Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Street Vacation 0 Street topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission approves vacation of 0 Street between First and Second to add parking for proposed office suites
Summary
The Planning and Traffic Commission approved vacating a portion of 0 Street between First and Second streets to allow an applicant to provide on-site parking for a two-building office project that would create 12 office suites; one written objection was received but staff found no adverse circulation impacts.
The Planning and Traffic Commission on Sept. 24 approved vacating 0 Street between First and Second streets to allow an applicant to provide on-site parking for a two-building project that would house 12 new office suites.
Staff told commissioners the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under CEQA Section 15305 (Class 5: minor alterations in land use limitations) and recommended adoption of a resolution related to the vacation. Planning staff said adjoining property owners were notified and that the city received one written objection from Alex Abadi, whose property lies south of the project and outside the city's jurisdiction. Staff reported the vacation would not negatively affect Abadi’s property and that the parcel has other access points.
Applicant Raul Parra spoke at the hearing, saying he sought the vacation "to improve Second Street" and "make more parking for my tenants" so he could "bring more local businesses to the City of Imperial and just trying to improve the area and make the City of Imperial grow." Planning staff told the commission the applicant had completed required lot mergers for affected parcels and agreed to the city's conditions for the vacation.
Commissioners had no substantive objections and moved to adopt the planning commission resolution on the vacation. A roll-call vote recorded Commissioners Rosales Trujillo, Carrillo, O'Badi and Vice Chairperson Winkler voting yes; the motion carried 4-0. The commission closed the public comment portion of the hearing after finding no additional neighborhood concerns had been received.
The resolution and staff report, as described at the hearing, require the applicant to complete specified lot mergers and on-site improvements before final administrative steps are taken. Staff said renderings and photos in the report illustrate the applicant’s proposed improvements to the right-of-way area.
The applicant and staff indicated the vacation is intended to provide space for on-site parking and site beautification. The record shows one written objection, but staff concluded that the objection did not present evidence of a negative circulation or access impact. The commission’s action implements the staff recommendation and directs staff to complete the ministerial steps required by the resolution.
Notes: The staff report described the project as supporting construction of two buildings with 12 office suites and indicated the vacation conforms to the land use and circulation elements of the general plan.
