Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Permitting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff: design-review permit modified; coastal development permit filed as new application; base density is 4 units
Summary
Staff told meeting participants that earlier 2010 resolutions will be added to the land record, the project’s design-review permit will be modified, the coastal development permit will be treated as a new application, and the site’s base density is four units.
Staff at a public meeting said the project’s design-review permit will be modified while the coastal development permit will be submitted as a new application, and that the site’s base density is four units.
A commenter asked about older documents shown in the packet, saying they saw “some resolutions in 2010” and asking whether those earlier resolutions would be superseded or modified. The commenter said the packet showed resolutions “in 2010, and I think there was another resolution. Is that just for, giving us some history with the project and what's happening on a go forward basis in this in this resolution? Do those old resolutions go away or are they being modified with the new resolutions?”
A staff member responded that the older resolutions are being added to the land record and that the design-review permit is being modified while the remaining approvals remain the same: “No. In this case, they're being added to the land. The design review, permit is being modified, but the rest are, essentially seeing the same.” The staff member also clarified that the coastal development permit is not a modification of the prior permit package but rather “a new [permit] associated with the current application.”
Later in the discussion another commenter noted the site’s zoning allowance, saying, “It looks like the base density allowed there is 4 units.” The exchange in the transcript records questions about the status of past resolutions, the scope of the design-review change, and whether the coastal development permit would replace or amend earlier approvals.
The meeting record does not show a formal vote or other final action on the permits in the provided transcript excerpt. The statements in the transcript distinguish between (a) recorded historical resolutions from 2010 being appended to the land record, (b) a modification to the design-review permit, and (c) a separate new coastal development permit application.
Absent further details in the transcript excerpt, staff did not specify which exact resolutions from 2010 are involved, nor did the excerpt include dates for the new permit filing or a timeline for review.
