Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves 222‑unit Clearview Way redevelopment, including 33 BMR units and several waivers
Summary
The commission voted 4–0 to approve a 222‑unit for‑sale residential redevelopment at 3000–3155 Clearview Way that converts office campus land into townhomes and single‑family homes, preserves 8 acres of hillside, provides 33 below‑market‑rate units, and uses state density bonus concessions and waivers.
The Planning Commission unanimously approved the Clearview Way redevelopment, a proposal to convert about 14 acres of a 22‑acre office campus into 222 for‑sale homes while preserving roughly 8 acres of hillside open space. Staff described required entitlements (site plan/architectural review, site development permit for grading and vegetation removal, and a vesting tentative map) and explained that AB 130 provided an exemption from CEQA. The project includes 149 townhomes and 73 single‑family detached homes; 33 units will be deed‑restricted as below‑market‑rate (BMR).
Developer Kevin Choi (Harvest Properties) presented design and benefits to the city, stressing a net traffic reduction versus the existing commercial use and $12.5 million in projected impact fees. Choi said the project will preserve 8 acres as natural landscape and deliver a mix of housing types with on‑site amenities such as two playgrounds, dog parks and rooftop decks. He also described a phased construction approach and an emergency access easement through the College of San Mateo.
Public Works and staff explained the trip generation methodology — using ITE rates and comparing the proposed residential use to the entitlement for the office campus — and reported a net daily trip reduction. Staff and the applicant discussed concessions and waivers under state Density Bonus law and AB 130; the applicant requested a concession to use only 3‑bedroom units to meet BMR obligations. Commissioners raised concerns about using a concession to alter local inclusionary distribution requirements but ultimately approved the staff recommendation by motion.
Commissioner comments covered sidewalk and Caltrans coordination along West Hillsdale Boulevard, visitor parking enforcement, open‑space protection for the preserved hillside, phasing and permitting logistics, and the tradeoffs between for‑sale product feasibility and higher density alternatives. After questions and conditions were clarified, the commission voted 4–0 to adopt the resolution approving the project.
