HomeMy WebLinkAboutRESO 2017-46_200 N CABRILLORESOLUTION NO. 2017-46
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DENYING SITE PLAN REVIEW
NO. 2016-03; DENYING VARIANCE NO. 2017-05 FOR
REDUCED PARKING; AND, DENYING VARIANCE NO.
2017-06 FOR INCREASED SIDE YARD SETBACK
ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SEVEN -
STORY MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT WITH UP TO 260
UNITS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 200 NORTH
CABRILLO PARK DRIVE
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds,
determines and declares as follows:
A. Robert Bisno with Cabrillo Community Partners, LLC (Applicant) is
requesting approval of Site Plan Review No. 2016-03, Variance No. 2017-
05 (reduced parking), and Variance No. 2017-06 (increased side yard
setback), to allow the construction of a seven -story mixed -use
development with up to 260 units at 200 North Cabrillo Park Drive.
B. On December 11, 2017, the Planning Commission of the City of Santa
Ana held a duly noticed public hearing and at that time considered all
testimony, written and oral.
C. The Metro East Mixed Use (MEMU) Overlay Zone (OZ) was adopted in
2007 as a result of interest in developing mixed -use residential and
commercial projects in its project area. The regulating plan, which
establishes land uses and development standards, allows a variety of
housing and commercial projects, including mixed -use residential
communities, live/work units, hotels, and offices.
D. Sections 41-595.4 and 41-595.5 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC)
require a review by the Planning Commission of all plans within a zoning
district classification combined with an OZ suffix where the applicant
wants to apply the overlay zone, to ensure the project is in conformity with
the overlay zone plan.
E. Pursuant to the MEMU Overlay Zone Section 8.1, the Planning Commission
is authorized to review and approve all site plan review applications to
ensure that buildings, structures, and grounds will be in keeping with the
Resolution No. 2017-46
Page 1 of 3
compatibility standards and design principles of the MEMU Overlay Zone
and will not be detrimental to the harmonious development of the city or
impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the MEMU Overlay
Zone.
F. The zoning designation for the subject property is Metro East Mixed Use
(MEMU) Overlay Zone (OZ-1) in the Active Urban sub -zone.
G. The Planning Commission determines that upon review of the project, it
cannot recommend granting the Site Plan Review approval as proposed
pursuant to Section 8.2 of the MEMU overlay district and determines that
the following finding has been established for Site Plan Review No. 2016-
03:
That the land use, site design, and operational considerations in the
proposed development plan have not been planned in a manner
that will result in a compatible and harmonious operation as
specified in Section 7 of the MEMU overlay district. Based upon
public hearing testimony and the two proposed variances, the site
design could have the potential to cause negative parking and
traffic impacts upon surrounding properties and development.
H. The Planning Commission determines that all of the findings required for
granting Variance No. 2017-05 pursuant to SAMC 41-638 could not be
made. Instead, the Planning Commission determines that the following
finding has been established for Variance No. 2017-05 (reduction in
parking):
1. That the granting of the variance will be detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to surrounding property. The site does not meet
minimum parking requirements. Based upon public hearing
testimony and the proposed variance for reduced parking, the
project may potentially negatively impact traffic flow and impact
neighboring properties resulting in a detriment to the public.
I. The Planning Commission determines that all of the findings required for
granting Variance No. 2017-06 pursuant to SAMC 41-638 could not be
made. Instead, the Planning Commission determines that the following
finding has been established for Variance No 2017-06 (increased side
yard setback):
1. That there are no special circumstances applicable to the subject
property, including its size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings. The strict application of the zoning ordinance is not
found to deprive the subject property of privileges not otherwise at
variance with the intent and purpose of the provisions of the Zoning
Code.
Resolution No. 2017-46
Page 2 of 3
Section 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana, after conducting the
public hearing, hereby denies Site Plan Review No. 2016-03, denies Variance No. 2017-
05 for reduced parking, and denies Variance No. 2017-06 for increased side yard setback.
This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which
includes, but is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission Action dated
December 11, 2017, and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony, written and
oral, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference.
DENIED this 11th day of December 2017 by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney
By: -----
Lisa Storck
Assistant City Attorney
ALDERETE, BACERRA,
MCLOUGHLIN, VERINO (5)
MENDOZA, NGUYEN (2)
CONTRERAS-LEO,
4KP rAr--
M McLoughlin
Chairman
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, SARAH BERNAL, Recording Secretary, do hereby attest to and certify the attached
Resolution No. 2017-46 to be the original resolution adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Santa Ana on December 11, 2017.
Date:
Recording Secretary
City of Santa Ana
Resolution No. 201 Y-46
Page 3 of 3