Planning commission approves Tentative Tract 949 and PUD 47-25, certifies mitigated negative declaration

The Hanford City Planning Commission on April 28 certified a mitigated negative declaration and approved Tentative Tract 949 and Planned Unit Development (PUD) 47-25, a proposal by N and M Capital LLC to subdivide approximately 30.9 acres south of Lacey Boulevard into 211 single-family lots with a 0.66-acre open-space parcel.

Planning staff said the project’s gross density would be about 6.82 units per acre, with an estimated population increase of roughly 650 people (using a planning assumption of 3.08 persons per household). The proposed minimum interior lot width is 40 feet (45 feet for corner lots), the minimum lot area is 3,255 square feet, and minimum depth is 81 feet. Staff noted proposed deviations from the RL-5 low-density residential standards: reduced lot sizes and widths, reduced setbacks (10-foot front yard for living space, 18-foot garage setback, 10-foot rear yard) and a reduced minimum open-space dimension (10 feet where 15 is normally required).

An initial study concluded the project would have less-than-significant environmental impacts with mitigation; staff recommended certification of Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 2026-12 and adoption of resolutions approving Tentative Tract 949 and PUD 47-25. Staff said the IS/MND was circulated on OPR’s CEQAnet and responses were received from the Department of Toxic Substances Control, which requested soil sampling; staff reported the Phase I did not reflect soil contamination and that the DTSC request was addressed in the updated IS/MND. The commission moved, seconded and voted by roll call to certify the MND and to adopt the approvals; the public hearing was then closed.

Commissioners asked questions about parking and whether the smaller lots would push overflow parking into the street; staff replied that with a 40-foot lot and a 16-foot driveway cars could be accommodated on-site and that lots narrower than 40 feet typically require additional visitor parking or designated overflow areas. Commissioners also raised packet-document issues: appendices A–D and technical studies referenced in the packet were omitted from the posted packet version; staff said the studies were included in earlier packet versions and would be corrected.