HomeMy WebLinkAboutGPA-ZC 22-0421 Staff Report
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING DATE: August 3, 2023 AGENDA: 6.a.
TO: Chair Bashirtash and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Paul Johnson, Planning Director
DATE: July 28, 2023
WARD: 1
FILE: GPA/ZC No. 22-0421
STAFF PLANNER: Louis Ramirez, Associate Planner II
REQUEST: (1) General Plan Amendment to change land use designation from GC (General Commercial)
to HR (High Density Residential); and (2) Zone Change to change zone classification from C-2 (Regional
Commercial) Zone to R-4 (High Density Multiple-Family Dwelling) Zone.
APPLICANT: Swanson Engineering, Inc. OWNER: 2700 White Lane LLC
2000 Oak Street. Suite 150 2700 White Lane
Bakersfield, CA 93301 Bakersfield, CA 93304
PROJECT LOCATION: 2700 White Lane
APN: 405-101-06
PROJECT SIZE: 2.49 acres CEQA: Section 15332
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: GC (General Commercial)
EXISTING ZONE CLASSIFICATION: C-2 (Regional Commercial)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: (1) adopt Resolution APPROVING general plan amendment to change the
land use designation from GC (General Commercial) to HR (High Density Residential; and (2) adopt
Resolution APPROVING change in zone classification from C-2 (Regional Commercial) to R-4 (High Density
Multiple-Family Dwelling) and recommend same to City Council.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The project site is currently developed with a 151-room, two-story hotel and
associated parking lot. Surrounding properties are primarily developed as: north – vacant land, self-
storage facility, and multiple-family residential; east – vacant land and automobile service station; south
– on and off-ramps to State Route 99, restaurants; and west – State Route 99.
GPA/ZC 22-0421 Page 2
This project was originally considered at the July 20, 2023 Planning Commission meeting. Following public
testimony, and at the request of the applicant, the project was continued to the meeting of August 3,
2023. Attached is the previous report providing additional background information and analysis of the
project site.
July 20, 2023 Planning Commission. Following staff’s presentation at the July 20, 2023 Planning
Commission meeting, no one spoke in support of the project, but opposition comments were received
from 10 neighborhood residents.
The neighborhood conveyed their concerns with the current operation of the facility as well as a spike in
vagrant activity in the vicinity to include personal experiences involving crime, intimidation,
encampments, and trash. The comments pertaining to the project site included but were not limited to:
tenants already living on the premises without city approval; building renovations without permits;
inability to accommodate families in a small dwelling unit; no security; laundry hanging from the railing;
shopping carts; no curfew enforcement; human trafficking; drug use; and fires.
A rebuttal period was provided where the applicant made comments in support of the project.
Additionally, the neighborhood residents reiterated their concerns and opposition. Following questions
from the dais, the applicant requested a two-week continuance to address the concerns and provide an
opportunity to meet with the neighbors.
Subsequent Research. In response to comments raised during the Planning Commission meeting, the
following is offered for consideration:
• As of August 2022, when the current landowner acquired the property, the project site has not paid
transient occupancy tax as required by hotels and motels within the City of Bakersfield. Additionally,
the Kern County Health Department no longer has a permit for a hotel at this site. Therefore, the
commercial use of this site has ceased and is operating as residential apartments without the
necessary land use approval. Additionally, the name of the building changed from Howard Johnson
by Wyndham to The Blanco.
• There is a history of building permits being issued and completed dating back to 1992. The most
recent building permits were issued in 2022 for reroofing of the building, fire alarm, and fire
suppression (fire sprinklers). The construction work was completed and inspected by the City. This
work is reflective of a change in use from hotel to apartments.
• Per the Bakersfield Municipal Code, there are two options to establish a residential use in a
commercial zone: (1) conditional use permit; or (2) General Plan Amendment and zone change from
commercial to residential. The owner has selected option 2 to provide zoning for a “High Density
Multiple-Family Dwellings.” A definition for multi-family dwelling is a single building or multiple
buildings that are divided to accommodate more than one family living separately. Multi-family
dwellings are developed to accommodate single individuals (e.g., studio apartments), couples (e.g.,
one-bedroom apartments), and families (e.g., two or more-bedroom apartments). The Uniform
Housing Code and California Building Code establish dwelling unit square footage minimums based
on the number of individuals the dwelling unit is intended to accommodate. For example, habitable
rooms, except kitchens, shall have an area of not less than 70 square feet. Where more than two
persons occupy a room used for sleeping purposes, the required floor area shall be increased at the
rate of 50 square feet for each occupant in excess of two.
GPA/ZC 22-0421 Page 3
• According to the applicant, there is on site management from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Monday through
Friday. Additionally, on site private security is provided 10 hours each day, 7 days a week including
holidays. Typical hours for security are 8:00 pm to 6:00 am but can vary to avoid predictability and
offer greater resource protection. Additionally, the security guards document an activity report
every 30 minutes. For minor infractions, residents are encouraged to contact the security guards
for assistance prior to contacting Bakersfield Police Department.
• Staff consulted with the Bakersfield Police Department regarding service calls the site. It was noted
the increase in service likely has a direct correlation with an increase in the number of rooms being
occupied. For example, approximately 24 rooms were occupied in June 2022 and that increased to
103 occupied rooms in July 2023.
o January - March 2022: 7 service calls
o April - June 2022: 7 service calls
o July - September 2022: 17 service calls
o October - December 2022: 21 service calls
o January - March 2023: 18 service calls
o April - June 2023: 23 service calls
o July 1 - July 23 2023: 10 service calls
• Regarding laundry hanging from the railing, laundry facilities are offered on site and are operated
using a phone or laundry card. Cards and accounts are available in the lobby. Regarding shopping
carts, in 2022 City Council adopted an ordinance to have property owners and businesses
implement shopping cart retrieval plans to keep shopping carts on the business property and
outside neighborhoods (Bakersfield Municipal Code Chapter 9.28). Regarding curfew, with some
exceptions, it is unlawful for any minor, defined as a person under the age of eighteen, to loiter
upon the streets of the city, in places of amusement or entertainment, or in other public places
within the city, between the hours of ten p.m. and five a.m. (Bakersfield Municipal Code Chapter
9.44). Regarding human trafficking, drug use, and fires, residents should contact the appropriate
emergency response agency. Additionally, some of the service-related and code enforcement-
related items that can be reported through the Bakersfield Mobile App (Android and iOS) include:
o Damaged park equipment ○ Abandoned furniture
o Graffiti ○ Junk
o Illegal dumping ○ Overgrown lawn or weeds
o Potholes ○ Trash and/or debris in a yard
o Streetlights ○ Vehicles parked on a lawn
o Traffic signals ○ Encampments
Site Visit. Following the July 20, 2023 meeting, City staff from Code Enforcement, Building, and Planning
conducted several site visits at various hours. Overall, the site was clean. Some of the comments
mentioned at the Planning Commission meeting were visible (i.e., clothes drying on the balcony rail and
a resident working on bicycles outside the door). There is a wrought iron fence surrounding most of the
site, but a large portion of the chain length fence maintained by the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) was damaged at the southwest corner of the property. Improvements were
being conducted in the rooms with installation of new plug-in air conditioners, box spring/mattress, and
furniture.
During daytime site visits, the desk manager greeted staff upon arrival. This individual provided the
following information pertaining to the operation of the facility: (1) a one-year lease agreement is
GPA/ZC 22-0421 Page 4
required for every resident (2) each resident is required to go through a background check that requires
at least two years without any criminal offenses; and (3) most residents come from or are recommended
by local shelters. A copy of The Blanco rules and regulations regarding guest, pets, and upkeep are
attached to this report.
Conditions of Approval. If it is the Planning Commission’s desire to have the rules and regulations as part
of “conditions of approval” it should be noted that conditions are part of a discretionary permitting
process and are typically customized for each specific project based on its scale, location, and potential
impacts. Conditions are subject to negotiation, public input, and regulatory review. Conditions of approval
are legally binding, and the developer must adhere to them from the time of project approval and beyond.
Failure to meet the specified conditions could result in penalties, fines, or in the case of a conditional use
permit (CUP) revocation of the approved use. The goal of conditions of approval is to strike a balance
between allowing development and ensuring that it aligns with the community's vision, preserves the
environment, and enhances the overall quality of life in the area. The following describes how conditions
of approval can be applied to common discretionary projects:
• General Plan Amendment - A General Plan is a comprehensive and long-term policy document that
guides the future growth, development, and land use within a city or region. It serves as a blueprint
for how the community envisions its growth and sets forth the goals, objectives, and policies that
will govern land use decisions over time. While a General Plan Amendment involves modifications
to the land use designation, it's important to note that a General Plan Amendment does not, in
itself, include specific conditions of approval for individual projects. Conditions of approval are
typically determined on a case-by-case basis during the project review process, considering the
project's scale, context, and potential impacts.
• Zone Change - The purpose of a zone change is to accommodate changes in land use needs, promote
better alignment with the community's long-term vision (as outlined in the general plan), or respond
to changes in the surrounding neighborhood or market conditions. When a zone change is
requested and approved, it provides for greater development opportunities on the rezoned land.
However, the zone change itself normally does not include specific conditions of approval for
development projects on the property. Development associated with a zone change will undergo a
separate review process, during which the project will be evaluated and the appropriate conditions
of approval specific to that development proposal will be determined.
• Planned Unit Development (Exclusive and Combining Zone) - The City’s Planned Unit Development
(PUD) zone is intended for residential uses to allow for innovative design and diversification in the
relationship of various uses, buildings, structures, lot sizes and open space while ensuring
substantial compliance with the general plan and the intent of the municipal code. In addition, the
development provides for adequate standards necessary to satisfy the requirements of the public
health, safety, and general welfare. This zone is not to be used to restrict residential development
or to compromise other zoning districts that may be more appropriate for a site. Instead, it enables
a developer to obtain approval of a specific, detailed plan for a residential neighborhood which
ensures that the uniqueness of the project design is preserved. These standards shall be observed
without unduly inhibiting the advantages of modern site planning techniques and innovative
planning of residential neighborhoods. Conditions of approval are appropriate for PUD projects to
protect and maintain property values and provide or protect community amenities in the subject
community, which would foster and maintain the health, safety, and general welfare of the
community.
GPA/ZC 22-0421 Page 5
• Conditional Use Permit - A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is a type of land use approval that allows
for a specific use or activity to be permitted in a zoning district under certain conditions. A CUP is
issued by the local planning authority (Planning Commission) and is subject to specific requirements
and limitations. The purpose of a CUP is to provide for development consistent with the zoning
while ensuring that development is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood or community.
Through appropriate conditions of approval, a CUP allows local planning authorities to balance the
needs of individual property owners or developers with the community's interests and zoning
regulations, fostering appropriate and well-planned development. This is done by applying
conditions of approval to the CUP that can include the following:
o Project Design Features: Conditions may include building design guidelines, setback
requirements, landscaping, and other architectural elements to ensure that the project's
appearance is aesthetically compatible with the surrounding area.
o Public Safety: Conditions of approval can include measures to enhance public safety, such as
installing additional lighting, providing enhanced security systems to include on site security
patrols, removing individuals who display disorderly conduct, etc.
o Public Benefits: Conditions may require the developer to provide public benefits such as
recreational amenities, preservation of green space, gathering space.
o Ensuring Compatibility: Conditions are used to ensure that development is compatible with the
existing character of the neighborhood or area. Conditions may address loitering, trash cleanup,
etc., that must be followed to help preserve the community's overall appeal.
o Construction Hours and Noise: Conditions may limit construction hours and impose noise
control measures to minimize disruption to neighboring properties.
o Project Monitoring and Reporting: Conditions may include requirements for periodic reporting
and monitoring of the project's compliance with the approved plans and conditions.
Planning Commission Options. The Planning Commission has several options regarding this request:
1. Recommend the public hearing remain open and continue the project to a date certain.
• The Planning Commission may have unanswered questions and/or request additional
information unavailable at the time of the hearing. If this information is required to make an
informed decision and can be obtained in a timely manner, the Planning Commission can leave
the public hearing open and make a motion to continue consideration to a date certain. The
upcoming meetings are August 17, 2023 and September 7, 2023.
Staff notes a continuance would allow a specific amount of time to obtain any requested
information and report back to the Commission with findings. This could, however, delay City
Council consideration of the project until November 2023.
2. Recommend project be referred back to staff.
• The Planning Commission may have unanswered questions and/or request additional
information unavailable at the time of the hearing. If this information is required to make an
informed decision but unclear how long it may take to obtain such information, the Planning
Commission can make a motion to refer the project back to staff.
GPA/ZC 22-0421 Page 6
Staff notes a referral back would allow as much time as needed to obtain any requested
information and report back to the Commission with findings. A referral differs from a
continuance in that the project will need to be publicly readvertised at a future Planning
Commission hearing date, including posting of new onsite sign notification. This ensures
interested parties are informed of the new hearing date and can continue to participate in the
public hearing process.
It should also be noted that pursuant to Government Code 65358, no mandatory element of a
general plan (Land Use Element, Circulation, i.e.,) shall be amended more frequently than four
times during any calendar year. City Council’s General Plan Amendment “window” to consider
amendments are tentatively February, May, August, and November of each year.
3. Recommend project be approved as proposed by the applicant.
• If the Planning Commission recommends approval of the project as proposed by the applicant,
staff would bring forward the recommendation to City Council. The Planning Commission can
make a motion to: (1) approve the General Plan Amendment to change land use designation
from GC (General Commercial) to HR (High Density Residential); and (2) approve zone change
to change zone classification from C-2 (Regional Commercial) Zone to R-4 (High Density
Multiple-Family Dwelling).
4. Recommend project be approved with a more restrictive zone classification.
• If the Planning Commission recommends approval of a more restrictive classification, staff
would bring forward the recommendation to City Council. The most plausible restrictive
classification that can be placed on the project site is the R-4/PUD (High Density Multiple-Family
Dwelling/Planned Unit Development) or Exclusive PUD (Planned Unit Development) zone.
o R-4/PUD Zone - This combining zone ensures site development is compatible with
surrounding development and/or recognizes unique site characteristics. Once a site
development plan is approved, changes to the plans must be approved by the Planning
Commission and only considered by City Council on an appeal.
o Exclusive PUD Zone - Like the combing zone, this zone ensures site development is
compatible with surrounding development and/or recognizes unique site characteristics.
Changes to site development plans require Planning Commission recommendation and City
Council approval.
5. Recommend project be denied.
• Considering all evidence in the record such as staff report, public testimony, agency comments,
and deliberations, the Planning Commission can make a motion to deny the project for reasons
made known during the hearing. If the project is denied, staff would bring forward the
recommendation to City Council.
Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 17.64.070 states that if any proposed zoning is disapproved
by the Planning Commission and no appeal is filed, such action by the Planning Commission
shall be final and conclusive. California Government Code Section 65354 states the Planning
Commission shall make a written recommendation on the adoption or amendment of a general
plan; a recommendation for approval shall be made by the affirmative vote of not less than a
majority of the total membership of the Commission; and the Planning Commission shall send
its recommendation to the legislative body. To ensure Council has all the information available
to make an informed decision on the general plan amendment (which goes to City Council
automatically), staff would also send the zone change for review.
GPA/ZC 22-0421 Page 7
Appeal. Pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 17.64.090, the actions of the Planning
Commission can be appealed within ten calendar days after the decision. The applicant or any other
person shall appeal in writing to the City Council by filing an appeal with the City Clerk. The appeal shall
include the appellant’s interest in or relationship to the subject property, the decision or action appealed,
and specific reasons why the appellant believes the decision or action from which the appeal is taken
should not be upheld. The Council may: (1) enact into ordinance the zoning amendment giving rise to the
appeal; (2) approve any alternative zoning district more restrictive than that proposed; (3) or may decide
against adoption of the proposed zoning ordinance amendment. The decision of the Council is final and
conclusive.
CONCLUSIONS:
Consistency with Surrounding Development. The project is near existing multi-family residential
development to the north and commercial development to the south, west and east. Therefore, the
proposed high density residential development is consistent with surrounding development.
Consistency with General Plan/Zoning Ordinance. The project is consistent with land use goals and
policies as contained in the General Plan related to multi-family development.
Recommendation. Staff finds that the applicable provisions of CEQA have been complied with, and the
proposal is compatible with the surrounding area, land use designation, and zoning ordinance. Therefore,
staff recommends your Commission: (1) Adopt Resolution APPROVING general plan amendment to
change the land use designation from GC (General Commercial) to HR (High Density Residential); and (2)
adopt Resolution APPROVING change in zone classification from C-2 (Regional Commercial) to R-4 (High
Density Multiple-Family Dwelling) and recommend the same to City Council.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Map Set
• July 20, 2023 Staff Report
• The Blanco Rules and Regulations
• Planning Commission Resolutions
Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE BAKERSFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN
AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION OF THE
METROPOLITAN BAKERSFIELD GENERAL PLAN FROM GC
(GENERAL COMMERCIAL) TO HR (HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
ON APPROXIMATELY 2.49 ACRES, LOCATED AT 2700 WHITE
LANE (GPA/ZC NO. 22-0421).
WHEREAS, Swanson Engineering on behalf of 2700 White Lane LLC, is requesting:
(1) an amendment to the land use map designation of the Metropolitan Bakersfield
General Plan from GC (General Commercial) to HR (High Density Residential); and (2)
an amendment to Title 17 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code to change the Zone District
from C-2 (Regional Commercial) to R-4 (High Density Multiple-Family Dwelling) on
approximately 2.49 acres located at 2700 White Lane (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 20, 2023, and
approved a continuance of the project to be held at the next meeting on August 3,
2023; and
WHEREAS, the Secretary of the Planning Commission set Thursday, August 3, 2023
at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield,
California, as the time and place for a public hearing before the Planning Commission
to consider the Project as required by Government Code Section 65353, and notice of
the public hearing was given in the manner provided in Title 17 of the Bakersfield
Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the above described project is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15332; and
WHEREAS, the facts presented in the staff report and evidence received both in
writing and by verbal testimony at the above referenced public hearing support the
following findings:
1. All required public notices have been given. Hearing notices regarding
the proposed Project were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of
the Project area and published in the Bakersfield Californian, a local
newspaper of general circulation, 10 days prior to the hearing.
2. The provisions of CEQA, the State of CEQA Guidelines, and the City of
Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures have been followed.
3. Pursuant to State CEQA, Guidelines Section 15332, This request is exempt
from the requirements of CEQA because the proposed Project would be
characterized as infill development that: would be consistent with the
General Plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well
as the applicable zoning designations and regulations; and is less than 5
acres surrounded by urban use; and has no value as habitat for
Page 2 of 2
endangered, rare or threatened species; and would not result in a
significant effect relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and
is adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
3. The public necessity, general welfare, and good planning practices justify
the Project.
4. The Project is compatible with the land use designations and
development of surrounding properties and is internally consistent with the
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Bakersfield Planning Commission as
follows:
1. The above recitals, incorporated herein, are true and correct.
2. The Project is hereby recommended for approval by the City Council
located on the map as shown in Exhibit A, of which is incorporated herein.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on
August 3, 2023, on a motion by _________and seconded _________, by the following
vote.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
APPROVED
_______________________________________
ZACHARY BASHIRTASH, CHAIR
City of Bakersfield Planning Commission
Exhibits (attached):
Exhibit A: Location Map
BEA CT
TRICIA
CT
PATTI CT
ELBERRENDO
A
VE
ELPOTREROLNLOS CARNEROS PL EL POTREROLNMESA GRANDE ST
WHITE LN
TRICIA
CT
PATTICT
EL
B
ERRENDOAVE
ELPOTREROLNLOS CARNEROS PL ELPOTREROLNMESA GRANDE ST
WHITE LN99GC
GC
GC
GC
GC
GC
GC
GC
HMR
HMR
LI
LR
LR
LR
LR
LRLR
GC
GC
WEST
BRANCH
CANALWESTBRANCH CANAL7/10/2023
0 120 240
Feet
_
GPA/ZC 22-0421
GC to HR
GPA/ZC 22-0421
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
LEGEND
(GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE)
RR Rural Residential
2.5 gross acres/dwelling unit
ER Estate Residential
1 dwelling unit/net acre
SR Suburban Residential
≤4 dwelling units/net acre
SR/LR
County: ≤ 4 dwelling units/net acre
City: ≤ 7.26 dwelling units/net acre
LR Low Density Residential
≤ 7.26 dwelling units/net acre
LMR Low Medium Density Residential
> 4 but ≤ 10 dwelling units/net acre
HMR High Medium Density Residential
>7.26 units but
≤17.42 dwelling units/net acre
HR High Density Residential
>17.42 units but
≤72.6 dwelling units/net acre
HC Highway Commercial
GC General Commercial
MC Major Commercial
OC Office Commercial
MUC Mixed Use Commercial
LI Light Industrial
SI Service Industrial
HI Heavy Industrial
P Public Facilities
PS Public/Private Schools
PT Public Transportation Corridors
P-SW Solid Waste Facilities
OS Open Space
OS-P Parks and Recreation
OS-S Slopes exceeding 30%
R-IA Resource -
Intensive Agriculture
20 acre minimum parcel size
R-EA Resource -
Extensive Agriculture
20 acre minimum parcel size
80 acre min (Williamson Act)
R-MP Resource -
Minerals & Petroleum
5 acre minimum parcel size
UER Urban Estate Residential
Western Rosedale Plan
0.5 acre net minimum parcel size
WM West Ming Specific Plan
AE
AuE
EXHIBIT A
Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE BAKERSFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN
AMENDMENT TO TITLE 17 OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL
CODE TO CHANGE THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION FROM C-2
(REGIONAL COMMERCIAL) TO R-4 (HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE-
FAMILY DWELLING) ON APPROXIMATELY 2.49 ACRES,
LOCATED AT 2700 WHITE LANE (GPA/ZC NO. 22-0421).
WHEREAS, Swanson Engineering on behalf of 2700 White Lane LLC, is requesting:
(1) an amendment to the land use map designation of the Metropolitan Bakersfield
General Plan from GC (General Commercial) to HR (High Density Residential); and (2)
an amendment to Title 17 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code to change the Zone District
from C-2 (Regional Commercial) to R-4 (High Density Multiple-Family Dwelling) on
approximately 2.49 acres located at 2700 White Lane (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 20, 2023, and
approved a continuance of the project to be held at the next meeting on August 3,
2023; and
WHEREAS, the Secretary of the Planning Commission set Thursday, August 3, 2023
at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield,
California, as the time and place for a public hearing before the Planning Commission
to consider the Project as required by Government Code Section 65353, and notice of
the public hearing was given in the manner provided in Title 17 of the Bakersfield
Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the above described project is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15332; and
WHEREAS, the facts presented in the staff report and evidence received both in
writing and by verbal testimony at the above referenced public hearing support the
following findings:
1. All required public notices have been given. Hearing notices regarding
the Project were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the Project
area and published in the Bakersfield Californian, a local newspaper of
general circulation, 10 days prior to the hearing.
2. The provisions of CEQA, the State of CEQA Guidelines, and the City of
Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures have been followed.
3. Pursuant to State CEQA, Guidelines Section 15332, this request is exempt
from the requirements of CEQA because the proposed Project would be
characterized as infill development that: would be consistent with the
General Plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well
as the applicable zoning designations and regulations; and is less than 5
Page 2 of 2
acres surrounded by urban use; and has no value as habitat for
endangered, rare or threatened species; and would not result in a
significant effect relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and
is adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
4. The public necessity, general welfare, and good planning practices justify
the Project.
5. The Project is compatible with the zone districts and development of
surrounding properties and is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield
General Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Bakersfield Planning Commission as
follows:
1. The above recitals, incorporated herein, are true and correct.
2. The Project is hereby recommended for approval by the City Council,
incorporating the change into the official zoning map as described in
Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 17.06.020 located on the map as
shown in Exhibit A and as specifically described in Exhibit B, all of which
are incorporated herein.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on
August 3, 2023, on a motion by _______ and seconded by _______ , by the following
vote.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
APPROVED
__________________________________________
ZACHARY BASHIRTASH, CHAIR
City of Bakersfield Planning Commission
Exhibits (attached):
Exhibit A: Zone Change Map
Exhibit B: Legal Description
BEA CT
TRICIA
CT
PATTI CT
ELBERRENDO
A
VE
ELPOTREROLNLOS CARNEROS PL EL POTREROLNMESA GRANDE ST
WHITE LN
C-2
C-2
C-2C-2
C-2
C-2
C-2
C-2C-2
C-2 C-2
C-2-MH C-2-MH
C-2-MH
C-2-MH
P.C.D.
P.C.D.
P.C.D.
R-3
R-3
R-3
R-S-1A
R-S-1A
R-S-1A
R-S-1A
R-S-1A
R-S-1A
M-1
M-1
M-1
M-1
C-2
C-2 C-2
C-2
TRICIA
CT
PATTICT
ELBERRE
NDOAVE
ELPOTREROLNLOS CARNEROS PL ELPOTREROLNMESA GRANDE ST
WHITE LN99
WEST
BRANCH
CANALWESTBRANCH CANAL7/10/2023
0 120 240
Feet
_
GPA/ZC 22-0421
C-2 to R-4
GPA/ZC 22-0421
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
R-1 One Family Dwelling 6,000 sq.ft. min lot sizeR-1-4.5 One Family Dwelling 4,500 sq.ft. min lot size
E Estate
10,000 sq.ft. min lot size
R-S Residential Suburban
24,000 sq.ft./dwelling unit
R-S-( ) Residential Suburban
1, 2.5, 5 or 10 min lot size
R-2 Limited Multiple Family Dwelling
4,500 sq.ft. min lot size (single family)
6,000 sq.ft. min lot size (multifamily)
2,500 sq.ft. lot area/dwelling unit
R-3 Multiple Family Dwelling
6,000 sq.ft. min lot size
1,250 sq.ft. lot area/dwelling unit
R-4 High Density Multiple Family Dwelling
6,000 sq.ft. min lot size
600 sq.ft. lot area/dwelling unit
R-H Residential Holding
20 acre min lot size
A Agriculture
6,000 sq.ft. min lot size
A-20A Agriculture
20 acre min lot size
PUD Planned Unit Development
TT Travel Trailer Park
MH Mobilehome
C-O Professional and Administrative Office
C-1 Neighborhood Commercial
C-2 Regional Commercial
C-C Commercial Center
C-B Central Business
PCD Planned Commercial Development
M-1 Light Manufacturing
M-2 General Manufacturing
M-3 Heavy Industrial
P Automobile Parking
RE Recreation
Ch Church Overlay
OS Open Space
HOSP Hospital Overlay
AD Architectural Design Overlay
FP-P Floodplain Primary
FP-S Floodplain Secondary
AA Airport Approach
DI Drilling Island
PE Petroleum Extraction Combining
SC Senior Citizen Overlay
HD Hillside Development Combining
WM- West Ming Specific Plan
LEGEND
(ZONE DISTRICTS)
AE
AuE
EXHIBIT A
( (
Legal Description
General Plan Amendment and Zone Change
Lot Lone Adjustment
Parcel A-Proposed HMR-R-4
Parcel 2 of Parcel Map Waiver No. P99-0810 per certificate of Compliance
recorded October 10, 2000 as instrument No. 200126374 of Official Records in
the City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, State of California;
Together with the West 46.00 feet of Parcel 3 of said Parcel Map Waiver No. P99-
0810.
Containing 2.72 Ac.±
Parcel B -to remain GC-C-2
Parcel 3 of Parcel Map Waiver No. P99-0810 per certificate of Compliance
recorded October 10, 2000 as instrument No. 200126374 of Official Records in
the City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, State of California;
Except the West 46.00 feet of said Parcel 3.
Containing 1.01 Ac.±
EXHIBIT B
CUR',f RADIUS LENGTH DELTA TANGENT ( ) RECORD INFORMA llON PER DffD RECORDED MARCH /J, 1940
Cl 25.00' 12.9/' 29:35'32" 6.50 IN BOOK 918 AT PAGE 344 OF OfflCIAL RECORDS
CURVE TAB/£
CD
C2 90.00' 7239' 46V4'59" JB.28
CJ 90.00' 161.77' 102'59'0/" 113.11 [ } RECORD INFORMAllON PER THAT CERTAIN MAP DATED
C4 25.00' 12.9/' 29:35'3/" 6.60 MARCH 10, 1904, ENllT/EJ "SAl£S MAP OF LANDS OF
C5 590.00' 438.47' 42:34'50" 229.92 KERN COUNTY LANO COMPANY, RLED APRIL 19, 1904 N
LI UHl UH NON-ACCESS I RELINQIJISHEMENT OF ABUTTER's RIGHTS
! I ~ ! I I I
I PARCELi ~! 511 i: i ! PMW Na P9s-os,o < 1 I : [
RECORO£D OCTOBEl? 10, 2000 APN: 405-101-05 f ~ ""-'-i ! DOCfJM£NT NO. 0200126314 fR I, ' ii II 0---i
1=~~~~~-=-=-=-~-=-;=======~;;;~~=======)ti i 6__ " w ';"''"'•: 00 ) :~ ' ·~~-----~-8~::~:~~----=-'~;;:~!~--7~ \ 01 ____ :~=-:=·=-~~==-~~~~-/ \\ \ ! f;
i;j ~ L________ _ N 89'55'40" W 405.22' ,. ___ _J,.-;,.,_ ,\_~'-~l'.)Z Q ! , ~ ..______ C4 -110.ss· .., I'\. 225.6/1/ ··\ . " <I: :
S 45"./6'52" W {R) \, C\I 2
CllY OF BAKERSFIELD
EXISTING ZONING: CZ
GENERAL PLAN: GC
PROPOSED ZONING, R-4 HIGH DENSITY
MULTIPLE-FAMILY DWELLING
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN: HR
P>RCe.A
2.72 AC. NET
PARCEL 2 PMW
NO. P99-0810 IJOCU!,fENT NO.
200128374 OF 0./l RECORDED
OCTOBER 10. 2000, TOGETHER
MTH TH£ HEST 45.00' OF
PARCEL J OF SA/0 PARCB..
MAP WA/1£li' NO. P99-08f0.
~ P>RCe.B\\.,__ ~Q ~ !li:
f.Of AC: NET '·· 0: , N ~
PARCEl. J PMW NO.
P99-0810 OOCIIAIENT NO.
200126374 OF O.R.
RECOHOEO OCTOBER 10,
2000, EXCEPT THE fffST
4600' OF SA10 PARCEL J.
NOT A PART <.! z -zi 0 ol "' "" z z: -< -~ !@ "' "'
~ ij ~ ..
~
~~
jfi ~" r:· I~~ i-1 "-
~ -~ ~J: .,,~
~";::_ ~~ ~~
~