Planning and Building Agency
www.santa-ana.org/planning-and-building
Item # 34
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701
Staff Report
November 19, 2024
TOPIC: Appeal Application No. 2024-01 for Construction of a 23’-4” Tall Accessory Building (2221 N Heliotrope Drive)
AGENDA TITLE
Public Hearing - Appeal Application No. 2024-01, Appealing the Decision of the Planning Commission to Approve Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 2022-06 Allowing the Construction of an Accessory Structure within the Rear Yard of an Existing Single- Family Residence Located at 2221 North Heliotrope Drive (APNs: 002-081-45 And 002- 081-46)
Legal notice published in the OC Reporter on November 6, 2024 and mailed on November 7, 2024.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
1. Adopt a resolution denying Appeal Application No. 2024-01, upholding the Planning Commission’s approval of a resolution to approve Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 2022-06 to allow the construction of an accessory structure within the rear yard of an existing single-family residence located at 2221 North Heliotrope Drive (APNs: 002-081-45 and 002-081-46).
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XXX entitled A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DENYING APPEAL APPLICATION NO. 2024-01
AND UPHOLDING THE DETERMINATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2022-06 AS CONDITIONED
TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE
EXCEEDING FIFTEEN FEET IN HEIGHT WITHIN THE REAR YARD OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2221 NORTH HELIOTROPE DRIVE (APN: 002-081- 45 AND 002-081-46)
2. Determine that, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines, the project is exempt from further review pursuant to Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines (Class 3-New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) because the project involves the construction of a small accessory structure.
Appeal Application No. 2024-01 for Construction of a 23’-4” Tall Accessory Building (2221 N Heliotrope Drive)
November 19, 2024
4 6
4 8
GOVERNMENT CODE §84308 APPLIES: Yes
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Chan Quang and Quynh Dinh Kieu (property owners and applicants) requested approval of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 2022-06 to allow the construction of an accessory structure within the rear yard of an existing single-family residence located at 2221 North Heliotrope Drive (APNs 002-081-45 and 002-081-46). Pursuant to Section 41-232.5 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC), accessory buildings more than 15 feet in height, or more than one story require, approval of a CUP. The property owners proposed an accessory structure referred to as a moon pavilion (“pavilion”) with a total height of 23’-4”, triggering discretionary review and approval by the Planning Commission. Staff recommended approval of the applicant’s request because the applicant revised the proposal to address Planning Commission and neighborhood’s concerns, stemming from the original public hearing on March 28, 2022. Specifically, the applicant relocated the proposed pavilion away from the south end of the property, updated the site plan to accurately depict existing and proposed conditions, provided photo simulations (e.g., conceptual renderings), and submitted building permit plans to address unpermitted work on an ancillary structure on the site. Moreover, staff recommended approval because the new proposed location minimizes impacts to surrounding areas and provides minimal change to the character or identity of the subject property and the neighborhood.
Table 1: Project and Location Information
Planning Commission Action and Background
On March 28, 2022, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing for the proposed project. At the public hearing, the Planning Commission engaged in extensive dialogue and expressed various concerns including the following:
Item Information
Project Address and Council Ward 2221 North Heliotrope Drive – Ward 3 Nearest Intersection Santa Clara Avenue and Heliotrope Drive General Plan Designation Low Density Residential (LR-7) Zoning Designation Single-Family Residence (R1)
North Single-Family Residences
East Single-Family Residences
South Single-Family Residences
Surrounding Land Uses
West Single-Family Residences
Property Size 0.90 acres (39,547 square feet)
Existing Site Development The subject site is developed with a two-story historic single-family residence known as the Maharajah House.
The Maharajah House is individually listed on the Register of Historical Properties as “Landmark” and a contributor to the Floral Park National Historic District.
Use Permissions Allowed with a conditional use permit (CUP) Zoning Code Sections Affected Uses Section 41-232.5
Appeal Application No. 2024-01 for Construction of a 23’-4” Tall Accessory Building (2221 N Heliotrope Drive)
November 19, 2024
4 6
4 8
•History of unpermitted work on the site. More recently, an existing permitted pool house was significantly altered without the required City building permits as substantiated by site aerials;
•Potential concerns regarding any proposed lighting within the structure; •Concerns regarding City oversight during construction; •Primary structure’s landmark historic status and Mills Act agreement; •Proposed structure’s compatibility/historic setting considerations; and •Guidelines/standards for review of proposed project and historic setting considerations.
During the public comments section, various members of the public spoke in opposition to the project. The majority of the comments in opposition can be summarized as concerns regarding the massing, scale, and compatibility of the structure (i.e., too visible and too tall), as well as visual impacts to the community and impacts to the historic structure and site. After additional discussion, the Planning Commission first motioned to approve the project. The motion failed by a vote of 3-4. After the first motion failed, a second motion was made and approved unanimously to continue the public hearing to the April 25, 2022 Planning Commission meeting. This continuance was intended to provide staff time to evaluate options of reducing the visual impacts by considering other locations, scale, size massing, and screening, or a combination, to address community concerns.
On April 25, 2022, the Planning Commission held the continued public hearing. At the request of the property owners, the recommended action was to continue the public hearing item to a future date. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to continue the item indefinitely. The matter was thereafter heard at a regular meeting on August 26, 2024, and after receiving public testimony on the item, the Planning Commission voted unanimously (4-2-0-1; Escamilla and Benninger voting against the motion and Ramos absent) to adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 2022-06 allowing the construction of the proposed accessory structure within the rear yard of an existing single-family residence located at 2221 North Heliotrope Drive (APNs: 002-081-45 and 002-081-46).
With its adoption of a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit (CUP No. 2022-06), the Planning Commission also modified condition of approval number eight (8) to make reference to Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC) sections limiting the use of the subject site to single-family residence. As drafted, the condition of approval restricts the use of the pavilion as a structure for private use and enjoyment by the private property owners, and requires that it not be designed or be intended for public access or viewing, or use by members of the general public. Moreover, the condition of approval states that the use of the structure and the subject property shall be prohibited from use for commercial purposes, including but not limited to, tours, museum use, festivals, etc. The site will be Appeal Application No. 2024-01 for Construction of a 23’-4” Tall Accessory Building (2221 N Heliotrope Drive)
November 19, 2024
4 6
4 8
required to remain and operate as a single-family residential site, or the conditional use permit may be subject to revocation as outlined in Section 41-651 of the SAMC.
On September 5, 2024, Peter Christoffersen, on behalf of himself and a group of Floral Park residential neighbors, submitted an appeal application pursuant to Section 41-645 of the SAMC (Exhibit 1) appealing the Planning Commission’s approval of CUP No. 2022-06. The appeal requests the following:
1. The Planning Commission approval of CUP No. 2022-06 be rescinded;
2. All new and/or outstanding City of Santa Ana building permit deficiencies be resolved before further consideration of additional projects on the site, including the proposed pavilion; and
3. That the Historic Resources Commission (HRC) review all landmark/historical/Mills Act compliance deficiencies and identify actions required to bring the property back to the original standard.
DISCUSSION
Project Description
The applicant is proposing to construct a freestanding pavilion approximately 205 square feet in size and 23’-4” in height, within the rear yard area of an existing single- family residence. The subject property is made up of two legal lots including assessor parcel numbers (APNs) 002-081-45 and 002-081-46. The pavilion would only be located on one parcel (APN: 022-081-45). The pavilion is proposed to be located towards the northeast corner of the property, approximately 15 feet from the rear (east) property line and 12 feet from the side (north) property line, behind an existing six foot high stucco wall and behind existing mature landscaping (e.g., 25-foot tall mature tree and mature bamboo). The pavilion would also be located approximately 30 feet east from the existing residence and approximately 16 feet from an existing, freestanding two-story accessory structure.
As designed, the structure would be ancillary and subordinate to the main single-family residence. The height of the proposed structure in comparison to the main residence is illustrated on the architectural plan set provided by the architect (see Exhibit 5). The height of the existing residence is approximately 25 feet while the tallest point of the pavilion (pavilion roof peak) is proposed to be a maximum of 23’-4”. The pavilion is designed in hexagonal shape and would include three “segments,” with the main floor elevated from the ground floor approximately seven feet and six-inches. The main floor would be accessed by a wood staircase and would have a clearance of floor seven feet and six-inches. The last segment would be from the top plate to the roof peak level, which is approximately eight feet and four-inches in height (total height 23’-4”). There are two additional structures on the site, including a detached two-story accessory structure and a freestanding one-story garden house. The two-story structure is Appeal Application No. 2024-01 for Construction of a 23’-4” Tall Accessory Building (2221 N Heliotrope Drive)
November 19, 2024
4 6
4 8
approximately 20 feet in height, while the garden house is a maximum 15 feet in height to the tallest ridge point.
As described by the applicants, the pavilion was previously built in Vietnam. The structure is built in a traditional Vietnamese design and was fabricated by Vietnamese artisans. The pavilion structure was disassembled, shipped to Santa Ana, and would be reconstructed on the subject property. As proposed, the pavilion would share a similar design, materials, and cultural characteristics as various other structures on the site, including an existing garden house. Specifically, the structure would include prefabricated wood post members, traditional Vietnamese hand-carved wood details, and would include clay roofing tile. Lastly, the installation of the structure would be designed and overseen by a licensed structural engineer and the structure would not include mechanical or plumbing equipment. The structure would include two electrical outlets and limited accent lighting, including two to four light fixtures within the structure and three to six landscape/up-lights at the base.
Analysis of Appeal
Appeal Application No. 2024-01
Pursuant to Section 41-645 of the SAMC, the appellant is requesting that: (1) the City Council overturn the Planning Commission’s decision approving CUP No. 2022-06; (2) require all new and/or outstanding City of Santa Ana building permit deficiencies be resolved before further consideration of the proposed pavilion; and (3) that the HRC review all landmark/historical/Mills Act compliance deficiencies and identify actions required to bring the property back to original standard. Specifically, the appellant states that:
1. The structure will significantly exceed the existing six-foot high fence and it will be clearly visible from Santa Clara Avenue, despite existing planting and required plantings;
2. The approval of the CUP provides a dangerous precedent providing “tacit” permission to other residents (both within Floral Park and in other neighborhoods within Santa Ana) to erect structures that may clearly fall outside the architectural compatibility of the historic neighborhood;
3. The existing accessory structures on the site and the proposed pavilion are not consistent with the Art Moderne style and detract from the historical designation of the home and the neighborhood as a whole;
4. The property owners have shown a proclivity to violate the statutory requirements of designation as an historical landmark as well as violating the SAMC;
5. The property owner’s use of the site as a cultural center (e.g., seasonal cultural gatherings, festivals, and tours) that brings a high volume of cars and school buses; and
6. Questions whether the Planning Commission visited the site prior to approving CUP No. 2022-06 to view the property and surrounding homes and whether the Planning Commission gave any consideration of the recent designation of Floral Appeal Application No. 2024-01 for Construction of a 23’-4” Tall Accessory Building (2221 N Heliotrope Drive)
November 19, 2024
4 6
4 8
Park as a National Historic District. Moreover, the appellant provides further questions about whether the owners will be held accountable for obtaining retroactive building permits for an accessory dwelling unit (ADU), as well as maintenance/upkeep of the “historically important home,” and how the City will monitor the site to ensure it is not being used as a cultural center.
Staff notes that the appellant does not provide any evidence to substantiate that the proposed project would adversely impact the community, pursuant to Section 41-638 of the SAMC. Specifically, the appellant does not provide evidence that the project will be a detriment to the general wellbeing of the neighborhood or the community; detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; would adversely affect the present economic stability or future economic development of property in the surrounding area; does not comply with the regulations and conditions specified in this chapter for such use; and would adversely affect the general plan of the city or any specific plan applicable to the area of the proposed use. Nevertheless, a comprehensive response on the appeal items previously outlined has been prepared and can be found in Exhibit 6.
Site and Project Background
The site contains a historical structure known as the Maharajah House, which was constructed in 1938 and was placed in the Santa Ana Register of Historical Properties (“Register”) and categorized as “Landmark” in 2003. The property qualifies for listing in the Santa Ana Register under Criterion 1 for its exemplification of the Art Moderne variant of the Moderne style and under Criterion 4b, for its association with a foreign ruling family, the Holkars of Indore, India. Moreover, the property satisfied two criteria for landmark categorization: “unique architectural significance” as an example of the Art Moderne style in Santa Ana and “historic/cultural significance” as the residence of a sitting ruler of Indore. The Maharajah House is also listed as contributor to the Floral Park National Historic District. Lastly, the City of Santa Ana entered into a Mills Act Agreement with the property owners in 2014. For reference, additional historic information on the property can be found in Exhibit 3.
The subject site was previously improved with a freestanding one-story garden house with a porch, built in 2004. Similar to the proposed pavilion, the garden house was dismantled, shipped from Vietnam, and reconstructed on the property. The garden house was built in Vietnam circa 1847 and was brought over piece by piece to Santa Ana. At the time, the property owners also imported a bell tower with three 18th- and 19th-century bells, marble sculptures, a collection of 11th-century foo dogs, and a water feature. The building permits for the garden house were reviewed and processed administratively by City staff. Pursuant to Chapter 30 of the SAMC, on-site accessory structures can be reviewed and approved administratively by staff. Therefore, the structure did not require discretionary review due to the fact that it is considered an Appeal Application No. 2024-01 for Construction of a 23’-4” Tall Accessory Building (2221 N Heliotrope Drive)
November 19, 2024
4 6
4 8
accessory structure, it was no more than 15 feet in height, and did not physically change and/or alter the Maharajah House.
As previously discussed, during the March 28, 2022 Planning Commission meeting, staff was made aware that a previously permitted one-story pool house/cabana (built in 1955) was significantly altered circa 2021. On May 4, 2022, Planning and Building Agency staff conducted a site visit/inspection of the structure and determined that the original one-story pool house/cabana had been significant altered. While the original footprint of the structure was not altered, the height was increased from 13 feet to 20 feet and the roof structure was modified from a flat roof to a pitched roof. Moreover, the exterior of the structure was modified in an East Asian influence to include new brick veneer, new clay tile roofing, and architectural ornamentation. Staff verified that the structure was not being utilized as a separate living area, but instead was being used as storage for antiquities and cultural artifacts.
Planning staff held various conversations with the property owners and property owner representatives (i.e., architects, engineers, etc.) between 2022 and early 2024 regarding the unpermitted work, and provided two options which included removing the unpermitted work and returning the structure back to the original conditions, or going through the required City permits to legalize the work. In May 2024, the property owners submitted required building plans to the Planning and Building Agency to legalize the unpermitted work, and convert the structure into an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) for a separate living space and storage. At the time this report was printed, the building plans were still in building plan check and have not been approved for permit issuance.
On July 15, 2024, Planning staff conducted a follow-up site visit/inspection in order to ensure that no additional work had been constructed without the necessary City permits, and in order to provide more recent site photos to the Planning Commission.
These site photos have been included as part of Exhibit 3. While staff did notice construction of two additional structures, these structures did not exceed 120 square feet in size (10 ft. by 12 ft.), and therefore did not require a building permit.
Project Analysis
CUP requests are governed by Section 41-638 of the SAMC. CUPs may be granted when it can be shown that the proposed project will not adversely impact the community. If these findings can be made, then it is appropriate to grant the CUP.
Conversely, the inability to make these findings would result in a denial. The purpose of regulating the height of accessory structures within single-family residential zones is to minimize impacts to surrounding areas and ensure the structures will provide a positive contribution to neighborhood character and identity.
The installation of the proposed structure would not result in a change to the existing land use. Instead, the property will continue to be used as it was historically, as a single- Appeal Application No. 2024-01 for Construction of a 23’-4” Tall Accessory Building (2221 N Heliotrope Drive)
November 19, 2024
4 6
4 8
family residence. In addition, the proposed structure has been designed to be located away from adjacent properties to minimize the privacy concerns and visual impacts. By locating the structure towards the northeast end of the property, the design limits the potential impacts to the single-family properties along all elevations due the proposed setbacks (12 and 15 feet), the existing six foot high stucco wall, and existing mature landscaping ranging in height from 12-feet to 25-feet tall (e.g., mature tree and mature bamboo). In addition, the public right-of-way parkways are improved with mature oak trees along Santa Clara Avenue, which further help to minimize the privacy concerns and visual impacts of the proposed structure. The existing landscaping and mature trees are not proposed to be removed or altered. To ensure that the existing landscaping conditions are maintained, staff is recommending a condition of approval requiring that the trees be preserved and protected in place. Moreover, staff is recommending a condition of approval requiring that the applicant plant additional bamboo behind the existing six-foot high stucco wall to help screen any deficient areas.
Staff is recommending bamboo as it’s one of the fastest-growing plants and it would help maintain consistency with the existing landscaping.
Lastly, by setting back the structure approximately 15 feet from the rear (east) property line, the design limits any potential aesthetic impacts to the property to the east. The overall design and location will ensure that the neighborhood character is maintained along the side elevation (along Santa Clara Avenue). Therefore, the construction of the proposed pavilion will not result in a change to the neighborhood character or identity.
To further ensure that the proposed pavilion will not negatively affect the neighborhood character or identity, staff is recommending a condition of approval prohibiting the use of the structure and the site for any commercial purposes, including, but not limited to, tours, museum use, festivals, etc. The site will be required to remain and operate as a single-family residential site, or the conditional use permit may be subject to revocation as outlined in Section 41-651 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC).
Historic Analysis
The installation of the pavilion would not result in any physical alterations to the historic structure. As such, the building will continue to retain all of its character-defining features as described in Exhibit 3. Moreover, the proposed structure would not impact any of the view sheds to the Maharajah House along any public perspectives. As mentioned, the pavilion would be located approximately 30 feet to the east of the Maharajah House and approximately 15 feet from the rear (east) property line behind an existing six foot high stucco wall and behind existing mature landscaping (e.g., 25-foot tall mature tree and mature bamboo). Therefore, all views of the historic structure along Heliotrope Drive and Santa Clara Avenue would remain unimpaired.
Chapter 30 (Places of Historical and Architectural Significance) of the SAMC defines modification as, “Any change, alteration, restoration, remodeling, rehabilitation, construction, or relocation of the physical exterior of a historic structure.” Moreover, Appeal Application No. 2024-01 for Construction of a 23’-4” Tall Accessory Building (2221 N Heliotrope Drive)
November 19, 2024
4 6
4 8
Section 30-6 (a) of the SAMC states that, “No exterior physical modifications, other than those identified by the historic resources commission for administrative approval by city staff, shall be permitted with respect to an historic structure until the historic resources commission approves such request at a duly noticed public hearing and issues a certificate of appropriateness.” The proposed structure is not physically altering or changing the exterior of the Maharajah House. Therefore, no additional review by the Historic Resources Commission is required for this project.
Moreover, a review of the developmental history of the Maharajah House’s back yard shows the area has continually evolved since the property’s original construction in 1938 and 1939. The earliest available depiction of the internal setting of the property is an aerial photograph taken in 1947, which shows the back yard was walled as it is today and was entirely landscaped, principally with a broad lawn. In addition, the photos suggest the wall or fence at the north end of the property was likely set back approximately 10 to 20 feet from the public right-of-way (Orange County aerial photographs 1947). City building permit information suggests the first documented alteration of note to the backyard occurred in 1955, when a swimming pool (not extant) and a cabana (the existing two story ancillary building) were constructed. These changes are further documented in a 1960 aerial photograph depicting the long, rectangular swimming pool situated immediately east of the residence and the cabana located just east of the pool.
Available sources, including building permit records and historical aerial photographs, show there were no notable changes to the backyard until the late 1980s or early 1990s. In 1989, a permit was issued for the construction of a new six-foot-tall wall.
While the location of the wall is not indicated in building permit information, a 1991 aerial photograph suggests the wall was then erected at its current location, tracing the north property line, approximately 10 to 20 feet north of the wall’s apparent historical location. By the time the current owners acquired the property in 2000, the back yard had already undergone substantial alterations to its plan and design. Since around 2003, when the property’s current owners received a permit to demolish the swimming pool, they began a program of major alterations to the backyard. These alterations include a general remodeling of the area and the installation of a handful of buildings and structures of historical, antiquity, and cultural interest imported from Vietnam, as one of the current owners is a descendant of a high-ranking official who served the last royal family of Vietnam and the items in the collection, including the subject Moon Pavilion, form part of a collection belonging to a prominent official during the 1800s.
Structures relocated from Vietnam to the back yard include a roughly 20-foot-tall wood pavilion with intricately carved details and a tile-clad roof system; a nineteenth-century, traditional residence with an iron wood structural system; and multiple additional smaller structures of a traditional Vietnamese character. The series of changes to the backyard described above, especially the introduction of the imported buildings and structures Appeal Application No. 2024-01 for Construction of a 23’-4” Tall Accessory Building (2221 N Heliotrope Drive)
November 19, 2024
4 6
4 8
from Vietnam, have introduced new architectural and landscape elements with no apparent relevance to the original architecture of the property or to its significant historical associations with the Maharajah. As such, in its current condition, the backyard would be highly unlikely to contribute to the significance of the property, and the addition of a new pavilion would not affect the property’s continued eligibility as a Santa Ana Landmark or a contributor to the National Register-listed Floral Park Historic District.
Proposed changes, which would be confined to the back yard, also would not affect the historical integrity of the Floral Park Historic District as a whole. As proposed, bamboo would be planted near the north property line to obscure the proposed pavilion from view from the public rights-of-way on Santa Clara Avenue and Heliotrope Drive. While the new bamboo would be clearly visible from the rights-of-way, its appearance alongside the existing wall would be consistent with the internal setting of the Floral Park Historic District, which is characterized in part by its variety of landscaping. As stated in the National Register nomination form for the historic district, “Landscaping varies from building to building, but as this is a point of pride within the neighborhood, landscaping is of high caliber. The majority of properties feature shallow lawns, mature shrubs and flower gardens. Perimeter fences, low walls, and hedges are usually present, and some are original to the property.” In addition, the pavilion and bamboo would be confined to an area corresponding to a very limited portion of the property’s northern frontage, approximately 100 linear feet. Because of the limited physical scale of the changes, the project would be partially visible only from very few public vantage points, further reducing its visual effects to the internal setting of the historic district.
General Plan Consistency
Finally, the CUP will be consistent with several goals and policies of the General Plan.
Land Use Element policy LU-2.8 encourages land uses and development projects that promote the City’s image as a cultural regional center. The applicant’s proposed structure furthers this policy as it introduces a cultural element from Vietnam, the native country of the current owners. The structure was previously built in Vietnam and built in a traditional Vietnamese design, fabricated by Vietnamese artisans. Specifically, the structure would include prefabricated wood post members, traditional Vietnamese hand- carved wood details, and would include clay roofing tile, all reflective of the Vietnamese cultural architecture. The new structure would also be consistent with existing cultural structures relocated from Vietnam, previously. These structures include a roughly 20- foot-tall wood pavilion with intricately carved details and a tile-clad roof system; a nineteenth-century, traditional residence with an iron wood structural system; and multiple additional smaller structures of a traditional Vietnamese character Policy LU-3.4 advocates for scale and massing of new development to be compatible and harmonious with the surrounding built environment. As designed, the structure would be ancillary and subordinate the main single-family residence. The height of the Appeal Application No. 2024-01 for Construction of a 23’-4” Tall Accessory Building (2221 N Heliotrope Drive)
November 19, 2024
4 6
4 8
proposed structure in comparison to the main residence is illustrated on the architectural plan provided in the project staff report. The height of the existing residence is approximately 25 feet while the tallest point of the pavilion (pavilion roof peak) is proposed to be a maximum of 23’-4”. Therefore, the structure would be of an appropriate scale and massing. Moreover, the structure is built in a traditional Vietnamese design sharing a similar design, materials, and cultural characteristics as various other structures on the site, including an existing garden house. Thus, the proposed structure would be harmonious with the surrounding built environment.
Furthermore, Policy LU-3.5 encourages the preservation and reuse of historical buildings and sites through flexible land use policies, while Policy HP-1.4 of the Historic Preservation Element encourages actively protecting historic and cultural resources.
The installation of the proposed structure would not require the removal of any elements of the historic structure and would not result in any physical alterations. As such, the building will continue to retain all of its character-defining features. Moreover, the proposed structure would not impact any of the view sheds to the Maharajah House, along any public perspectives. As mentioned, the pavilion would be located approximately 30 feet to the east of the Maharajah House, and approximately 15 feet from the rear (east) property line, behind an existing six foot high stucco wall and behind existing mature landscaping (e.g., 25-foot tall mature tree and mature bamboo).
Therefore, all views of the historic structure along Heliotrope Drive and Santa Clara Avenue would remain unimpaired.
The proposed changes would also not affect the historical integrity of the Floral Park Historic District as a whole. As proposed, bamboo would be planted near the north property line to obscure the proposed pavilion from view from the public rights-of-way on Santa Clara Avenue and Heliotrope Drive. As previously noted, while the new bamboo would be clearly visible from the rights-of-way, its appearance alongside the existing wall would be consistent with the internal setting of the Floral Park Historic District, which is characterized in part by its variety of landscaping. As stated in the National Register nomination form for the historic district, “Landscaping varies from building to building, but as this is a point of pride within the neighborhood, landscaping is of high caliber. The majority of properties feature shallow lawns, mature shrubs and flower gardens. Perimeter fences, low walls, and hedges are usually present, and some are original to the property.” In addition, the pavilion and bamboo would be confined to an area corresponding to a very limited portion of the property’s northern frontage, approximately 100 linear feet. Because of the limited physical scale of the changes, the project would be partially visible only from very few public vantage points, further reducing its visual effects to the internal setting of the historic district.
Appeal Application No. 2024-01 for Construction of a 23’-4” Tall Accessory Building (2221 N Heliotrope Drive)
November 19, 2024
4 6
4 8
Public Notification and Community Outreach
Project notifications were posted, published, and mailed in accordance with City and State regulations for the Planning Commission hearing and for the City Council appeal hearing, as required by Sec.41-645 of the SAMC.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines, the project was reviewed and determined to be exempt from further review pursuant to Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines (Class 3- New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) because the project involves the construction of a small accessory structure. Based on this analysis, Notice of Exemption, Environmental Review No. 2022-11 will be filed for this project.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
EXHIBIT(S)
1. Appeal Application No. 2024-01 – Peter Christoffersen
2. Resolution Denying Appeal Application No. 2024-01 and upholding the Planning Commission’s Approval of CUP No. 2022-06
3. Planning Commission Staff Report - August 26, 2024
4. Planning Commission Minutes – August 26, 2024
5. Architectural Plan Set
6. Response to Appeal Comments
Submitted By: Minh Thai, Executive Director of the Planning and Building Agency Approved By: Alvaro Nuñez, City Manager