Laserfiche WebLink
PLANNING <br />COMMISSIONERS <br />City <br />c—'-'' <br />DE <br />CITY PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MINUTES <br />THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2019, 9:00 A.M. <br />ART PICK COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY HALL <br />3900 MAIN STREET <br />WARDS <br />KRRP <br />I <br />B <br />YROE <br />1 <br />OUA <br />E <br />T <br />S <br />2 <br />I <br />3 <br />K <br />R <br />4 <br />2 -JJ Lf) <br />ARTZ <br />LOEA <br />E <br />N <br />6 <br />S <br />O <br />U <br />W <br />7 <br />N <br />I <br />S <br />S <br />E <br />N <br />C <br />WW <br />3 <br />K <br />C <br />3 <br />CITY OF <br />VERS I <br />9". Arts &Innovation <br />Access to State Route 91 on-ramp will continue to be provided via Adams <br />Street by means of Magnolia and Indiana Avenues. Ms. Assadzadeh <br />stated that staff would like to provide responses to the letter received <br />November 13, 2019 from Christopher Sutton. The concerns were as <br />follows: 1) Prior 3 letters were withheld from the Planning Commission. <br />Staff reiterated the previous letters did not bring up new issues and staff <br />would be happy to address any questions the Commission may have. 2) <br />The Environmental Review of the Adams-Diana-SR91 Interchange <br />Project has begun and this proposal is related thereto and premature. <br />Staff's response is that the Initial Study is underway, the scheduled <br />delivery date to circulate the draft environmental document is September, <br />2020. It is anticipated that the environmental document will be a negative <br />declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration. 3) A Categorical <br />Exemption under CEQA cannot be applied to this proposal. Planning <br />staff continues to recommend that this project is exempt from CEQA as it <br />will not have a significant effect on the environment, including traffic. 4) <br />The Vacation and Abandonment of Diana Avenue would be <br />unconstitutional as an illegal gift to and subsidy of a religious institution. <br />As previously mentioned, Diana Avenue is intended to be sold at fair <br />market value, subject to an appraisal. 5) The 2011 Traffic Study, paid for <br />by California Baptist University proves that Diana Avenue cannot be <br />vacated or abandoned. Ms. Assadzadeh deferred to Nathan Mustafa, <br />City Traffic Engineer & Mobility Manager, Public Works Department. Mr. <br />Mustafa stated that one of the concerns presented to staff was that the <br />vacation of Diana Avenue would restrict traffic that already occurs on the <br />roadway. As previously mentioned, Diana Avenue is classified as a local <br />roadway in the General Plan. A local roadway is not intended to be a <br />passthrough for traffic between two arterial roadways. By vacating the <br />roadway, there is no obstruction of the intent of the General Plan and it <br />would not have an unforeseen impact because it was not intended to <br />serve as an arterial roadway. It is anticipated that as part of the 91 / <br />Adams Interchange Project, the current two build alternatives, cul-de-sac <br />Diana Avenue at its intersection with Adams. At some point in the future <br />the public engagement process will occur for that interchange, currently <br />it is undergoing technical review. 6) The 2012-2013 CBU Applications No. <br />P12-0309 and the 2015 Case were prepared by former members of the <br />Planning Commission. Staff noted that Commissioners have always <br />recused themselves should there be a conflict of interest. 7) The City has <br />failed to notify the families on Wilma Court and Emily Court of this <br />proceeding proposing to vacate and abandon their streets. The City did <br />notice 300' radius from the boundaries of the main campus which is <br />pursuant to the requirements of the Zoning Code. She noted that all of <br />III <br />APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes — November 14, 2019 Page 2 of 6 <br />