The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2026-040 - Denying Appeal for Residential Development on 2101 East Fourth Street RESOLUTION NO. 2026-040 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DENYING APPEAL APPLICATION NO. 2026- 01, THEREBY UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2026-01 AND ONE INCENTIVE/CONCESSION AND TWO WAIVERS OR REDUCTIONS OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS PURSUANT TO STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW, TO BE MEMORIALIZED IN DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT NO. 2026-01, BASED ON FINDINGS, INCLUDING A DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT WAS EXEMPT UNDER CEQA SECTION 15168, FOR A SEVEN STORY MIXED-USE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 274 RESIDENTIAL UNITS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2101 EAST FOURTH STREET (APN: 400-041-03) 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. Randy Barth with Think Together, a California nonprofit corporation ("Applicant" and "Owner"), represented by Christine Saunders (application- listed contact person), applied for, submitted, and sought approval of Site Plan Review No. 2026-01 (SPR-2026-01) and Density Bonus Application No. 2026-01 (DBA-2026-01) to facilitate the redevelopment of the property located at 2101 East Fourth Street with a seven-story mixed-use development consisting of 274 residential dwelling units, including 14 affordable units reserved for extremely low-income households, approximately 20,714 square feet of ground-floor commercial space, associated parking, open space, and related site improvements ("Project"). As part of the application, the Applicant also requested approval of one incentivelconcession and two waivers or reductions of development standards pursuant to California Government Code Section 65915, to be memorialized in Density Bonus Agreement No. 2026-01. B. The Project site is located within the Professional (P) zoning district, has a General Plan land use designation of District Center -- Medium High (DC- 3), and is within the Village Center District (VCD) of the Metro East Mixed- Use Overlay Zone ("MEMU"). C. On May 28, 2026, following a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission, after considering all testimony, written and oral, approved Site Resolution No. 2026-040 Page 1 of 5 Plan Review SPR No. 2026-01 and approved the requested incentivelconcession and two waivers or reductions of development standards pursuant to California Government Code Section 65915, based on its determination that the Project was exempt from CEQA under Section 15168. D. On June 3, 2026, Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility ("Appellant") timely filed Appeal Application No. 2026-01 appealing the Planning Commission's approval of Site Plan Review No. 2026-01 and its approval of one incentive/concession and two waivers or reductions of development standards under State Density Bonus Law. E. The Appellant asserts that additional environmental review is required and that the Project cannot rely upon the previously certified Metro East Mixed- Use Overlay Zone (MEMU) environmental documents pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") Guidelines and be exempt from further review under Section 15168 (Program EIR). F. CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 authorizes reliance on a certified Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for later activities that are within the scope of the program, provided no conditions requiring subsequent or supplemental environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, are present. G. Pursuant to Section 41-645 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code ("SAMC"), when considering an appeal, the City Council may, after public hearing, affirm, reverse, change, modify the original decision and may make any additional determination it shall consider appropriate within the limitations imposed by Chapter 41. H. On August 4, 2026, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on Appeal Application No. 2026-01 and considered the entire administrative record, including the Appeal application, the Planning Commission Staff Report and decision, the City Council Staff Report, and all written and oral testimony. I. After independently reviewing the administrative record, the City Council finds that the Appeal does not identify any factual or legal error in the Planning Commission's decision or present substantial new evidence requiring reversal or modification of the Planning Commission's approval. The City Council further finds that the Planning Commission's approval is supported by substantial evidence and complies with the State and local law including, including, but not limited to, the Santa Ana Municipal Code, State Density Bonus Law, and the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 2. The denial of Appeal Application No. 2026-01 results in upholding the Planning Commission's May 28, 2026, approval of Site Plan Review No. 2026-01 and its approval of one incentive/concession and two waivers or reductions of development Resolution No. 2026-040 Page 2 of 5 standards pursuant to State Density Bonus Law, including the determination that, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Project is exempt from further environmental review under Section 15168 (Program EIR). This exemption applies when a previously certified Program Environmental Impact Report (Program EIR) has adequately analyzed the environmental effects of an activity, and no new significant impacts would result from the proposed Project. If the proposed Project remains within the scope of the Program EIR and does not require a subsequent Environmental impact Report(EIR), no additional environmental documentation is required. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines, the Project is exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 (Program EIR). The Project is within the scope of the certified 2007 Metro East Mixed-Use Overlay Zone (MEMU) Program Environmental Impact Report (Program EIR) and the certified 2018 MEMU Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (Subsequent EIR), which previously evaluated the environmental effects associated with development within the MEMU Overlay Zone. To evaluate the appropriate level of environmental review, the Applicant prepared a CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 Consistency Memorandum with support from Ganddini Group, Inc., the Applicant's environmental consultant. The Consistency Memorandum evaluated whether the Project would result in new significant environmental impacts, substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts, or otherwise require additional environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168. The Consistency Memorandum was reviewed by City staff, who independently evaluated the analysis and determined that the Project would not result in new significant environmental effects or substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts. City staff further determined that there have been no substantial changes to the Project, the surrounding circumstances, or the information available that would require preparation of a subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. Furthermore, all applicable mitigation measures adopted as part of the certified MEMU Program EIR and 2018 Subsequent EIR remain applicable to the Project and will continue to be implemented through the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(3). Accordingly, denial of the appeal would uphold the Planning Commission's determination that no additional environmental review is required under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168. Therefore, a Notice of Exemption, Environmental Review No. 2025-01, will be filed for the Project. Section 3. 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, referendum, and other 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 Resolution No. 2026-040 Page 3 of 5 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 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 4. After conducting a duly noticed public hearing and considering the entire administrative record, the City Council hereby denies Appeal Application No. 2026- 01 and upholds the Planning Commission's approval of Site Plan Review No. 2026-01 and one incentive/concession and two waivers or reductions of development standards pursuant to California Government Code Section 65915, subject to the conditions of approval contained in Exhibit A to Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2 of the May 28, 2026, Planning Commission Staff Report. This action is based upon the evidence contained in the administrative record, including, but not limited to, the August 4, 2026, City Council Staff Report and exhibits attached thereto, the May 28, 2026, Planning Commission Staff Report and accompanying exhibits, the appeal application, and all written and oral testimony received by the City Council, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 5. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this Resolution. ADOPTED this 4th day of August, 2026. 4ale 'e mezc a aA APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia RR Carvalh ity Attorney By: Melissa M. Crosthwaite Senior Assistant City Attorney Resolution No. 2026-040 Page 4 of 5 AYES: Councilmembers Amezcua, Bacerra Henandez, Penaloza Vazquez (5) NOES: Councilmembers None (0) ABSTAIN: Councilmembers Phan 1 ABSENT: Councilmembers Lopez_(1) CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, JENNIFER L. HALL, City Clerk, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2026-040 to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on Auqust 4, 2026. 1= Date: Ls. , Jennifer . Hall Cit ity of Sy na Resolution No, 2026-040 Page 5 of 5 PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK