Welcome to the administrative zoning hearing of June 25th, 2025.

My name is Rebecca Shapiro, and I'm presiding over today's hearing as a zoning administrator.

I'm calling the meeting to order at 401 p.m.

The hearing today is in a hybrid format and city staff, the applicants, and some community members may be here in person.

We'll also ask if any community members who are joining us virtually want to speak on an item at certain points in the meeting.

Just as an early reminder when those opportunities arise, which will typically be during the public comment portion of the meeting.

For each agenda item, members of the public wishing to comment may do so by clicking on the raise hand function in Zoom when I announce the item on which you wish to speak.

Speakers will then be notified of their turn shortly before they're called on to speak.

And if you've phoned in today, please dial star nine to raise your hand and similarly when you're called on to speak.

Um just be prepared to press star six to unmute yourselves.

Uh, all speakers, uh, whether virtual or in person will have three hours, sorry, three minutes to provide comments.

Uh and um if you are here in person and wish to comment on a hearing item, please fill out a yellow speaker card for us so we can accurately spell your name for the meeting minutes.

Uh, with that, I will move on to item number two or section two of the agenda, which is oral communications from the public.

Uh, oral communications from the public is the portion of the meeting agenda for persons wishing to address the zoning administrator on any matter not on the agenda.

Um speakers are uh similarly limited to three minutes, and state law prohibits any action on uh any items that are raised that are not on the agenda.

Uh I think the only people in our physical audience here are staff and applicants.

So is there anyone in the virtual audience who's raised their hands to speak on oral communications from the public?

No, but I was kind of waiting for Bruce, but he would find no one.

Okay.

Great.

Thank you.

Um we will now move on to item three on the agenda, which is the public hearing portion of our agenda.

We have two public hearing items on today's uh agenda, and for each item, we will start with a brief staff presentation, then an opportunity for a single applicant presentation or sharing of remarks if desired.

And then one public comment period for uh the item being considered, after which I will take action on the permit request for uh that item.

Starting with agenda item 3.1.

Uh, I want to first acknowledge that the meeting agenda does include a minor type O and should read 302 Loreto with a T, not a D.

Um, all the other posted materials uh for this item are correct.

Um, item 3.1 is a request for historic preservation permit for an addition to a single family home that's listed on the city's register of historic resources.

Uh assistant planner Meta Fall is presenting the project today.

Addie, do you have a staff presentation?

I do, thank you.

So I'd just like to highlight a few additional details of the project proposal.

Having someone technical issues.

The subject request is for a historic preservation permit to allow a ground floor addition to the existing structure.

The existing house was constructed in 1927 as part of the Palmita Park subdivision in a mix of colonial and tutor revival styles.

The property is listed on the Mountain View Register of Historic Places.

The proposed edition is located at the rear of the existing structure such that the changes will be minimally visible in the public right-of-way.

The edition is highlighted in yellow for clarity.

Modifications to the SAD have been minimized to only what is necessary to construct the addition.

The addition will use materials to complement the existing building, but is sufficiently differentiated from the historic portion.

The House will retain all other historic or character defining features which allow the building to express its architectural style and historical significance.

Furthermore, the applicant has submitted an analysis prepared by a historic consultant, which confirms that the proposed project complies with all 10 Secretary of the Interior standards for the treatment of historic properties under the category of rehabilitation.

To conclude, city staff has completed the review of the application and is recommending approval based on the findings and conditions of approval in the attached report.

And city staff recommends a determination that the project is categorically exempt percentage of section 15331 historical resource restoration slash rehabilitation of the SQL guidelines.

Great.

Thank you.

Maddie, looking to the audience, I see the applicant is here.

If you'd like, it's entirely optional.

You're welcome to make a presentation or share any remarks you have.

Just very briefly, Andreas Gobel.

I've been living in that house for more than 20 years.

Late in life, we now uh actually have kids and uh you know have 12-year-old and 10-year-old, it's really time to expand the two one that that house originally is.

We really like the location.

I uh appreciate the consideration and the expert handling uh of the mountain by Madeline.

Uh, I hope the city will find that this is permissible and uh then we can look forward to you know expanding and growing our uh family in that location where we've been for a long time.

Fantastic.

Thank you.

Um we will now open the item up to public comment.

Uh is there anyone from the public who'd like to comment on item 3.1?

Uh, just as a reminder, if you're online calling, please use your raise hand function in Zoom or dial star nine to raise your hand.

Um is there anyone in our virtual audience who's raised their hand?

No.

Thank you.

Um with that, I will close the public hearing portion, uh public comment hearing of the uh public comment portion of the hearing, uh, and we'll now act on the requested historic preservation permit for 302 Loretta.

Um we did receive one written public uh comment actually on the other item.

Sorry for that.

Um we received no written public comments on this particular item, and as such, I will move to conditionally approve the project request for item 3.1 based on the findings and conditions that were posted online and the application materials that have been reviewed by city staff.

This includes the determination that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to section 1531 of the SQL guidelines, which applies to historic resource restoration/slash rehabilitation.

Uh and this concludes action on item 3.1.

Uh a final signed findings report will be issued for this action, or rather, you'll get confirmation also through the online system.

And um, there is an appeal period for this action of 10 days from the issuance of the findings report.

Uh, and so if you have any follow-up questions about uh this item and next steps, please just uh speak with your project planner.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

And uh, I hope you're able to enjoy many, many more years in that house.

Um just take a moment for the project planner for item 3.2 to make uh his way up here.

Agenda item 3.2 is at 2400 to 2700 East Charleston Road.

This is a request for a two-year permit extension for a previously approved uh development permits, um, which allowed conversion of an existing um uh series of warehouse retail buildings to research and development use uh along with some other improvements.

Um this project was originally approved with a determination that it was categorically exempt pursuant to section 1501 15301 of the sequel guidelines, which applies to existing facilities and uh junior planner uh Ben Tassu is presenting the project today.

Uh Avin, please uh share your brief presentation.

Thank you.

Um this project uh site is located on the north side of Charleston Road, uh between Industrial Arbeiter and US 101 Freeway and the general industrial district, the existing property contains commercial building, including the three existing vacant warehouse retail buildings.

From uh M1 through M3, it on the screen.

We're previously approved to allow the conversion of the three building into research and development use to add 6013 square view to existing reasonable labels into the buildings and two constructs for SAD site landscaping improvement on a 10.98 acre site.

On April 11, 2025, the property owner, Charleston Mountain View Owner, LOC filed a request for a two-year permit extension or the previously approved conditional use permit and development review permit to allow channel time to implement the previously approved permits.

And the staff has conducted uh the review of the application, which is um changed from the originally approved project, and the staff is recommending approval based on the findings and functions of approval, including the previous CPAR determination that the project is categorically exempt pursuing to section 15301 and 15.04, which are commonly modification to existing facilities in minor modification to land.

Thank you.

Uh Ben, uh turning to our applicant in the audience.

Uh, do you have any presentation or brief remarks you'd like to share again, purely optional?

Uh sure.

Hi, my name is Carrie Williams, and I'm here on behalf of the applicant uh Presidio Bay Ventures.

Uh, first I want to thank staff very much for bringing this um request forward.

Uh, since our uh conditional use permit approval back in April of 2023, uh, we have completed the project design.

Um, we applied for a building permit.

Uh, we've been engaged uh with staff for over a year and multiple rounds of review.

Uh, we've been diligently working in good faith to process our building permit uh and to meet all the conditions of approval.

Uh, due to current economic and market conditions, uh, we need uh some additional time to implement the project, and we would ask that you approve our request for a two-year extension.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Um we I'll now look to our virtual audience and open this item up for public comment.

Uh, is there anyone from the public who would like to comment on item 3.2?

Uh, again, uh, using the raise hand function in Zoom or star nine if you're participating by phone.

Do we have anyone wishing to speak?

No.

Uh, thank you.

Um, seeing no one, I will close the public uh comment portion of this hearing.

Um, and uh we'll now act on the requested two-year permit extension for this uh previously approved um project under prior application number PL 2022 145, uh 2400 to 2700 Charleston Road.

Um, do you want to just briefly acknowledge one written comment we received ahead of this hearing, which uh complemented the the oak groove and and urged just continued focused on um yeah sustainability and um sort of uh biologically sustainable practices um at the site.

Um the you know project will and does already comply with the city's water conservation and landscaping ordinance um and includes a large number of um California native and climate adapted trees and other plants that um are very low water using or low water using.

Um and um as the applicant has not made any changes to the approved project is in process.

We anticipate um this project proceeding uh consistent with the prior conditions of approval, except as modified by uh the new conditions of approval recommended by staff.

So with that, I am moving to conditionally approve this project request for item 3.2 based on the findings and conditions posted online and the application materials reviewed by city staff, um, including the prior determination that had been made that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to sections 15301 and 15304 of the CEQR guidelines.

This concludes action on item 3.2.

As with the prior item, a final signed findings report or and documentation of this action will be issued accordingly, and there is an appeal period of 10 days from such issuance.

If anyone has any follow-up questions on this item, please contact the project planner.

Aben Tassu.

So with that, I am concluding our public hearing today and adjourning this meeting at 4 15 p.m.

Thank you everyone for attending.