10-04-2011 CC RPT 11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Morton - Ellis, Sher Subject: FW: Against Case NumberP11 -0531, the proposal for the property on the corner of Central Avenue and Magnolia City Council Meeting Date: October 4, 2011 From: K Wright [mailto:twodogkd @yahoo.com] Item No.: 11 Sent: Friday, September 30, 20114:01 PM To: Randel, Travis; twodogkd @yahoo.com; Morton - Ellis, Sherry Subject: Against Case NumberP11 -0531, the proposal for the property on the corner of Central Avenue and Magnolia TO: Travis Randel, Associate Planner, Community Development Department, City of Riverside TO: Riverside City Council, Public Comments at the October 4, 2011 6:30 City Council meeting, ITEM 11 PUBLIC COMMENTS on the subject as noted below FROM: Karen Doris Wright, 4167 Central Avenue, Riverside, CA 92506 Please note we live DIRECTLY ACROSS the street from the projects as proposed. SUBJECT: Karen Doris Wright's comments on Public Notice for Case Number P11 -0531 at 4100 Central Avenue, in Riverside in WARD 3, which requests variances for proposal of a medical office of 8,152 sf, a 1,142 sf pharmacy; a restaurant 1,306 (pizza place ?); 6,294 general office for a total of 16,894 sf multiple tenant building. For this they propose ONLY 66 parking spaces as a variance to a requirement stated of 88 parking spaces, which clearly seems a gross understatement for parking needed. COMMENTS: We are against Case Number I'll-0531, against approving the parking variance which is GROSSLY INADEQUATE TO THE NEEDED number of parking spaces which I believe is much higher than you states. This proposal for the multiple tenant property on 4100 Central Avenue at the corner of Magnolia Avenue. We are against of this proposal due to the grossly understated parking requirements and due to the variance which only requires 66 parking spaces which is grossly inadequate for all the businesses, tenants, customers that will be in residents. I believe the 88 parking spaces specified as the requirement to be grossly understated, and believe if the different parking space requirements were penciled out for each type of use the total would exceed 88 parking spaces. I feel this proposal is INCOMPLETE since these numbers are not fully penciled out so citizens may verify if the appropriate standards were applied. As I believe the medical offices alone would require around 45 spaces that leaves only 21 spaces for ALL OTHER USES which is unrealistic, as it would be to ANY REASONABLE MAN ON THE STREET. Discussion: The parking is inadequate, and I believe my be understated. As it stands now without the medical offices and without the drugstore, the parking lot is more than half full. No variances should be allowed as there is no where for over flow parking. There is very limited parking in the area, no parking on Magnolia and no parking on Brockton. Parking is 1