positive
community image and quality environmental. Policy 1.5
promotes projects that enhance architectural forms, textures,
colors, and materials in the design of all projects. The vacant
lot will be redeveloped with a new building with
contemporary architecture and water efficient landscaping.
IV. Notice of the September 9, 2019 Planning Commission public hearing
was provided in accordance with the Government Code as well as Santa
Ana Municipal Code Section 41-636 and Section 2-153(c) by advertising
in the Orange County Reporter a newspaper of general circulation, by
mailing to owners of property and residents within 500 feet of the
project site and posting on the project site on August 30, 2019 10-days
prior to the public hearing.
Section 2. The City Council, after hearing, considering and weighing all
evidence in the record presented on behalf of all parties and being fully informed of the
application, the Planning Commission's decision, and the appeal, hereby finds and
determines that the Planning Commission's decision was not made in error, that the
Planning Commission's decision was not an abuse of discretion by the Planning
Commission and that the Planning Commission's decision was supported by substantial
evidence in the record.
Section 3. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
Environmental Review No. 2019-69, the City Council does hereby find and determine that
the project is exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332, Class 32 (In -fill
Development Projects). This exemption is applicable to the project as the project is
consistent with the General Plan and zoning designation and all applicable general plan
policies, the project is within city limits and is less than five acres (1.46 acres) and is
surrounded by urban uses. The site was previously developed with commercial uses and
has no habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. The project would not result in
any significant effects related to traffic, noise, air quality or water quality as indicated by the
Traffic Study dated May 17, 2019 prepared by Linscott, Law and Greenspan, the Noise
Resolution No. 2019-099
Page 6 of 8
Study dated July 2019 prepared by LSA, and the Conceptual Water Quality Management
Plan prepared for the project. The project site lies within the jurisdiction of the South
Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). As such construction of the project
shall comply with SCAQMD Rule 403, which identified measures to reduce fugitive dust
and is required to be implemented at all construction sites located within the South
Coast Air Basin. The project will not exceed construction or operational emission
thresholds established by the SCAQMD. The project can be served by all required
utilities and public services. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(c), the City
Council determined that the Class 3 (New Construction or conversion of Small Structures)
exemption is also applicable as the project consists of two commercial buildings less than
10,000 square feet (7,394 square feet) on a site zoned for such use (C2-General
Commercial), not involving the use of significant amounts of hazardous substances and
can be served by all required utilities and public services and the surrounding area is not
environmentally sensitive.
Section 4. The Applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold the City
and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies,
authorized volunteers, and instrumentalities thereof, harmless from any and all claims,
demands, lawsuits, writs of mandamus, and other and proceedings (whether legal,
equitable, declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature), and alternative dispute
resolution procedures (including, but not limited to arbitrations, mediations, and such
other procedures), judgments, orders, and decisions (collectively "Actions"), brought
against the City and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments,
agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set
aside, void, or annul, any action of, or any permit or approval issued by the City and/or
any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and
instrumentalities thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the City) for or
concerning the project, whether such Actions are brought under the Ralph M. Brown
Act, California Environmental Quality Act, the Planning and Zoning Law, the Subdivision
Map Act, Code of Civil Procedure sections 1085 or 1094.5, or any other federal, state or
local constitution, statute, law, ordinance, charter, rule, regulation, or any decision of a
court of competent jurisdiction. It is expressly agreed that the City shall have the right to
approve, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, the legal counsel providing
the City's defense, and that Applicant shall reimburse the City for any costs and
expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the City in the course of the defense.
City shall promptly notify the Applicant of any Action brought and City shall cooperate
with Applicant in the defense of the Action.
Section 5. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby denies Appeal
Application No. 2019-03, thereby upholding the Planning Commission's approval of
Conditional Use Permit No. 2019-30, amendment to Variance No. 2018-10, Conditional
Use Permit No. 2019-31 and Environmental Review No. 2019-69. This decision is
based upon the evidence submitted at the abovesaid hearing, which includes, but is not
limited to: the Request for City Council Action dated October 15, 2019, and exhibits
attached thereto; the Request for Planning Commission Action dated September 9,
2019, and exhibits attached thereto, and the public testimony, written and oral, all of
which are incorporated herein by this reference.
Resolution No. 2019-099
Page 7 of 8
ADOPTED THIS 1511 day of October, 2019.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney
By: —
Lisa Storck
Assistant City Attorney
AYES: Councilmembers
NOES: Councilmembers
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers
NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers
'Ward 4 Representative Vacant
Di
Penaloza Pulido Sarmiento, Solorio,
Villegas (5)
Iglesias (1)
None (0)
None (0)
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, DAISY GOMEZ, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached
Resolution No. 2019-099 to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the
City of Santa Ana on October 15, 2019
n� t
Date:
Daisy Gomez/
Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
Resolution No. 2019-099
Page 8 of 8