Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning administrator Adam Matamian approves Taco Bell remodel on El Camino Real
Summary
The City of San Clemente’s zoning administrator approved a development permit and CEQA exemption March 5 for a Taco Bell remodel at 918 S. El Camino Real that incorporates Design Review Subcommittee recommendations on lighting, tile accents and landscaping; a 10‑day appeal period applies.
Zoning Administrator Adam Matamian approved a development permit and found the Taco Bell remodel at 918 South El Camino Real categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) during a special meeting March 5.
Mejia, a city staff member who presented the revised plans, said the applicant revised the elevations after review by the Design Review Subcommittee to add tile accents around the north and east entrances, lower the north elevation window, replace floodlights with downward‑facing fixtures and lighten cornice colors. The property is a 9,303‑square‑foot lot in the Neighborhood Commercial 2 zone and sits inside the city’s architectural overlay.
"It does meet the zoning requirements at NC‑2, and it enhances pedestrian activity given that the primary entrance has now been chosen to face El Camino Real," Mejia said, summarizing staff’s analysis. She noted the proposal keeps the drive‑through and replaces the sunroom seating with outdoor patio seating, with total seating reduced from the prior layout. The revised plans also show two trellises: one over the drive‑through and one facing El Camino Real.
Matamian said the changes represent a "huge improvement" to the existing building and moved staff's recommendation to adopt Resolution ZA 26‑003 approving Development Permit 25‑259. He told the applicant that, if site lighting creates spill onto adjacent properties, the city will require shielding to contain the light on the property.
The meeting included a brief exchange over signage. Mejia said she searched permit records in the city systems (Central Square and the Apple Center) and did not find a recent permit for the larger signs now present on the building. The applicant disputed that, saying the signs had been permitted; Matamian asked staff to follow up and, if necessary, for the applicant to file the appropriate administrative sign permit. "The plans indicate that there will be a separate permit for the replacement of those signs," Matamian said.
Matamian closed the public hearing after making the findings listed in the resolution and stated he had no additional conditions. After the decision, staff said they would send the applicant a consent form to sign; once returned, staff will provide the signed resolution and the applicant may submit building plans. Matamian said a 10‑day public appeal period applies and that the City Council could call the item up (the council call‑up deadline was noted as March 17); applicants may submit building permits before the appeal period ends at their own risk. Matamian also summarized typical plan‑check turnaround times given by staff: about three weeks for the first submittal, two weeks for the second and one week for subsequent reviews.
The zoning administrator’s action records a formal approval of the development permit and the CEQA exemption; no vote tally was recorded in the transcript. Staff and the applicant were directed to confirm sign permitting outside the development permit before sign replacements occur.
