DATE: 04/15/2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Planning and Development Department
2026-101
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
SUBJECT:
PARKING VARIANCE FROM § 17.86.020(C) OF THE CORONA MUNICIPAL CODE AT 428 W. GRAND BOULEVARD
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This staff report asks the City Council to affirm the decision by the Planning and Housing Commission in granting Variance 2024-0001 (V2024-0001), which would allow parking to be placed between the Grand Boulevard right-of-way line and a new 3,560-square-foot medical office building proposed at 428 W. Grand Boulevard, instead of behind or to the side of the building.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council:
a. Take no action, thereby affirming the Planning and Housing Commission’s action granting V2024-0001, based on the findings contained in the staff report and conditions of approval.
OR
b. Set the item for review at a subsequent meeting.
BACKGROUND & HISTORY:
The applicant proposes to develop a one-story, 3,560-square-foot medical office building with new landscaping, parking, perimeter walls, and future signage on a currently vacant
0.32-acre parcel located at 428 W. Grand Boulevard. The property is in the Community Services (CS) District of the Downtown Revitalization Specific Plan. The project site is surrounded by the Corona Post Office to the north and west, Saint Edwards Catholic Church to the east, and a dental office to the south. The parcel was previously developed with a single-family home.
The variance request (V2024-0001) is associated with an Architectural Review application (ARC2024-0001), which was for the review of the site plan, architecture, landscaping and fencing associated with the proposed medical office building. On March 9, 2026, the Planning and Housing Commission approved both architectural and variance applications. Only the variance requires City Council review as the next step.
The project was initially reviewed by the Development Plan Review (DPR) Committee on February 16, 2023. The applicant formally submitted the Variance and Architecture Review applications to the city on January 3, 2024. The applications were reviewed by the Project and Environmental Review Committee (PRC) on January 25, 2024. Missing and revised items were subsequently submitted, and the applications were deemed complete on December 18, 2025, and scheduled for the Planning and Housing Commission meeting of February 23, 2026. Due to a lack of quorum, the applications were rescheduled to the March 9, 2026, meeting, where approval was received.
ANALYSIS:
Corona Municipal Code (CMC) § 17.86.020(C) requires the following setback to be provided for new development located on Grand Boulevard:
“17.86.020
Building setback lines are established for the following major streets:
(C) Grand Boulevard, not less than 60 feet from the centerline. Parking shall not be permitted in the setback area or between the right-of-way line and any building, structure or portion thereof.”
The project, as proposed by the applicant, provides a building setback of 128 feet, measured from the Grand Boulevard centerline to the medical office building, which exceeds the minimum 60-foot building setback requirement under § 17.86.020(C). The parking area is also located behind the 60-foot setback area. However, while the building and parking area meet the setback requirement, the site plan does not comply with the latter part of the code requirement regarding parking placement, which is underlined below:
“Parking shall not be permitted in the setback area or between the right-of-way line and any building, structure or portion thereof.”
The project proposes a parking lot located between the Grand Boulevard right-of-way line and the building, which places the parking in front of the building (Exhibit 2). The intent of this requirement is to ensure that parking areas are located behind or to the side of the building so that parking areas not prominently visible from Grand Boulevard. This arrangement enhances the visual quality of the streetscape, promotes a more pedestrianoriented environment, and reinforces the traditional downtown development pattern in which buildings are situated closer to the street frontage. Accordingly, the applicant is requesting a variance from § 17.86.020(C) to allow parking in front of the building.
Justification For Variance
CMC § 17.96.020 requires that special circumstances applicable to the subject property must exist for the Planning and Housing Commission to grant a variance application.
Special circumstances applicable to the subject property must relate to the size, shape, topography and location or surroundings of the subject property.
The property is physically constrained by its size, shape, and surroundings, hindering the applicant’s ability to design a site plan that places the parking lot behind the building, as required by § 17.86.020(C). The following outlines the applicant’s justification for the variance:
1. Narrow and irregular lot configuration.
The lot is trapezoidal in shape, with an average lot depth of approximately 173 feet and a frontage width of approximately 82 feet. Due to the limited width, the applicant indicates that there is insufficient area to accommodate a medical office building of functional size, required parking counts, landscape setbacks, fire access drive aisles, driveway ingress/egress; and building and life-safety code requirements, including special design requirements mandated by the California Department of Health Care Access and Information for OSHPD-3 licensed healthcare facilities. These constrains limit site planning flexibility and hinder the ability to place parking behind the building while maintaining code compliance.
2. Infill condition with only one point of access.
The property is an infill parcel surrounded by existing development on all three sides and has only one point of vehicular access from Grand Boulevard. The site lacks alley access and shared access from the adjoining properties. If the building were placed at the front of the lot with the parking behind, the parking area would effectively become “landlock”. The lot width is inadequate to accommodate a compliant driveway extending from Grand Boulevard to the rear parking area while also meeting minimum width requirements for two-way circulation, accessible parking access, and emergency vehicle access.
3. Fire Department access requirements.
Fire Department standards require that dead-end drive aisles shall be limited to a maximum length of 150 feet. If drive aisles exceed 150 feet, the drive aisle lane must be at least 28 feet wide and include a turn-around area for emergency vehicles at the end of the drive aisle. Placing the parking lot behind the building would create a dead-end drive aisle over 150 feet, requiring the additional design features which would substantially reduce the buildable area of the site and impose additional layout constraints on the medical office building and parking configuration.
4. Patient and emergency access considerations.
The applicant states that providing a driveway and parking area in front of the building improves patient safety and accessibility, particularly for pediatric patients, patients with disabilities, and patients requiring assisted drop-off. Furthermore, a front-loaded access design also facilities a more direct and efficient response by EMS and emergency personnel, reducing travel distance from the public right-ofway to the building entrance.
5. Driveway spacing constraints.
The proposed driveway is located near the center of the site frontage along Grand Boulevard. This placement was determined by City staff to be most optimal because it maximizes separation from the adjacent driveways that serve the Post Office to the north and dental office to the south. The required driveway spacing standard limits alternative placement options for the driveway and influences the placement of the parking lot and onsite circulation. Given that the driveway is restricted near the center of the site’s frontage, the most feasible location for the parking area is at the front of the building.
6. Post Office encroachment on the property.
A portion of the adjacent Post Office parking lot is located immediately west of the project site. The parking lot currently encroaches into the project site by approximately three feet along the site’s entire west perimeter. This existing encroachment further constrains the site and reduces the flexibility in designing a compliant rear parking lot and circulation layout.
7. Specialized healthcare facility design requirements.
The proposed medical office building will operate as an OSHPD-3 licensed healthcare facility and is therefore subject to specialized design regulations that are administered by the California Department of Health Care Access and Information. Examples of required design elements include having a separate front entrance for walk-in patients from the patient discharge exit; having an enclosed accessible parking space for patients who cannot reasonably enter through the front door; and providing an exterior access closet for medical gas and medical vacuum systems. According to the applicant, accommodating these design regulations is only feasible with the building placed at the rear of the property.
CMC § 17.96.020 requires that special circumstances applicable to the subject property must exist for the Planning and Housing Commission to grant a variance application.
Special circumstances applicable to the subject property must relate to the size, shape, topography, and location or surroundings of the subject property.
Based on the analysis provided herein, the requested variance to allow parking to be located between the Grand Boulevard right-of-way line and the building is justified due to the existence of special physical circumstances unique to the property. The site is constrained by its narrow width, trapezoidal shape, infill location, and single vehicular access point. These limitations are further compounded by Fire Department access requirements, driveway spacing standards, an existing off-site parking encroachment, and specialized state-mandated design regulations applicable to licensed healthcare facilities. Collectively, these conditions restrict the applicant’s ability to reasonably design the site so that parking is located to the rear or side of the building while maintaining compliance with applicable building, fire, accessibility, and healthcare facility requirements.
Strict application of the CMC would therefore deprive the property privileges enjoyed by other similarity zoned properties that are not subject to the same physical and operational constraints or located on Grand Boulevard. The variance request is not the result of actions by the applicant but rather the inherent limitations of the site and the regulatory requirements governing the proposed medical office use.
Granting the variance will not constitute a special privilege, as the approval simply enables development of the property in a manner similar to other sites in the vicinity that have parking located between Grand Boulevard and building. These include the following sites:
U.S. Post Office – 414 W. Grand Blvd. (located to the north, adjacent to subject site)
New Hope Thrift Shop – 514 W. Grand Blvd. (located to the south of the subject site)
Grand Commercial Center – 210 W. Grand Blvd. (located to the north of the subject site)
Furthermore, the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or to the surrounding properties. The project has been reviewed by the applicable city departments and as designed and conditioned, the project can maintain compliance with all other applicable development standards.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The applicant paid the application processing fees of $5,773 to cover the cost of the Variance.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
Per Section 15332 of the State Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Section 3.31 of the City’s Local CEQA Guidelines, a Notice of Exemption has been prepared for the project because the project qualifies as a Class 32 (In-Fill Development Projects) categorical exemption. The project consists of the construction of a 3,560 square foot outpatient surgery medical building on a parcel that is less than five acres surrounded by urban uses. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning, and implementation of the project would not result in any significant traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality impacts. Moreover, none of the exceptions to the Categorical Exemptions listed under Section 15300.2 of the CEQA State Guidelines apply, as the project will not result in a significant cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place over time or have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances, or damage a scenic highway or scenic resources within a state scenic highway. The site is not located on a hazardous waste site and will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
PLANNING AND HOUSING COMMISSION ACTION:
At its meeting of March 9, 2026, the Planning and Housing Commission considered the subject matter and took the following action:
Motion was made, seconded (Longwell/Vernon) and carried, with Commissioner Woody voting “No” and with Vice Chair Siqueland absent, that the Planning and Housing Commission find the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), adopt Resolution No. 2684 granting V2024-0001, based on the findings contained in the staff report and conditions of approval. The minutes of the Planning and Housing Commission meeting are included as Exhibit 4.
PREPARED BY: ROCIO LOPEZ, SENIOR PLANNER
SUBMITTED BY: SANDRA VANIAN, PLANNING MANAGER
REVIEWED BY: BRETT CHANNING, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER and ACTING
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Exhibit 1 – Locational and zoning map
2. Exhibit 2 – Site plan for Variance 2024-0001
3. Exhibit 3 – Planning and Housing Commission staff report
4. Exhibit 4 – Minutes of the Planning and Housing Commission meeting of March 9, 2026