satisfy the BMR requirement since this matter is not under their discretion.
Commissioner Davis commended the proposed project’s ability to provide sizeable
ownership units that may support a three-generation household. He also recognized
that the proposed project complies with almost all of the City’s objective standards.
Commissioner Shukla applauded the applicant for considering feedback provided by
the Planning Commission at a previous study session. She complimented the
proposed project’s inclusion of a living room and half bathroom on the first floor, its
ability to act as multigenerational housing, and its use of trees that will mitigate
street sound. She also noted her concerns regarding the proposed project’s lack of
street parking and insufficient lighting for its common space.
MOTION: Commissioner Howe moved and Commissioner Howard seconded the
motion to approve Alternative 1 – Make the required Findings to approve the CEQA
determination that the project is categorically exempt from further environmental
review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 as noted in Attachment 3 and
approve the Special Development Permit and Tentative Map subject to the Findings
in Attachment 3, the Recommended Conditions of Approval in Attachment 4, and the
noted clarifications in the staff report.
The clarifications to the staff report are as follows:
1.) The average residential unit size is 2,490 square feet.
2.) The fiber glass entry doors and steel garage doors with a faux-wood finish
would complement the proposed architectural style.
Commissioner Howe stated that the parking requirements for the proposed project
have been met, and the inclusion of an additional residential unit would reduce the
square footage of the planned number of residential units for the proposed project.
Commissioner Howard spoke in overall support of the proposed project.
Commissioner Serrone voiced his support of the motion and the proposed project.
He also noted available parking options surrounding the proposed project site and
stated that the fence that will be located on the street frontage of the proposed
project site will serve decorative purposes if not act as a buffer for noise.
Commissioner Davis confirmed his support of the motion and emphasized that the
proposed project meets the City’s parking requirements.
