Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Street Renaming topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission advances vacation and renaming of 'SQ Mountain Road' under AB 2022

Riverside County Planning Commission · March 5, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Riverside County staff presented a plan to vacate an unmaintained county road known in the transcript as 'SQ/Squaw Mountain Road' and to adopt a new street name selected from CACGN-approved options; the commission voted 5-0 to forward the cases to the Board of Supervisors.

The Riverside County Planning Commission voted 5-0 on March 5 to forward staff’s recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to pursue a general vacation of an unmaintained county road easement identified in staff materials as SQ (Squaw) Mountain Road and related actions to rename and re-sign an adjacent unnamed alignment.

Ryan Holm, supervising land surveyor for TLMA Transportation, told commissioners the project is CEQA-exempt and is being advanced in response to Assembly Bill 2022, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, which addresses use of the term 'squaw' in place names. Holm summarized staff’s three-step approach: vacate the County road easement, adopt a new street name for the unnamed road (one of four names approved by the County’s CACGN), and replace street signs without accent marks.

Holm said the transportation department is requesting that three related cases—the general vacation of SQ Mountain Road, a summary vacation of an adjoining drainage easement, and the adoption of the replacement street name—be heard by the Board of Supervisors at the same meeting. When asked for the specific motion, staff reiterated the recommendation to move forward with the general vacation and present the case to the Board of Supervisors.

An unidentified commissioner moved to continue with staff’s recommendation; the motion carried on a 5-0 vote, which the meeting facilitator announced as "approved 5 to 0." No public speakers addressed the item during the meeting.

The planning commission’s action was procedural: it forwarded the staff recommendation to the Board of Supervisors rather than adopting the vacation or formally changing street names at the commission level. The Board of Supervisors will make any final determinations, including the formal adoption of a new street name and the formal vacation of the easement.

Staff said the new street name will be chosen from four CACGN-approved names and that replacement signs will omit accent marks. The record presented to the commission included staff’s statement that there are no environmental impacts associated with this project and that it is therefore CEQA-exempt.

Next steps: the commission forwarded the cases to the Board of Supervisors for consideration at a future meeting; no Board date was specified during the commission discussion other than the intent to present the related cases together.