ATTACHMENT 5
-1-
-2-
-3-
-4-
Dear Raising Cane's Costa Mesa T eam,
I wanted to take a moment to express our heartfelt gratitude for the incredible support and presence you brought to Killybrooke Elementary during Red Ribbon Week. Your commitment to connecting with our school, understanding our needs, and uplifting our students and staff has left a lasting impact.
Karina Gil, your team member who served as our Principal for the Day, was truly amazing in every way. Her genuine connection to the Costa Mesa community and her passion for supporting our students shone brightly. Her visit was a source of excitement and motivation for our students, and they were absolutely thrilled to receive generous donations and hear her encouraging words.
Additionally, our staff was so excited to have lunch from their principal for the day. That was so thoughtful and a much needed pick me up.
Your involvement during Red Ribbon Week not only brightened our days but also reinforced the importance of meaningful connections within the Costa Mesa community. We are deeply grateful for your partnership and the positive influence you have on our school. We look forward to future collaboration and meaningful connection with Cane’s as it evolves in our Costa Mesa community.
Once again, thank you, Raising Cane's Costa Mesa, for your support and partnership, and for making a difference in the lives of our students. We look forward to continuing our partnership in the future and creating more memorable moments together. Our schools are so lucky to have community partners that are invested in building up our youth. Your presence in our community is impactful and for that we are grateful.
With warm regards and appreciation,
Laura T aylor
Principal
Killybrooke Elementary School
-5-
-6-
-7-
-8-
-9-
-10-
-11-
-12-
-13-
-14-
-15-
-16-
-17-
-18-
-19-
-20-
-21-
-22-
-23-
February 7, 2024
Planning Commission Chair Adam Ereth
City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
CC: Planning Commission Members:
Russell Toler, Karen Klepack, Jon Zich,
Johnny Rojas, Angely Andrade Vallarta,
Jimmy Vivar
Scot Drapkin, Assistant Director of EDS
Subject: Detailed Objections to and a request for Denial of Project ZA-22-11, PDVR-23-0003, PMND-23-0003 (Raising Cane’s at 1595 Old Newport Boulevard)
Planning Commission Chair Ereth and Commissioners:
On behalf of the Consortium of property owners: Steve Schwimer, Paul Schwartz, Gregg and Nick Kelly, Dan Kang, Michael Guerin and John Morehart, we hereby express our unequivocal opposition to project ZA-22-11, PDVR-23-0003, and PMND-23-0003, re: Raising Cane’s Restaurant at 1595 Old Newport Boulevard.
Our comprehensive objections, detailed below, highlight our numerous concerns:
Raising Cane’s is playing the system by using February, the slowest month of the year for fast food restaurants, as a basis for the Stantec traffic study to entitle a too-small irregularly shaped property bordering a narrow, congestion side street for its fast food restaurant. The low numbers of the traffic study allowed for a number of conditional uses needed to squeeze and manipulate the site plan to fulfill parking and queuing requirements.
May is more typical of normal traffic for fast food restaurants while still accounting for school and traffic impacts on surrounding areas. -24-
Page two
Planning further picks over zoning codes to justify unwarranted environmental impacts on 100+ residents in the adjacent Sea Breeze Villa mobile home park by dismissing CMMC 13-49 of the General Plan, and Measure K, that exist to protect mobile home parks from such impacts.
Raising Cane’s proposed use doesn’t align with the goals of Measure K and the General Plan to meet State housing mandates. It’s piecemeal planning at best.
Planning did not include Measure K overlay and goals relating to land use and mobile home park residents in general;
Planning failed to include General Plan goals and elements regarding 100+ residents at the adjacent Sea Breeze Villas.
Individually and separately, the denial of the Raising Cane’s project is warranted.
Traffic Study Flaws
Planning should have requested a traffic study based on the busier months of May instead of one of the two slowest months of the year for the fast food industry. Note that School is in session in May as well.
The study does not take into account extrapolated traffic data for the increased sales each year of the sales goals shown by Raising Cane’s for its Seven Year Plan. That is from $5.4mm in 2023 to $8.0mm by 2030.
Note: the Stantec traffic study was conducted in February 2023, a month of heavy rain, and according to QSR50 (a Journal for fast food restaurants) among the two slowest months for fast food restaurants during the year.
Note: in 7 years, according to Raising Cane’s Co-CEO A J Kumeran, sales are projected to increase from $5.4 mm per store (2023) to $6.1mm (2024), -25-
Page three
to $8 mm per store in 2030. (per QSR 50 report of April 2023, regarding the top 50 fast food restaurants.). (that’s 8% sales increase per year.) Note: a significant amount of traffic going to Raising Cane’s is destination oriented, versus by-pass trips, which adds to the trips per thousand per square feet normally associated with drive in restaurants. (See Fehr & Peers Technical Memorandum for the City of Citrus Heights - Raising Cane’s September 3, 2020).
Note: Stantec also failed to include the traffic impact on Newport Boulevard and Industrial Way, and 16th Street, intersections known for daily gridlock between 4 and 6 PM, nor its impacts on private streets of the adjacent properties. Making a left or right turn onto 16th, and then a left onto Old Newport during rush hour has only a 2 - 3 car stack on 16th and no left turn lane on 16th and Old Newport Boulevard.
The slowest month for fast food restaurants, February, can’t provide data required for a realistic site plan that meets May through August traffic, parking and queuing impacts.
Minimally, a new traffic study must be done during May for a realistic traffic flow, parking and queuing impact at this site, taking into account Raising Cane’s dependence on destination oriented traffic and yearly increases in sales.
Note: Staff suggests that a reduction in operating hours would result in lessening the need for additional parking and queuing, per Condition of Approval 6.
It appears disingenuous since Peak Operating Hours are at the lunch and dinner hours, when parking and queuing are at the highest need, and a reduction in total operating hours would not lessen the need for additional spaces or queuing requirements.
Note: Raising Cane’s has suggested off-site parking for staff, but never identified the site in the year since.
-26-
Page four
Note: Operating hours, including truck deliveries, will be from 7 AM to either 4 AM or 5:30AM (included are 2 hours for cleaning the site and restaurant), depending on the day of the week. Total operating hours of 21 to 22.5 hours per day impacts on 100+ residents must be addressed.
MEASURE K OVERLAY AND GOALS
Measure K, approved by Costa Mesa voters in November, 2022, identifies specific properties for which there is opportunity for the city to meet their Regional Housing Needs Assessment numbers mandated by the State Department of Housing and Community Development.
Measure K is further designed to protect and expand residential uses for low and middle income residents currently in commercial zoning. (Up to 70% in the overlay are Middle and South American ancestry.) Measure K goals include expanding a
ffordable housing and protecting Mobile Home
parks.
As a Consortium of adjacent property owners, we are interested in determining a scope of work for a specific plan for the area, including a plan for assemblage of those adjacent properties to help meet the 11,721 unmet housing needs (years 2021 - 2029) for the City of Costa Mesa. We believe Raising Cane’s severely restricts such a specific plan for mixed use and affordable housing closely aligned with the goals of Measure K and the General Plan.
Note: The proposed Raising Cane’s is adjacent to the Sea Breeze Villas, a 62 unit mobile home park built in 1992; and, within 90 feet of the project. (The homes are 30 years old, thin wall construction with single pane windows.) More than one hundred residents occupy the units.
Sea Breeze Villas is a legal non-conforming residential use grandfathered in a commercial zone. It is a mistake to dismiss CMMC Section 13-49 development standards in lieu of Measure K’s passage. It is counter to -27-
Page five
the General Plan goals and Measure K meant to protect residence and Mobile Home Parks from the developmental impacts of this intensity. It’s a slap in the face of over one hundred low income residents who have little to no resource to mitigate these impacts.
GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS INCONSISTENT WITH CUP:
CD-8.1 Development Compatibility - access, circulation, parking, should be as far away from residences (and mobile home parks) as possible.
LU-3.1 states “Protect existing stabilized neighborhoods, including mobile hone parks, from encroachments of incompatible or potentially disruptive land uses or activities.”
Raising Cane’s is asking to operate between the hours of 9 AM and 3:30 AM Thursday through Saturday, and 9 AM and 2 AM Sunday through Wednesday (deliveries as early as 7 AM occurring any day of the week).
Raising Cane’s estimates it will take an additional two hours to clean and close the operation. This will entail cleaning the parking lot as well. All in all, hours of operation will range from 7AM to either 4 AM or 5:30 AM the following day. That is 21 hours to 22.5 hours of operation every day, regardless of the impacts on adjacent residents.
Noise, traffic, loitering, trash, lights, smells, etc. are all disruptive to the residents of the Sea Breeze Villas.
N-2.1 Limit the hours of operation adjacent to residential in order to minimize excessive noise.
It is important to emphasize that Sea Breeze Villas were built in the 1992, having thin walls and single pane windows; staffs’ sound study at 3150 Harbor adjacent condos have double pane windows and stucco and concrete walls.
Parking lot cleaning, vehicle noise including load music, tire squealing and braking, loud mufflers, motorcycles, diesel engines, yelling, door -28-
slamming, all are noise impacts affecting adjacent residents at all hours of the days and nights.
Page six
LU-2.11 Parking lots and other noise sources (such as speakers for ordering) should face away from residential homes.
The proposed Raising Cane plan parking lot faces the Sea Breeze Villas and not Old Newport Boulevard, and therefore does not meet the requirements of LU-2.11.
IN SUMMARY
In light of these comprehensive concerns, we strongly urge the Planning Commission to deny ZA-22-11, PDZVR-23-0003, and PMND-23-0003.
There are significant deficiencies in the Stantec traffic study utilizing February 2023 data, The month of May better reflects truer peak hour traffic, parking, and queuing impacts for the proposed site. 2024 to 2030 sales projections stated by Raising Cane Corporate should be incorporated into a year by year traffic simulation to stress test the site plan.
The site plan should be flipped per CD-8.1, N-2.1, LU-2.1 and LU-
2.11with parking, queuing and ordering facing Old Newport Boulevard to comply with the General Plan and Measure K.
The summary dismissal of CMMC Section 13-49 is a slap in the face of the low income residents of Sea Breeze Villas. To not protect adjacent residential uses is counter to the elements and goals of the General Plan and Measure K that call for the respect of all its residents, and is an error on the part of Planning.
Finally, we believe Raising Cane’s is piecemeal planning for an area now covered by Measure K, and this area is better served by a comprehensive speci
fic plan that better achieves the goals of Measure K.
Deny ZA-22-11, PDZVR-23-0003, and PMND-23-0003.
-29-
Page seven
Respectfully submitted for the above listed consortium,
S/S DAVID SWERDLIN
David Swerdlin
Swerdlin & Associates, A Governmental Relations Group
31125 Via Cristal
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
[email protected].
949-636-4407
-30-
-31-
-32-