Item 246/2025
Final
City of Garden Grove
INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM
To:
Lisa L. Kim From: Niki Wetzel
Dept:
City Manager Dept: Community Development
Date: 8/12/2025
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution denying an appeal filed by Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (SAFER) and upholding the Planning Commission’s Decision to approve Site Plan No. SP-158-2025. (Action Item)
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a public hearing to consider an appeal filed by Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (“SAFER”) requesting that the City Council consider modifying the Garden Grove Planning Commission’s decision to approve Site Plan No. SP-158-2025.
BACKGROUND
JYJ Logistics, LLC (“The Applicant”) filed a land use application for City approval of Site Plan No. SP-158-2025, for property located at the northwest corner of Lincoln Way and Western Avenue, at 7441 Lincoln Way. Site Plan No. SP-158-2025 would authorize the construction of a new 50,300 square foot shell industrial building, and associated site improvements on the
2.15 acre project site.
The Applicant contends that the proposed project is categorically exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15332 of the State CEQA Guidelines (In-Fill Development Projects). In support of this contention, the Applicant provided an Environmental Information Form as part of its application (Attachment 7) and a Class 32 Exemption Justification Memorandum, along with supporting technical studies (Attachment 6).
City Staff concurred that the Class 32 CEQA exemption applies and recommended that the Planning Commission approve the pro posed project, subject to specified Conditions of Approval.
The Garden Grove Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the proposed project on June 5, 2025. No members of the public submitted letters or spoke in opposition to the proposed project at the public hearing. After closing the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted 7 -0 to adopt Resolution No. 6115 -25 determining that the proposed Project was categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to the Class 32 exemption, Item 246/2025
making c ertain findings, and approving the requested land use entitlements, subject to specified Conditions of Approval. Resolution No. 6115-25 is included as Attachment 2.
On June 23, 2025, within the designated 21-day appeal period, the City Clerk’s Office received an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision from Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (“SAFER”). According to its appeal, SAFER objects to the Planning Commission’s determination that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA review based on the Class 32 Categorical Exemption, asserts that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or an Environmental Impact Report should have been prepared to examine its environmental impacts to the surrounding area . A copy of the Appeal form fi led by SAFER is included as Attachment 5. No additional supporting information or justification for the appeal or its request was provided by SAFER at the time of filing of the appeal.
DISCUSSION
Project Summary:
The subject site is a 2.15-acre-lot located at the northwest corner of Lincoln Way and Western Avenue. The property has a General Plan designation of I (Industrial) and is zoned Planned Unit Development No. PUD-103-76 (Rev. 2018). The subject property is adjacent to the same zoned properties that are improved with office/industrial buildings to the west, and across Lincoln Way to the south. To the north is a residential property in the City of Stanton. Across Western Avenue to the east of the site is an industrial use property also in the City of Stanton.
The site is currently improved with a two-story, 43,946 square-foot office/industrial building constructed in 1984. Over time, the existing building has become increasingly underutilized and underperforming in the marketplace, as the Applicant has faced persistent challenges in securing tenants to achieve full occupancy for this building. The applicant proposes to replace the existing building with newer improvements allowing the property to r each its full economic potential. The proposal includes the demolition of the existing building, and the proposed construction of a new 50,300 -square-foot shell industrial building, along with associated on-site improvements such as parking lot and landscaping.
SITE PLAN:
Specific elements of the proposed Site Plan and development are discussed below – and in more detail in the attached Planning Commission Staff Report dated June 5, 2025 (Attachment 3).
The proposed tilt-up building complies with the General Plan and PUD-103-76 (Rev. 2018), including Floor Area Ratio (FAR), setbacks, height, and parking standards.
The existing driveway on Lincoln Way would be removed, and the driveway on Western Avenue would remain and be widened to 40 feet.
A total of 52 parking spaces—standard, accessible, and compact—are planned along the internal drive aisle and behind the building.
Item 246/2025
Thirty-four (34) spaces would be within a gated area accessible from both ends, with Knox boxes for emergency access; the remaining 18 spaces would be accessible from Western Avenue.
The L-shaped building would front Lincoln Way and Western Avenue, consisting of a 46,800-square-foot ground floor and a 3,500-square-foot mezzanine. The ground floor includes a 45,300 square feet open area with 39-foot ceilings for warehouse/light manufacturing, seven (7) roll-up doors, and 1,500 square feet office area including a break room, and two (2) restrooms. The mezzanine includes open and private offices, a conference room, and two restrooms. Landscaping would be provided throughout all setback areas and between parking and the perimeter wall. Brisbane Box trees will line the northern property line to screen the project from adjacent residences, in compliance with PUD requirements.
Applicable Law Governing Appeals of Planning Commission Decisions:
Pursuant to Garden Grove Municipal Code (GGMC) Section 9.32.030, all decisions of the Planning Commission are appealable to the City Council. Appeals are governed by GGMC Sections 9.32.110 through 9.32.150.
GGMC Section 9.32.110 (Appeals – Purpose) provides that the purpose of an appeal of a hearing body decision is to allow an applicant or an interested party of a land use action who feels aggrieved by the decision to seek review of the case by another imported hearing body.
SAFER did not articulate how or why it is an “interested party” vis-à-vis this particular project when it filed its appeal.
Pursuant to GGMC Section 9.32.120 (Time for Appeal), a decision of a hearing body on a land use action may be appealed by the applicant, or an individual, within 21 days of the date on which the decision is rendered. SAFER is a nonprofit corporation, not an individual.
Therefore, SAFER lacks standing under the Garden Grove Municipal Code to appeal the Planning Commission’s approval of the proposed Project.
However, CEQA independently authorizes any person or entity to appeal a determination by a nonelected decision-making body (such as the Planning Commission) that a project is not subject to CEQA to the agency’s elected decision-making body (i.e., the City Council). (Pub.
Resources Code, § 21151(c).)
Therefore, the City Council’s review and consideration of the project on appeal is limited to whether the Planning Commission’s determination that the Proje ct is exempt from review under CEQA pursuant to the Class 32 Exemption was correct.
Applicability of the Class 32 CEQA Exemption:
CEQA’s Class 32 exemption applies to in-fill development projects (CEQA Guidelines §15332).
A project can qualify for a Class 32 exemption if the proposed project: (1) is consistent with applicable General Plan designation and all general plan policies, as well as with applicable Item 246/2025
zoning designation and regulations; (2) the proposed development occurs within City limits on a project site of no more than five (5) acres substantially surrounded by urban uses; (3) the project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species; (4) the approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; (5) the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services; and (6) no exceptions to the exemption apply. (CEQA Guidelines §§ 15300.2(b)-(f), 15332).
The Planning Commission deter mined that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to the Class 32 exemption based on the following:
The project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and policies and applicable zoning designation and regulations.
As to the General Plan, the Property is designated as Industrial (I), which is intended to create, maintain, and enhance industrial areas characterized by uses that include industrial research, assembly, and testing of electronics, instruments, office and r elated machinery, wholesaling, warehousing, administrative offices, and regional or home offices of industry. In this designation, the maximum FAR is 1.00. As to zoning, the property is zoned Planned Unit Development No. PUD-103-76 (Rev. 2018), which also allows various industrial type of uses including warehousing and manufacturing. The project is designed to meet the development standards as set forth by the PUD. As a result, the project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and policies and the applicable zoning designation and regulations. (See Attachment 6, Justification Memorandum, p. 20.)
The subject site is located within City limits on a project site of no more than five acres and is substantially surrounding by urban uses.
The Project site is rectangular in shape and is 2.15 acres located within an existing industrial area, commonly known as the Irvine Industrial Park . The Project site is completely surrounded by urban uses including office/industrial buildings to the west, and across Lincoln Way to the south, a multiple family residential in the City of Stanton to the north, and an industrial use also in the City of Stanton. (See Attachment 6, Justification Memorandum, p.
21.)
The subject site was surveyed, and does not have any known value as habitat for endangered, threatened, or rare species.
The Project site is within a highly developed, densely populated urban area. The Project site contains existing industrial/office building that would be demolished to accommodate the Project. The subject site provides no value for habitat for endangered, threatened, or rare species. (See Attachment 6, Justification Memorandum, pp. 21-22.)
Traffic, noise, air quality, and water quality studies have been prepared by licensed firms to study the impact of the proposed development, and no significant impacts have been identified. The traffic, noise, air quality, and water quality studies are attached for reference (Attachment 6).
Item 246/2025
The Project’s potential traffic, noise, air quality, and water quality impacts were projected and evaluated in technical studies. The studies concluded that the Project would not result in any significant traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality impacts. ( See Attachment 6, Justification Memorandum pp. 22-23; Attachment 6, Air Quality, VMT, Noise Study, and Water Quality Study.)
The Public Works Department reviewed the proposed development, and found that it can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
The Project’s potential impacts to utilities, fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, and library facilities were projected and evaluated. It was determined that the Project could adequately be served by, and would not result in any significant impacts to, all required utilities and public services. (See Attachment 6, Justification Memorandum, pp. 36-38.)
No Exceptions to the Class 32 Exemption Apply.
A Class 32 categorical exemption is precluded where a project may result in damage to scenic resources within an official state scenic highway, is located on any lists of hazardous waste and substance facilities and sites and public drinking wells with organic contaminants pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource, there is a reasonable possibility of a significant impact on the environment due to unusual circumstances, or significant cumulative impacts from projects of the same type will result. It was determined that none of these exceptions apply to the proposed Project. (See Attachment 6, Justification Memorandum, pp. 39-44.)
CONCLUSION
Staff has reviewed the appeal request and recommends that the City Council uphold the Planning Commission’s decision to approve Site Plan No. SP-158-2025.
The basis for Staff’s recommendation and the Planning Commission’s approval of Site Plan No. SP -158-2025 are set forth in detail in the following documents related to the environmental analysis conducted for the proposed project:
Attachment 6: Class 32 Categorical Exemption Justification Memorandum and Technical Studies
Attachment 7: Environmental Information Form
Attachment 8: Notice of Exemption
FINANCIAL IMPACT
None.
Item 246/2025
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council:
Conduct a Public Hearing;
Adopt the attached Resolution denying the appeal filed by Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility, and upholding the Planning Commission’s decision approving Site Plan No. SP-158-2028 and determining the Project to be exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act.
ATTACHMENT(S)
Attachment 1: Draft City Council Resolution upholding the Planning Commission's decision to approve Site Plan No. SP-158-2025
Attachment 2: Planning Commission Resolution No. 6115-25 with Exhibit "A" - Conditions of Approval Attachment 3: Planning Commission Staff Report dated June 5, 2025 with Vicinity Map, Plans, and Class 32 Categorical Exemption Technical Studies
Attachment 4: Planning Commission Minute Excerpt date June 5, 2025 Attachment 5: Appellant's Appeal Filling and Request in Writing dated June 23, 2025 Attachment 6: Class 32 Categorical Exemption Justification Memorandum and Technical Studies Attachment 7: Environmental Information Form
Attachment 8: Notice of Exemption