The Lemoore Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council approve a four‑lot subdivision and associated planned unit development for a property at 109 Hamlet Street. The commission’s action, recorded as a recommendation via Resolution 2025‑09, sends the PUD and tentative parcel map to council because the lot‑width deviations require legislative approval.

City planner Steve Brant told commissioners the request from Sequoia Investors, represented by Steven Macias, would divide the site into four parcels and allow two lots narrower than the municipal 50‑foot standard. Brant said the project is "categorically exempt from the environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines, section 15315," noting that subdivisions of four lots or fewer often qualify for that exemption.

Brant flagged tree protection and mitigation as a key condition. He said two valley oak trees on the site could be retained (one about 20 inches in diameter and one about 32 inches) but other trees under utility lines would need removal. "The code states to do 1 to 1 mitigation, meaning for every inch that you're taking out, you need to replace it with the same number of inches," Brant said, adding staff’s back‑of‑the‑envelope math translated to about 52 one‑inch‑diameter replacement units or the option for the applicant to pay in‑lieu fees placed in a city fund for replanting.

Applicant Steven Macias presented floor plans and described the development as infill near downtown, with the two exterior units planned as single‑story three‑bedroom homes and the two interior lots configured as single or two‑story units with single‑car garages. Macias said the interior units would have usable backyards "greater than 30 feet" and estimated sales prices in the current market around $350,000, while adding the developer’s plan is to sell individual homes rather than hold them as rentals.

Commissioners probed lot depth, setbacks, parking and trash storage. Staff and the applicant said standard setbacks would be met, sidewalks and full improvements would be required at construction, and each lot would provide covered parking. Neighbors were invited to comment; an adjacent resident, Voreen Hasavito, said she had received notice and supported the design while asking for sidewalks and landscaping, which the applicant and staff confirmed would be provided.

Commissioner Reed moved to adopt the recommendation language for Resolution 2025‑09; Commissioner Wells seconded. Commissioners Reed, Wells, Couch, Hill and the chair voted aye. Because the project includes a PUD, the commission’s vote is a recommendation: the City Council will review the resolution, the staff report and conditions before making a final decision.

If the council approves the PUD and map, required conditions include tree mitigation or payment of in‑lieu tree fees, installation of sidewalk and frontage improvements, and standard conditions tied to the parcel map. The commission record notes that two valley oak trees may remain if construction and utility conflicts allow; staff said mitigation will be finalized in the council packet and conditions.