Planning commission approves height variance, development review for Golden West Circle warehouse

The Westminster Planning Commission on July 2025 approved a development review and a height variance for a two‑story industrial warehouse at 15172 Golden West Circle, allowing the building to reach 44 feet — nine feet above the M‑2 zone limit.

Ken Fichtelman, principal planner for the city, told the commission the site is a 232,201‑square‑foot parcel now developed with a warehouse and trucking bays and that the applicant proposes a combination warehouse, office and showroom building with about 106,220 square feet of warehouse space and just under 9,000 square feet of first‑floor office and showroom space. The project includes 132 parking stalls (the code requirement was 116) and eight truck loading bays. Fichtelman said a mitigated negative declaration (MND) has been prepared and recommended for adoption.

The applicant requested a height variance to raise the building to 44 feet so the facility and its signs can be visible from Interstate 405, Fichtelman said, because a raised freeway grade and a roughly 10‑foot Caltrans sound wall have reduced visibility from the roadway. "They're asking for the height variance up to 44 feet so that the building will gain some visibility from the freeway and their signs will be visible from the freeway, something that every other building along that freeway corridor currently enjoys," Fichtelman said.

John Cataldo, the project's architect, said the team reviewed the city's conditions and asked that the approval period be extended because construction‑document and agency review can take more than two years. "We were wondering if at all possible to ... make it three years," Cataldo said. Tim Fan, representing the company and the owner, described plans for a mix of wholesale and retail showroom activity at the site.

Resident Terry Raines spoke in favor of the variance, saying staff had clearly explained the reasons for it and recommending approval. After discussion about the approval period, the commission amended Condition 6 in the resolution to extend the approval expiration to three years to give the applicant more time to secure permits and complete construction documents.

Commissioner Anderson moved to approve the development review and height variance and to adopt the mitigated negative declaration under Resolution 25‑012 and the related MND Resolution 25‑013, subject to the amended conditions; the motion was seconded by Chair Hamade and passed 4‑0. Commissioner Bulbert recorded on the record that condition number 6 would be changed to a three‑year expiration.

The staff report noted the project otherwise complies with applicable development standards, including requirements from the Orange County Fire Authority. The MND was prepared to address potential impacts and staff concluded mitigation reduced any impacts to less‑than‑significant levels. The commission record shows the action is subject to a 15‑day appeal period beginning the decision date identified in the notice of decision.

Next steps for the project include the statutory appeal period and then standard building‑permit and agency reviews; the condition extending the approval period to three years is intended to reduce the need for later extensions if multi‑agency reviews delay construction documents.