HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-084 - Denying Appeal No. 2023-07 & Upholding Planning Commission Determination for 2938 South Daimler StreetRESOLUTION NO.2023-084
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA DENYING APPEAL NO. 2023-07 AND
UPHOLDING THE DETERMINATION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION TO DENY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
2023-18 TO ALLOW AN ASSEMBLY USE TO OPERATE AT
2938 SOUTH DAIMLER STREET
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. Property Owner Anchor Stone Christian Church (Applicant) is requesting
approval of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 2023-18 to allow an assembly
use to operate at an existing office space located at 2938 South Daimler
Street.
B. Pursuant to Section 41-313.5(n) of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC),
assembly uses such as churches located in the P zoning district require
approval of a CUP.
C. Pursuant to SAMC Section 41-638(a)(1), the Planning Commission shall grant
approval of a CUP only if all five of the specified findings of fact contained
therein are satisfied.
D. On July 18, 2022, the Applicant acquired the site located at 2938 South
Daimler Street, prior to contacting City of Santa Ana staff to ensure the
proposed use would be allowed subject to General Plan land use consistency,
zoning laws, and land use requirements.
E. The Applicant did not engage with the City regarding the permissibility of their
proposed assembly use on the Property. It is a fundamental responsibility of
any party seeking to establish a new use, to proactively seek clarity on the
regulatory and zoning requirements from City staff. This proactive approach
involves consulting with relevant municipal departments, understanding the
jurisdiction's General Plan and zoning ordinances, and ensuring alignment
with the City's land use policies.
F. Alternative General Plan land use designations such as General Commercial
(GC) and its accompanying zoning districts allow for retail and service
establishments; recreational, cultural, and entertainment uses; business and
professional offices; and vocational schools, among which recreational,
cultural, and entertainment uses provide for community assembly such as
religious facilities.
Resolution No. 2023-084
Page 1 of 8
G. The City's land use restrictions are applied uniformly to all general assembly
uses.
H. As outlined herein and the Request for City Council Action (RFCA), it is
evident that the Applicant's proposed assembly use does not adhere to the
principles and objectives laid out in the City's General Plan.
On January 23, 2023, the Applicant submitted a development project
application to the City for the change of use from office to an assembly use.
Following a thorough analyses during the Development Project Review (DP)
process, the Development Review Committee (DRC) identified that the
proposed use was not consistent, conflicts with, and negatively impacts the
enjoyment and uses of the property within the Industrial/Flex-Medium (Flex-
3) General Plan land use designation.
J. Based on the project's General Plan inconsistency, staff is unable to
recommend approval of the Applicant's request due to the inability to satisfy
all five findings of fact required by SAMC Section 41-638(a)(1), among which
includes the subject property's General Plan land use designation of
IndustriallFlex-Medium (Flex-3) that does not allow community assembly uses
such as the subject church.
K. Requiring consistency of a CUP with a local jurisdiction's general plan is well
established by California case law. The California Supreme Court and Court
of Appeal have consistently found that the discretionary approval of a CUP
must be consistent with a general plan (Neighborhood Action Group v. County
of Calaveras, 156 CaL App. 3d 1176, 1185 (1984)), and that the general plan
is atop the hierarchy of local government land use law, acting as a constitution
for all future developments. (De Vita v. Cty. of Napa, 9 Cal. 4th 763, 773
(1995); citing Neighborhood Action Group, 156 Cal.App.3d at 1183.)
L. On February 21, 2023, staff and the Applicant met to discuss the project,
during which staff informed the Applicant of the identified inconsistencies
between the proposed use and the General Plan. As a result, the Applicant
was given the option to withdraw the DP application or move forward with the
CUP application without the supporting findings necessary in the approval of
a CUP and denial recommendation.
M. On May 2, 2023, the Applicant indicated, as documented in the RFCA, intent
to proceed with the CUP application knowing the proposed use did not have
the requisite supporting finding necessary for the CUP approval.
N. On July 24, 2023, the Applicant submitted the CUP application proposing to
convert an existing office space into a church.
O. On September 11, 2023, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing for Conditional Use Permit No. 2023-18. The Commission voted 6:1
Resolution No. 2023-084
Page 2 of 8
(Ayes: Commissioners Benninger, Escamilla, Leo, Oliva, Pham, and Woo;
Noes: Ramos) to adopt a resolution denying CUP No. 2023-18.
P. On September 14, 2023, appellant Steven Lee with Anchor Stone Christian
Church, filed Appeal No. 2023-07. Pursuant to SAMC Section 41-645, the City
Council is authorized to review appeals of Planning Commission decisions ad
may, after holding a public hearing, affirm, revers, change, modify the original
decision and may make any additional determination it shall consider
appropriate within the limitation imposed by Chapter 41 of the SAMC. To
support the City's recommendation to deny the appeal application and uphold
the Planning Commission's denial of CUP No. 2023-18, the City prepared a
response to the comments contained within the appeal application, attached
as Exhibit 4 to the Request for Council Action (RFCA) staff report, dated
November 21, 2023.
Q. On November 21, 2023, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on
Appeal No. 2023-07 for CUP No. 2023-18.
R. The City Council determines that the following findings, which must be
established in order to grant CUP No. 2023-18 pursuant to SAMC Section 41-
638(a)(1), have not been established. Specifically, CUP Finding 5 of Section
41-638(a)(1)(v) 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. Therefore, the City Council affirms the Planning Commission's denial of
CUP-2023-18 finding:
That the proposed use will adversely affect the general plan of the
city or any specific plan applicable to the area of the proposed
use.
The subject site has a General Plan land use designation of
Industrial/Flex-Medium (Flex-3), which is intended to
provide context -appropriate development in areas with
existing industrial uses. Industrial/Flex allows for clean
industrial uses that do not produce significant air pollutants,
noise, or other nuisances typically associated with industrial
uses, including office -industrial flex spaces, small-scale
clean manufacturing, research and development and
multilevel corporate offices, commercial retail, artist
galleries, craft maker spaces, and live -work units. Based on
the land use designation, development policies and
allowable uses within the Flex-3 designation, the subject
site is not suitable for the operation of community assembly,
nor does it list community assembly -type uses as
permissible under the land use designation. Conversely,
land use designations such as General Commercial (GC)
and its accompanying zoning districts allow for "retail and
service establishments; recreational, cultural, and
Resolution No. 2023-084
Page 3 of 8
entertainment uses; business and professional offices; and
vocational schools," among which "recreational, cultural,
and entertainment uses" provide for community assembly
such as religious facilities.
In addition, the subject site is part of one of the five Focus
Areas adopted by the General Plan also known as 55
Freeway and Dyer Road Focus Area. The various land use
designations within each Focus Area work together to
ensure consistency and diversity of land uses achieving
development policies to balance developing goals and land
use consistencies within the City. The five Focus Areas
were identified by the General Plan Advisory Committee
and refined through a seven-year community engagement
process as the areas of the City most suitable for new
development. The five Focus Areas are geographically
distributed throughout the City, and each allows the City to
meet its diverse needs. The purpose and intent, specific
objectives, and custom land uses for each focus area were
defined to facilitate new types of urban development and
further embody the City's core values.
Furthermore, the 55 Freeway and Dyer Road Focus Area is
intended to transition from an area that exclusively focused
on professional office to an area that supports a range of
commercial, and industrial/flex development. Moreover, the
overall scale and experience of the focus area along the
freeway and city boundary are intended to reflect an urban
intensity and design, with inspiring building forms and public
spaces. The industrial/flex land use designation is meant to
promote large-scale office -industrial flex spaces, multilevel
corporate offices, and research and development in creative
buildings and spaces.
Additionally, the subject project will not be consistent with
the goals and policies of the General Plan, including those
from the Land Use Element (LU) and the Economic
Prosperity Element (EP). Specifically, policies 1.1 and 4.1
of the Land Use Element (LU) and policies 1.9 and 2.3 of
the Economic Prosperity Element (EP).
Policy 1.1 of the LU encourages compatibility between land
uses to enhance livability and promote healthy lifestyles.
The introduction of a community assembly use and a Bible
school to the existing office complex will generate noise,
traffic and queuing, solid waste generation and circulation.
Moreover, it will introduce assembly uses with youth
services in close proximity to existing industrial uses in the
Resolution No. 2023-084
Page 4 of 8
area, counter to this General Plan policy. Additionally, the
Flex-3 land use designation allows future developments
with clean industrial and office uses in accordance with
Table LU-A-2, which specifies interim industrial flex uses.
Community assembly such as churches is not permitted.
Irreconcilable land use conflicts between a sensitive
receptor such as the proposed church and its school
operations will be generated if the CUP application were
approved with future industrial uses taking place in the land
use designation of the Focus Area. The purpose of the land
use plan of the Land Use Element is to prevent these
irreconcilable land use conflicts from occurring in the future
between sensitive receptors and surrounding industrial
uses. In addition, the Flex-3 land use designation allows
primarily office, industrial, clean manufacturing, research
and development, and similarly -natured
industrial/production-oriented land uses and does not allow
community assembly such as churches. This land use
principle of preventing inconsistent land uses from locating
in the same areas is currently codified in the City's Light and
Heavy industrial (M1 and M2) zoning districts. The Flex-3
General Plan use designation points to the M1 land uses in
Table LU-A-2 as examples of clean industrial uses
commensurate with the General Plan land use designation,
reaffirming this principle of not locating sensitive receptors
such as community assembly uses within or in proximity to
industrial areas of the City.
Policy 4.1 of the LU supports complete neighborhoods by
encouraging a mix of complimentary uses, community
services, and people places within a walkable area. The site
is surrounded by professional and industrial uses, and the
nearest residential community is approximately 0.3 miles
away. As such, the introduction of a religious institution in
this site would not be compatible with the surrounded uses
and will not encourage development of place -making within
a walkable area. Moreover, as detailed above, the purpose
of the land use plan of the Land Use Element is to prevent
irreconcilable land use conflicts from occurring in the future
between sensitive receptors and surrounding industrial
uses. However, irreconcilable land use conflicts between a
sensitive receptor such as the proposed church and its
school operations will be generated if the CUP application
were approved with future industrial uses taking place in the
land use designation of the Focus Area.
Policy 1.9 of the EP seeks to avoid potential land use
conflicts by prohibiting the location of sensitive receptors
Resolution No. 2023-084
Page 5of8
and noxious land uses in close proximity. Establishing uses
such as community assembly, coupled with youth services
and Bible school, would introduce sensitive receptors into
an area that is mostly comprised of industrial and office uses
and that is intended to transition to industrial uses over time,
through implementation of the General Plan. The purpose
of the land use plan in the Land Use Element is to prevent
these land use conflicts from taking place through goals,
policies, and zoning practices designed to create "a physical
environment that encourages healthy lifestyles, a planning
process that ensures that health impacts are considered,
and a community that actively pursues policies and
practices that improve the health of our residents," as listed
as an adopted Core Value of the Land Use Element.
Approval of the CUP application would be contrary to the
Land Use Element and this adopted Core Value.
Policy 2.5 of the EP encourages the development of
mutually beneficial and complementary business clusters
within the community. As promulgated by the adopted
General Plan Land Use Element, introducing community
assembly does not support the development of mutually
beneficial and complementary business clusters at the
subject site. To the contrary, it will create irreconcilable
conflicts by introducing a sensitive receptor within an area
that is presently and continuing to transition to industrial
uses. Approval of the requested application would lead to
present and future land use conflicts stemming from noise,
traffic, vibrations, queuing, solid waste generation, and
circulation. Moreover, community assembly uses are not
listed as permissible within the subject site's General Plan
land use designation, as the use is not considered among
those that foster development of mutually beneficial and
complementary business clusters within the community.
The land use would be incompatible with surrounding uses
and approval of the CUP would be contrary to the General
Plan.
Section 2. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and the CEQA Guidelines, this project is exempt from further review under Section
15061(b)(4) of the CEQA Guidelines, as the City Council has denied Appeal No. 2023-
07, and affirm the determination of the Planning Commission to deny Conditional Use
Permit No. 2023-18.
Section 3. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana, after conducting the
public hearing, hereby denies Appeal No. 2023-07 and affirms the Planning
Commission denial of CUP No. 2023-18 for the proposed assembly use at 2938 South
Daimler Street. The denial shall prohibit the assembly use at the subject site but leaves
Resolution No. 2023-084
Page 6 of 8
in effect the permitted office uses, allowed by right under SAMC Section 41-313,
subject to all applicable standards and regulations set forth in Chapter 41 of the
Santa Ana Municipal Code. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the
above -referenced hearing, including but not limited to: The Request for Planning
Commission Action dated September 11, 2023, and exhibits attached thereto; the
Request for City Council Action (RFCA) dated November 21, 2023 and exhibits
attached thereto; and the public testimony, written and oral, all of which are incorporated
herein by this reference.
ADOPTED this 21st day of November 2023.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney
By: L'1� k •(9J �n
Jose Montoya
Assistant City Attorney
AYES: Councilmembers Amezcua, Bacerra _Hernandez, Lopez,
Penaloza, Phan, Vazquez (7)
NOES: Councilmembers None (0)
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers None (0)
NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers None (0)
Resolution No. 2023-084
Page 7 of 8
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, JENNIFER L. HALL, City Clerk, do hereby attest to and certify the attached
Resolution No. 2023-084 to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the
City of Santa Ana on November 21 2023.
Date:�-
nnifer L H 11
C i I
City of Santa Ana
Resolution No. 2023-084
Page 8 of 8