Planning commission tentatively approves 36-unit Columbia Avenue apartment project after neighbor objections on parking and scale

Riverside County Planning Commission · February 18, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
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

After public comment raising neighborhood character and parking concerns, the commission voted 4–0 Feb. 18 to tentatively adopt staff recommendations for a Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment (GPA 2200007), Change of Zone (CZ 2200028) and Plot Plan 22032 for a 36-unit development on Columbia Avenue in the 3rd District.

Riverside County planning commissioners on Feb. 18 tentatively approved staff recommendations for a proposed 36-unit apartment development on Columbia Avenue in the 3rd District, after hearing resident objections about parking, neighborhood character and pressure on local services.

Project planner Jose Luis Aparicio summarized the proposal (GPA 2200007, CZ 2200028, Plot Plan 22032), describing a 2.4-acre site with four apartment buildings that would yield 36 units with a mix of one-, two- and three-bedroom floor plans, 90 parking spaces, three onsite picnic/barbecue areas and 90 parking spaces. Aparicio said the project’s CEQA document is a Mitigated Negative Declaration circulated for public review from Jan. 20 to Feb. 9, 2026; he told commissioners no public comments were received during that review period but staff had received a late letter from a resident that morning.

A resident letter from Jonathan Green raised concerns about spot zoning, a change in neighborhood character with the introduction of two- and three-story structures, traffic and infrastructure safety, environmental and wildlife impacts, and potential overcrowding of schools and utilities. Aparicio said planning had just received the letter and would respond to it prior to any Board of Supervisors action.

Applicant representative Keith Tolliver of Senate Development Group told the commission he accepted the conditions of approval. In response to a commissioner’s question about guest parking, Tolliver said there is guest parking outside the gated area and that the project complies with municipal parking requirements. He also confirmed demo permits would be obtained to remove existing onsite structures and utilities and that the development would connect existing septic-served units to public sewer once construction proceeds.

During the public hearing, online speaker Earl Morris and his wife, Elmanda Morris, said current street parking on Columbia Avenue already overflows from nearby apartments and that the proposed density and a three-story building would be out of character with mostly two-story surrounding development. Earl Morris said, “Right now, we do have a problem on Columbia Avenue … In the evenings and on the weekends, both sides of the street are completely congested with cars.” Elmanda Morris added concerns about local services, saying, “Our Hemet hospital is overcrowded already. The emergency room is is ridiculous, and we have no maternity ward now.”

Tolliver responded that the current street condition drives overflow and that the project will improve Columbia Street by installing curb, gutter and sidewalk; he said such street improvements could allow lawful street parking and that the project “is in compliance, with the minimal and maybe even exceed the amount of parking for this project.” He added the three-story building is sited away from single-family residences to reduce direct impacts.

Two commissioners voiced support, citing the county’s housing needs and the project’s design. A motion to adopt staff recommendations — including adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and tentative approval of GPA 2200007, CZ 2200028 and Plot Plan 22032 — was made and seconded; the commission approved the motion 4–0.

The commission’s action is tentative: staff recommended the planning commission adopt Resolution 2026-001 and forward recommendations to the Board of Supervisors, which will consider final action. Staff also noted the project must comply with 2025 Title 24 and building-code requirements at the permit stage.