CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
October 9, 2025
San Clemente City Hall
First Floor Community Room
910 Calle Negocio
San Clemente, California 92673
1. CALL TO ORDER
Zoning Administrator (ZA) Adam Atamian called the Adjourned Meeting of the City of San Clemente Zoning Administrator to order on October 9, 2025 at 3:05 p.m. The meeting was held in the First Floor Community Room of City Hall, 910 Calle Negocio, San Clemente, California.
Staff Present: Adam Atamian, Zoning Administrator
Jonathan Lightfoot, City Planner
Zach Rehm, Principal Planner
Araceli Mejia, Assistant Planner
Jessica Gatny, Assistant Planner
Tamara Tatich, Administrative Assistant
2. MINUTES
A. Receive and file Minutes for the September 4, 2025 Regular Zoning Administrator Meeting.
ZA Atamian received and filed the minutes for the regular meeting of September 4, 2025.
3. ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
None.
4. PUBLIC HEARING – Time limitation for applicants: 10 minutes.
All other speakers: 3 minutes.
A. Public Hearing Project (PHP) 25-295, Short Term Apartment Rental (STAR) 25-296, Riley I STAR, 242 Avenida Santa Barbara
A public hearing to request Zoning Administrator approval to establish a short-term rental within an existing triplex at 242 Avenida Santa Barbara. The unit is currently a short-term rental outside the allowed short-term rental zone.
The permit would allow the unit to remain a short-term rental, provided that it is rented while a property manager occupies another unit on-site.
The Zoning Administrator will also consider whether the project is Categorically Exempt from the requirements of the CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15301 (Class 1: Existing Facilities).
DRAFT
Zoning Administrator Adjourned Meeting October 9, 2025 Page 2 ZA Atamian opened the public hearing and introduced Principal Planner Zach Rehm who summarized the staff report and a presentation titled, “Riley I Star, PHP25-295, STAR25-296,” that detailed the request for a STAR permit. A copy can be requested by contacting the Planning Division.
Applicant Jim Riley stated that they have operated as a short-term lodging unit for eleven years, have excellent online ratings, paid their taxes on time and have hosted over 300 guests that are primarily 55 years old and over.
ZA Atamian disclosed that he visited the property, stated that the area is dense and that there was one code compliance action previously; however, that there are no other complaints received since 2021. ZA Atamian asked the applicant to address the measures that have been in place to ensure the no future issues occur. Mr. Riley stated that they have a manager on premises, installed a security camera, disclosures of the house rules of no parties, and guests are provided with emergency numbers. The long-term renter has their contact information if there’s a need.
ZA Atamian asked staff about Condition 7.19 regarding the STLU expiration period. Principal Planner Rehm stated that the condition was included to be consistent with other STAR permits and that the STLU is still valid and then it will transition to a STAR upon expiration. ZA Atamian confirmed that a manager is onsite and they will be there throughout the STLU permit.
ZA Atamian closed the public hearing and stated that this is a good location for a STAR uses and can make the findings for approval.
Action: The Zoning Administrator determined the project tis categorically exempt from CEAQ and adopted Resolution ZA25-021 approving Short Term Apartment Rental 25-296, Riley I STAR, 242 Avenida Santa Barbara, subject to the Conditions of Approval.
B. Public Hearing Project (PHP) 25-298, Short Term Apartment Rental (STAR) 25-311, Riley II STAR, 222 W. Escalones
A public hearing to request Zoning Administrator approval to establish a short-term rental within an existing triplex at 222 W Escalones. The unit is currently a short-term rental outside the allowed short-term rental zone. The permit would allow the unit to remain a short-term rental, provided that it is rented while a property manager occupies another unit on-site.
The Zoning Administrator will also consider whether the project is Categorically Exempt from the requirements of the CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15301 (Class 1: Existing Facilities).
ZA Atamian opened the public hearing and Principal Planner Rehm summarized the staff report in a presentation titled, “Riley II STAR, PHP25- 298, STAR25-311 that detailed the request for a STAR permit. A copy can be requested by contacting the Planning Division.
DRAFT
Zoning Administrator Adjourned Meeting October 9, 2025 Page 3 Mr. Riley, the same applicant from the previous item, stated that they’ve had the rental for 13 years, rent to seniors, no problems, the property is maintained, his spouse checks on the property often and they have a high rating as a STLU.
ZA Atamian asked whether there are multiple lots on the parcel, and Principal Planner Rehm stated that it has two addresses on one parcel. Mr. Riley stated that he pays only on tax bill for the two lots. ZA Atamian stated that it could be two lots with one APN number. The issue is that if there are separate lots, an owner can sell one lot leaving the property without a manager’s unit which would be problematic with this STAR permit. Mr. Riley stated that he has no intention of selling the property.
ZA Atamian closed the public hearing and disclosed that he drove by the property, the area is less dense than the area of the other rental, but it’s nice how its situated. ZA Atamian agreed with the findings in the staff report in that it is appropriate for the area and is well maintained. ZA Atamian stated that Condition 7.19 may be enforced and left intact; but will add an additional Condition to address the state of the property with respect to how many lots exist on the parcel.
Action: The Zoning Administrator determined the project categorically exempt to CEQA and adopted Resolution ZA25-022 approving Short Term Apartment Rental 25-311, Riley II STAR, 222 W. Escalones, subject to the Conditions of Approval with the addition of Condition 7.20 that states: Operations of the Short-Term Lodging Unit shall be required to occur on a single lot that includes the portion of the building located at 221 West Canada. If multiple lots exist on the parcel, those lots will be required to merge to facilitate this permit and any future subdivision of property that separates 221 W. Canada from 222 W. Escalones shall deem this permit null and void.
C. Public Hearing Project (PHP) 25-341, Development Permit (DP) 25-367, Porter Addition, 260 W Marquita Unit A
A public hearing to request Zoning Administrator approval to approve a Development Permit 25-237 to convert 91 square feet (sq. ft.) of storage space into a 114 sq. ft. office space by raising the height of the roofline of a 3- unit residence located within 300 feet of a historic resource.
The Zoning Administrator will also consider whether the project is Categorically Exempt from the requirements of the CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15301 (Class 1: Existing Facilities).
ZA Atamian opened the public hearing and Assistant Planner Gatny summarized the staff report in a presentation titled, “Porter Addition, Development Permit (DP) 25-367/PHP25-341,” that detailed the request for a DP permit. A copy can be requested by contacting the Planning Division.
DRAFT
Zoning Administrator Adjourned Meeting October 9, 2025 Page 4 Assistant Planner Gatny introduced the applicants Ron and Darlene Porter, and architect Rob Williams. Mr. Williams thanked staff and is prepared to answer any questions.
ZA Atamian asked why the application required a public hearing, and staff confirmed that the addition is in the line of sight from the historical resource.
ZA Atamian confirmed that the property was a three-unit condominium and that air space was not an issue.
ZA Atamian disclosed that he visited the site and found the property to be unique and that the findings can be made in that the addition will not be detrimental to public health, the project is in character with the neighborhood, and it complies with the general plan and zoning ordinance.
ZA Atamian closed the public hearing.
Action: The Zoning Administrator determined the project was categorically exempt from CEQA and adopted Resolution ZA25-023 approving Development 25- 367, Porter Addition, 260 W. Marquita, subject to the Conditions of Approval.
D. Public Hearing Project (PHP) 25-361, Amendment to Conditional Permit C-1021, Assessor’s Parcel Number 690-552-05
A public hearing to request Zoning Administrator approval to amend Conditional Permit C-1021 to replace an existing 70-foot-tall lattice communications tower with a new 120-foot monopole communications tower on a privately owned open space parcel along the Rancho San Clemente Ridgeline Trail, at Assessor’s Parcel Number 690-552-05, commonly addressed as 616 Del Dios.
The Zoning Administrator will also consider whether the project is Categorically Exempt from the requirements of the CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15302 (Class 2: Replacement or Reconstruction).
ZA Atamian opened the public hearing and City Planner Lightfoot summarized the staff report in a presentation titled, “Public Hearing Project (PHP) 25-361, ATC Replacement Communications Tower,” that detailed the request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 25-363. A copy can be requested by contacting the Planning Division.
City Planner Lightfoot introduced Emily Murray, attorney with Allen Matkins and representing American Tower Corporation (ATC), and the Zoom participants as the applicant team consisting of Sarah O’Neil, Bonnie Belair and Jenna Castro.
City Planner Lightfoot gave a history of the cell site that was originally permitted at 70’ in 1962 through a Conditional Use Permit. The property has had some site improvement to enhance site security. A settlement agreement that addressed security and provisions that are currently in place by ATC, DRAFT
Zoning Administrator Adjourned Meeting October 9, 2025 Page 5 such as lighting, cameras and erosion control was the result of litigation in 2024. As a component of the agreement, ATC agreed to submit an application to replace a the 70’ lattice tower with a new 120’ monopole which is being presented. The design aligns with the settlement agreement. The replacement facility will improve security and public safety at the site.
ZA Atamian asked the applicants for a statement, and Ms. Murray stated that the 120’ monopole application is submitted in satisfaction with ATC obligations of the settlement agreement and thanked staff. On behalf of ATC, Ms. Murray made the following comments:
• Disputed that the original use permit from 1962 precluded a tower height of 137’.6” as referenced in the Resolution.
• Asserted that ATC produced a version of the 1962 CUP that had the original plot plans, where there is verbiage that says in case of a conflict between the language of the application and the plot plan, the plot plan shall prevail, and that plot plan detailed a 137.6’ steel tower. • Disputed the public testimony cited in the Resolution regarding compliance with the Conditions of Approval.
• Noted that ATC provided evidence in writing at multiple public hearings before the City Council contradicting that public testimony • Noted that all parties agreed to settle without any admission to liability on any party’s part, and ATC agreed in §5 of the settlement agreement to submit an application to remove and replace the existing lattice tower with a new monopole facility up to 120’ tall.
• The application was submitted, and the City agreed to process the application with speed, which it has done.
• The HOA agreed to not oppose and to publicly support the application. • The parties agreed that the City could not waive its discretionary decision-making authority, the City didn’t guarantee any approval, denial or outcome of this application.
• The agreement was made contingent that ATC did not have to proceed with a tower replacement if any new Conditions were imposed on the replacement monopole. If that contingency is triggered, the 70’ lattice tower remains in place. The draft resolution did not propose any additional conditions, and ATC appreciates the opportunity to work with the City.
ZA Atamian asked Ms. Murray if there was an understanding that there was a need for additional site security to deter trespassing. Ms. Murray concurred that trespassing had been a problem, as well as vandalism, all of which was addressed in the settlement agreement.
ZA Atamian clarified that the settlement agreement releases ATC from accepting any new conditions that are not satisfactory to ATC, and inquired if any added new conditions would preclude ATC from advancing their project.
Ms. Murray read the applicable section of the settlement agreement, and noted that ATC wishes to proceed with the application as submitted.
DRAFT
Zoning Administrator Adjourned Meeting October 9, 2025 Page 6 ZA Atamian disclosed that he had visited the property multiple times and aware of the project. He noted that his prior involvement with the property and ATC and their legal council was related to the prior voluntary compliance agreement, but was not involved in drafting the settlement agreement and has not been involved in the review of the monopole project. ZA Atamian stated his knowledge is with the 70’ lattice tower.
ZA Atamian stated he reviewed the staff report and thanked staff for their work.
ZA Atamian stated that the Design Review Subcommittee (DRSC) had proposed tower designs and he appreciated that they delivered examples of designs, but was skeptical of applicability to a 120’ tall tower. ZA Atamian asked whether ATC considered any of those options as viable. Ms. Murray explained that the alternate stealth examples would not achieve the project goals, particularly related to colocation of facilities.
ZA Atamian asked if the applicant considered a monopole less than 120’, and Ms. Murray stated that the taller tower allows for multiple carriers to be spread far enough apart to not interfere with output, and that the community had concerns with a lower height. ZA Atamian asked if a shorter tower would accommodate the desired carrier facilities, and Ms. Murray stated that the lower lattice tower accommodates because they can maintain the multiple carriers spread apart the wider base of the lattice facility, but a monopole requires vertical separation between collocated facilities.
ZA Atamian stated he reviewed the simulated images of what the new tower will look like compared to the existing tower and compared the project to a recent power company project that replaced lattice towers with monopoles, and that the project didn’t generate much public concern. While a new monopole will be taller, but the visual impact is narrower.
ZA Atamian stated the existing conditions of the permit are all in compliance and that all parties of the settlement agreement are in agreement with the current conditions including maintaining the gravel within the fence line and erosion control.
ZA Atamian cited §7(J) of the settlement agreement indicates that the City agrees that the 1962 CUP is vested and does not contain an expiration date.
ZA Atamian asked what is the ATC process should the facility be deemed obsolete. Ms. Murray responded that she did not know the lifecycle expectation for the facility. She continued to state that ATC is interested in keeping the facility safe and up to date and to her knowledge has no intention of retiring the facility.
Having no further questions, ZA Atamian closed the public hearing. ZA Atamian expressed appreciation for finding a mutually agreeable solution while respecting private property rights, and thanked everyone for working through a difficult process.
DRAFT
Zoning Administrator Adjourned Meeting October 9, 2025 Page 7 ZA Atamian stated that the settlement agreement is not a preapproval of the project, and there was no bias throughout the application review process.
ZA Atamian is supportive of the application understanding that ATC is not required to obtain approval of a 120’ monopole. Effectively, the decision in front of him is to evaluate the merits of either denying the project and maintaining the existing lattice tower, or obtaining a new facility in this location that will include the removal of the lattice tower. ZA Atamian continued to state that the lattice tower was a public safety issue due to evidence of climbing the structure, trespassing, and other activities that could result in a fall or starting a fire. It would require a much taller fence or a visually obnoxious structure to secure the lattice tower than to install a new monopole; the height is a benefit to the community and public safety personnel for better cell coverage; the age of the lattice tower is evident; this is a unique opportunity to replace the old structure with new technology; and trail users will experience a smaller visual impact to the open space, particularly with a narrower base and profile.
ZA Atamian made the findings in that the site is suitable for the type and intensity of the use that is provided; the proposed use will not be detrimental to public safety or welfare; and the proposed will not negatively impact surround land uses. ZA Atamian also noted that Harbor View Estates Homeowners Association (HOA) agreed to not oppose the application from approval, and they are supportive of the project per the letter to the City Council from the Harbor View Estates HOA, paragraph 2 that states, “The Harbor View Homeowners Association supports the replacement of existing lattice tower at the facilities with a monopole and respectfully requests that the City Council find that American Towers past and current use of the facilities was in its full compliance to all applicable laws.” Action: The Zoning Administrator determined the project was categorically exempt from CEQA Guidelines §15301 (14 CCR §15301, Class 1: Existing Facilities); §15302 (14 CCR §15302, Class 2: Replacement or Reconstruction); and §15303 (14 CCR §15303, Class 3: New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), and adopted Resolution ZA25-024 approving Public Hearing Project 25-361, American Tower Corporation, subject to the Conditions of Approval
5. NEW BUSINESS
A. Review of Tentative Future Agendas
5. OLD BUSINESS
None.
7. ADJOURNMENT
DRAFT
Zoning Administrator Adjourned Meeting October 9, 2025 Page 8 The next Regular Meeting of the Zoning Administrator will be held at 3:00 p.m. on Thursday, October 23, 2025 at the Community Development Department, First Floor Community Room, located at 910 Calle Negocio, San Clemente, California.
Respectfully submitted,
SAN CLEMENTE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
_____________________________________
Adam Atamian, Zoning Administrator
DRAFT