HomeMy WebLinkAbout23 - PH-1 - Attachment 3 - 4/21/2015ATTACHMENT 3
Costa Mesa
City of Costa Mesa
Appeal of Planning Commission Decision/Rehearing: $1,220.00
Appeal of Zoning Administrator/ Building Official / Fire MarshalEl /
Staff Decision: $690.00
APPLICATION FOR APPEAL, REHEARING, OR REVIEW
Applicant Name` SAM Rallimwl
Address 2Z8( N"Qorf Qlvd, C05P,trMa4ar CIF 4Z1027
Phone 9Y4 290-93S4 Representing
REQUEST FOR: ❑ REHEARING �j APPEAL ❑ REVIEW"
Decision of which appeal, rehearing, or review is requested: (give application number, if applicable, and the date of the
decision, if known.)
Z a� gfPea(�e5 IV, lwst'at m+ ike elanA.fog
w45 AAdG on tAOA&&, Febru.Nr t ZoIS. C#44Jl-,ti,n A %
Decision by: PIaAAin5 eVAtrw%5btrA
Reasons for requesting appeal, rehearing, or review:
CA r1d: k -b 'd (o b n $ , I bt j c o/Id. +ton tbe3 n,y(
pro✓,bt- AA7 +tr?ker &4h4n94e'usrr +g t� proh:b� iiltn ql� ScLI./j At(oollol:G
IS&44a6Ls. cen",*,% aas- aCr" Ln{„c,cs {'btq-F- �n�Iq�6;t,wn. Mut4u-9-VUr PV -5
Go fl t :; -�*A 4 (j Wove L P-,wF *Lr i ,tsi✓ j ♦nd QSSe,+ st k 4kr4mAowf 14-
Ivoti Id h,ndcr our ab; 1.j °i* A&y4-i'd0it v-/;+1,toi( tAA.eo4m5 t f,Anna:a(
iAsh'kt, 5 r twpArj M�eS40r5W VendAcs, QaAk-5 r: (( no{- lend of (a ,,
+oµPPrfih�t 1`a4e,5 ✓'Y�t 15µ.C,(1 r,olcL:h`rn, M,.mpv' C.✓Yn hi ok^ vtr 4y `
,'I. /
4n se,"m or renew 4 dxN SV07 Ajrt". u µ/:+Nn an 04 60^%f4hj_
?k�y li/wiiwf+bn r 04114 Pu.+ diS4d'/Mf4 co cg �ogifi`on . �orGd hour
GOMPv�:f1�s.� arl is urZjust o- uAfct:r, Ttis•5L hc/ldroncGj oo•t.ld pafi ws cK-F o4'
bu Ss5.
IeRse, 4&ee a{4a&1Ld leer.
Date: 0t'zIZI7.0I"�-- Signature: s►vnq
*If you are serving as the agent for another person, please identify the person you represent and provide proof of authorization.
**Review may be requested only by Planning Commission, Planning Commission Member, City Council, or City Council Member
For office use only - do not write below this line
SCHEDULED FOR THE CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF:
If appeal, rehearing, or review is for a person or body other than City Council/Planning Commission, date of hearing of
appeal, rehearing, or review:
�.� i- Updated July 2011
509 W. Lambert Rd
Brea, Ca 92821
Rahimian Management Corp. 888-902-3012
www.rahimiancorp.com
2281 NEWPORT BLVD — PA -14-39
Dear City of Costa Mesa,
I will be appealing condition #6 in Exhibit B which states the following:
"A buyer's notice shall be recorded on the property prior to the issuance of building
permits, to inform future property owners of prohibition of sales of alcoholic beverages.
Applicant shall submit to the planning division a copy of the legal description for the
property, and either a lot book report or current title report identifying the current legal
property owner so that the document may be prepared. The form and content of
the buyer's notice shall be approved by the City Attorney's office and Development Services
Director. "
Firstly, I want to mention that we have already invested over 100 hours of our time and over
$25,000 in design/engineering fees. Further, we have respectfully given the city the
following items for this project:
- We have provided an additional dedication of land for the future expansion of Fairview
- This highly visible and high traffic comer will be landscaped/hardscaped with modernized
aesthetics which will add to the beautification of the city and surrounding community.
- We will be adding over $10,000,000 per year of taxable revenue
- We will be creating 10-15 Full and Part Time jobs
- We will be providing extra convenience for city residents
- We have agreed to the prohibition of selling alcoholic beverages
Condition #6 in Exhibit B is not providing any further enhancement to the prohibition of
selling alcoholic beverages. Condition #5 already clearly states that Sale of alcoholic
beverages shall be prohibited. Furthermore, the CUP which would be granted for this
project in itself is enough to legally prohibit the sales of alcoholic beverage. Therefore,
Condition #6 will add no value to the city. Meanwhile, it would put us (land owner) at a
detriment for many reasons. Limitations such as this which are recorded on the property
become public knowledge and will hinder our ability to stay competitive in future
negotiations with parties such as an Oil Company (i.e. Chevron, Shell, 76), a financial
institution, property investor, or vendor. For instance, a bank may raise its interest rates on a
-Z(1---
loan offering when they find this recording. A giant Oil Company may not consider giving
us a Fuel Supply Agreement if they find this recording, and without an agreement we would
not be in business
This limitation would put us at a disadvantageous position compared to our competition and
is unjust and unfair. This could lead to trouble with financing, refinancing and re -branding
of this site. This would most definitely impair our ability to access a business line of credit.
In our industry and line of business, we cannot allow for such limitations as it could easily
put us out of business. Therefore, we are vigilantly requesting to omit Condition #6 in
exhibit B so we can continue with this project and create a successful outcome for all of us.
Unfortunately, if this condition is not omitted, the city will be forcing us to withdraw this
project.
We look forward to hearing from the city with an approval for this project with condition#6
omitted so we can proceed to construction and build.
Sincerely,
Sam Rahimian, Jr.
General Manager
Rahimian Management Corp