Riverside planning commission postpones Dutch Brothers kiosk review after traffic, parking and sidewalk questions

The Riverside Planning Commission on March 18 postponed action on a proposed Dutch Brothers coffee kiosk at 115 Woodman Drive after commissioners raised concerns about traffic stacking, parking access and sidewalk and drainage details.

Staff planner Nia Holt told the commission the proposal is for a 946-square-foot kiosk in a B2 zoning district with two drive-through lanes and that staff finds the project generally consistent with the comprehensive plan. Holt also said the applicant had submitted revisions, including the elimination of three parking spaces to reduce conflict at the proposed drive-through, and that staff recommended approval with conditions, including delivery of a shared-parking agreement.

Andrew Gardner, the applicant’s civil engineer, said the project uses an underused outlot and that the owner has agreed to remove an existing Youth Land sign. He said resubmitted materials include parking revisions and a photometric plan and that the city engineer had emailed that afternoon requesting the roadside ditch be closed and the sidewalk moved into the right-of-way. Gardner asked that sidewalk construction be made subject to the city engineer’s final approval.

Several commissioners pressed the applicant on traffic. Gardner said the design provides two lanes and queuing for about 24 vehicles at peak times and that, if stacking exceeded that, patrons could be asked to use the shared parking area or walk up to the kiosk. "If we did exceed 24, I would anticipate that they would either have to park within the shared parking area and wait or potentially walk up to the kiosk," Gardner said.

Resident Marcy Percy told commissioners she worried the kiosk would add to congestion at the Woodman/Airway junction and said motorists already make unsafe maneuvers there. "That traffic flow is a very big concern for me and my adjoining neighbors," Percy said during public comment.

The law director summarized staff’s six recommended conditions and suggested adding a seventh requiring the sidewalk be built to the city engineer’s standards to address drainage and safety. Commissioners debated whether to condition approval or simply postpone while staff and the applicant finalize engineering details. A motion to postpone consideration of both the site plan and the parking-waiver request carried unanimously; the commission set a new hearing date for April 15, 2026. The roll-call vote in favor was cast by Commissioners Denning, Haristston, Owens, Dao (Daell) and Vasquez.

Procedural note: staff said the city engineer indicated no traffic study was required for this project, and the applicant said revised materials were submitted to staff seven days before the meeting for review. The case was filed under the prior zoning code, and staff confirmed that the application will continue to be processed under the rules in effect at the time of submission.

The commission will rehear the case on April 15, when the applicant is expected to deliver the revised site plan, the parking/access agreement and finalized engineer-approved sidewalk and drainage plans.