Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Planning commission approves 117-unit Riverside housing project, flags secondary access for signage
Loading...
Summary
The Riverside Planning Commission approved PR2021‑001114, a proposal for 117 multifamily units on 4.54 acres with 215 parking spaces and 22,708 sq. ft. of common open space; commissioners requested the secondary Hedrick Avenue access be signed as exit‑only and noted construction details will be resolved in plan check.
The Riverside Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of PR2021‑001114 on Dec. 18, advancing a proposal to build a 117‑unit multifamily complex on a 4.54‑acre site.
Associate planner Anna Firsett told the commission the project would require a general plan amendment, rezoning and design review to permit the density and that staff recommended adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval subject to conditions. "The project serves to provide housing opportunities and is consistent with the development standards of the zoning code and citywide design guidelines," Firsett said during her presentation.
The development would be built on three contiguous parcels and provide 215 parking spaces, largely in garages; the proposal includes a two‑story edge adjacent to single‑family homes transitioning to three stories on the site interior and about 22,708 square feet of common open space with a pool, spa, fitness center and clubhouse.
Commissioners focused on technical details raised during review. Commissioner Wilder asked whether grading and a retaining wall at the north building would conflict with rear window locations. Andrew of GNG Engineering and the applicant, Hugo Lepe, said the design includes a stem wall and that window sills would be a few inches above exterior grade; they said those details would be finalized during plan check. Wilder also asked about drainage for podium parking levels; the project team said the podium would include floor drains and mechanical ventilation and that structural plans will be refined later.
Traffic and access were a second area of concern. Commissioners questioned whether the Hedrick Avenue driveway was intended as ingress/egress or exit‑only; the applicant said the drive can function both ways but staff recommended labeling it as an exit (egress) for tenants. Brad Bridal of Impact Sciences, who worked on the environmental review, said the traffic study conservatively modeled the Hedrick point as ingress/egress and concluded the project would not cause significant traffic impacts and required no mitigation.
Commissioner Wilder moved to approve PR2021‑001114 with a possible additional condition to make the secondary access exit‑only; Commissioner Singh seconded the motion, which carried. The commission announced a 10‑day appeal period for the decision.
Next steps include resolution of detailed grading, foundation and drainage information during the plan check process and submittal of final construction documents before building permits are issued.
