HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-19RESOLUTION NO. 2006-019
KO - 6/30/06
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING
NEIGHBORHOOD PROJECT REVIEW NO. 2005-20
TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
RESIDENTIAL ADDITION AT 909 SOUTH ROSS
STREET LOCATED IN THE SPECIFIC
DEVELOPMENT 40 ZONE (SD-40) (HENINGER
PARK)
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. The property owner is requesting approval of Neighborhood Project
Review No. 2006-20 to allow the construction of a residential
addition at 909 South Ross Street, which is located within the
Specific Development 40 Zone (SD-40) (Heninger Park).
1. The applicant is proposing to construct a 494 square foot
addition at the rear of the existing single-family residence.
The project will involve the addition of one bedroom and a
hallway connecting it to the rest of the house.
2. The addition has been designed to be consistent with the
existing Colonial Revival architecture style of the home. The
exterior elements of the addition will match finishes of the
existing residence, including the wood siding, single-hung
wood windows, and roof pitch.
B. The Heninger Park Review Committee has reviewed the proposed
construction and recommends approval of the project.
C. Santa Ana Municipal Code Section 41-593.5(c) requires the
Planning Commission to review all plans within a Specific
Development Plan area to ensure that the project is in conformity
with the approved Specific Development.
D. On July 10, 2006, Planning Commission the Planning Commission
conduced the necessary review pursuant to Santa Ana Municipal
• Code Section 41-593.5(c).
Resolution No. 2006-019
Page 1 of 3
E. After considering all of the evidence submitted, the Planning
• Commission finds and determines that Neighborhood Project
Review No. 2005-20 is consistent with the Heninger Park
Architectural Design Guidelines and complies with the Heninger
Park zoning provisions.
F. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the
proposed project is exempt from further review per section
15301(e)(1). The class 1 exemption allows addition not to exceed
2,500 square feet in area. Categorical Exemption Environmental
Review No. 06-98 will be filed for this project.
Section 2. The Planning Commission hereby approves Neighborhood
Project Review No. 2005-20. This decision is based upon, but is not limited to:
the Request for Planning Commission Action dated July 10, 2006 and exhibits
attached thereto, and the public testimony, all of which are incorporated herein
by this reference.
ADOPTED this 10th day of July, 2006.
AYES: Commissioners: Betancourt, Cribb, De La Torre, Gartner, Leo, Lutz
• (6)
NOES: Commissioners: None (0)
ABSENT: Commissioners: Rodriguez (1)
ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: None (0)
~'~
Christo er Leo
Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney
By: ~
Kylee O. O o
Assistant ty Attorney
•
Resolution No. 2006-019
Page 2 of 3
•
•
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, MARTHA RAMIREZ, Planning Commission Secretary, do hereby attest to and
certify the attached Resolution No. 2006-019 to be the original resolution adopted
by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on July 10,,?~006.
Date: ~ lJ~
Planning Commissi
City of Santa Ana
Resolution No. 2006-019
Page 3 of 3
}
PROOF OF SERVICE
(C.C.P. SECTION 1013(a), 2015.5)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE
I am employed in the aforesaid county; I am over the age of eighteen and
not a party to the within action; my business address is 20 Civic Center Plaza,
Ross Annex 2°d ,Santa Ana, California 92702.
On August 15, 2006 I served the
action by p~acmg a true copy
follows:
ing document described as:
~iect Review No. 2005-20) in this
in seaTe enve ones a ressed as
Agustin Alvarez
909 South Ross Street
Santa Ana, CA 92701
[ ] I caused to be delivered by courier, such envelope by hand to the office of the
addressee(s).
[X] BY MAIL I am readily familiar with my employer's practice of collection and
processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited
with U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at
Santa Ana, California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on
motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date
or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in
affidavit.
[ ]The document was transmitted by facsimile transmission and was reported as
complete and without error.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California
that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on August 15, 2006 at Santa Ana, California.
THA
•