Agenda Packet_2026-02-03 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

instructional need or classroom count, materially misstates the property's educational baseline. Without a clear breakdown of classroom, instructional, and non-instructional functions, the project's alignment with CEQA Class 14 cannot be accurately assessed. A valid determination requires understanding how much of the existing and proposed space is educational in nature, and whether the addition constitutes a minor increase in instructional capacity. The record did not provide this necessary distinction. As presented, the basis for relying on a CEQA Class 14 exemption is materially compromised and cannot be relied upon for approval. 2.3 Unexamined Cumulative Impacts,_Parking Demand,, and Event-Based Use Disqualifying CEQA Class 14 Exemption In addition to the misclassification of space, the CEQA Class 14 exemption did not account for cumulative use, parking demand, or non-school event activity across the multi-institutional corridor. The project was represented as a minor expansion of school use, however, the intensity of activity, traffic, and parking demand in this corridor extends beyond school hours and includes evening, weekend, and commercial event functions. CEQA requires that determinations consider the full scope of operational impacts, including cumulative effects, yet this analysis did not occur. Parking was characterized as adequate based on shared institutional lots, without acknowledging that these lots serve public ticketed events and are monetized for non-school use, including VIP and valet parking. Event venue use typically triggers higher parking requirements than school instructional use, due to visitor volume, peak-time overlaps, and nighttime operations. The project materials did not disclose or evaluate how event parking, school operations, and proposed expansion would interact, nor did they consider the resulting - impact on nearby residential properties. The stated purpose of the expansion was to accommodate two additional grade levels, with enrollment increasing from 180 to a maximum of 195 students. However, no enrollment data, growth projections, or instructional capacity analysis was provided to substantiate the need for expansion. Further, no conditions of approval or enforcement measures were included to ensure that the 195-student limit would remain in place. The absence of an enforceable cap, combined with additional multi-use space, creates a potential for increased intensity beyond what was represented at the hearing. The multi-institutional corridor comprised of 5305, 5311, 5315, and 5321 W. McFadden Avenue reflects cumulative activity levels not limited to a single school campus. Event use, school programs, extracurricular activities, community gatherings, and church-affiliated functions collectively produce traffic, noise, and parking demand affecting adjacent residential properties. These cumulative impacts were not evaluated prior to asserting CEQA exemption eligibility. As presented, the basis for relying on a CEQA Class 14 exemption is materially compromised and cannot be relied upon for approval. 2. CEQA—Class 14 Exemption Inapplicable Due to Senior and ADA-Protected Residents at a Dual-Institutional Boundary 8 City Council 18 — 24 2/3/2026