Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/21/91 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD. Held ThursdaY, March 21, 1991, 5:30 p.m.,. City Council Chamber, City Hall, 1501Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California. 1. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: Present: KATE ROSENLIEB, Chairperson JIM MARINO, Vice Chairperson STEVE ANDERSON *OSCAR ANTHONY TERI BJORN DAVID COHN Absent: DARREN POWERS C. ROBERT FRAPWELL ADVISORY MEMBERS: Present: LAURA MARINO, Deputy City Attorney STEVE WALKER, Traffic Engineer CALVIN BIDWELL, Building Director STAFF: Present: JACK HARDISTY, Planning Director MIKE LEE, Associate Planner ISABEL WILLIAMS, Recording Secretary *Commissioner ~Anthony was seated after roll call o TENTATIVE TRACT 5446 (L. BRUCE NYBO, INC.) · Motion was made by Commissioner Cohn to continue this hearing to the April 18, 1991 meeting. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Anderson. TENTATIVE~TRACT 5488 (MARTIN-McINTOSH ENGINEERING) Tentativetract is located on the west side of Windsong St'reet, approx- imately 600 feet north of Brimhall Road and contains 28 lots on 9.65 acres. The current zoning of the project site was approved in May 1988 with conditions, of approval limiting the maximum number of dwelling units. The R-1 zoned portion of Tract 5073 and Tract 5488 is limited to a max- imum of 56 dwelling units. The. R-2 portion (now wholly within Tract 5488)~is limited to a maximum of 71 units. Public bearing was opened. Mr Roger McIntosh with Martin'McIntosh Engineering represented the developer. He addressed Condition 8, page 2 of 8 indicating they have already received approval for Stone Creek to be 36 feet flow-line to' flow-line'and this. Should be corrected. He gave the following verbiage; Minimum flow-line to flow-line width of Stone Creek shall be 36 feet. Minimumflow-line to flow-line width of Thistlewood shall be 40 f~et.~ Minutes, ?l/C, 3/21/91 3. TENTATIVE TRACT 5488 (continued) Page 2 Mr. Walker represented the Public Works Department and-was amenable. Mr. ~McIntosh also addressed Planning Department Condition 7, page 8 of 8 requesting that the condition be deleted since they are not adding anymore lots, merely gaining a lot because they have moved the 'sump off of one of the lots in the first phase. Mr. Hardisty was in agreement. -Mr. McIntosh referred to Planning Department Condition 11, page 8 of 8 commenting that the original Tract Map 5073 did not have that condition and preferred that the tr~act be entered into a maintenance district rather than form a homeowner's association. Mr. Hardisty commented that it could be included as a part of the over- all landscaping for the subdivision. He then indicated that Condition~ 11 could be changed~to require that the landscaping shall be maintained by the maintenance district for the property. Chairperson Rosenlieb asked Mr. McIntosh if he had any objection if the last sent'ence of Condition 10 would read; Installation of the 7rl/2 foot wide landscaping area may be deferred. Mr. Mclntosh was amenable. Mr. Hardisty informed Commission that the Park Division submitted a series of standard conditions that apply ~to landscaping along street that they may want to incorporate into the conditions of approval in lieu of Condition 11. Mr. McIntosh commented it was acceptable except for Condition 1 which is already covered in a prior condition. He also referred to Condition 9 of page 8 of 8 asking that the words "of Phase 2" be inserted after prior to recordation. Mr. HardistY indicated th'at is acceptable. It was clarified that this tract is in Maintenance District 21. Chairperson R0senlieb referred to Condition 9 indicating that the land- scaping should be put in at the same time Which is Condition 10, and in that condition it indicates that landscaping shall be installed at the issuance of the first building permit on the R-2 zone property. Mr. Hardisty replied that the words prior to recordation should be in both Conditions 9 and 10. Mr. McIntosh commented that he would like to see the condition read, prior to a building permit because the. landscaping that will most likely go in there would all be done at one time. Minutes, P1/C, 3/21/91 Page 3 TENTATIVE TRACT 5488 (continued) There. being no others wishing to speak, public hearing was clo~d. Motion was made by Commissione~ Bjorn to approve and adopt the Negative Declaration, to make all findings set forth in the staff report, and to approve proposed Tentative Tract 5488 subject to the conditions out- lined in Exhibit "A" of the staff report with the followfng revisions; Page 2 of 8, Public Works Condition B.A, Minimum flow-line to flow-line width of Stone Creek shall be 36 feet and Thistlewood Street shall be 40 feet; Page 3 6f 8, Public Works. Condition lt.d reference~to Maintenance District 16 shall be changed to Maintenance District 21; Page 8 of 8, Planning Department Condition 7 shall be deleted; Page 8 of 8, Planning Department Condition 9 shall'be revised to read, prior ~o recordatioh of Phase 2, etc.; Page 8 of 8, Planning Department Condition 10 revise the last sentence of the condition to read, instal- lation of the 4 1/2 foot landscaping strip may be.deferred until time of issuance~of the' first building permit for any dwelling unit within the R-2 zone ~pr0pertM; Condition 11, Planning Department, Page 8 of 8 shall be deleted and the following language inserted in its place, "the wall, parkway area and landscaping which separates the residential and industrial uses Shall be inclUded in Maintenance District No. 21; Community Services Department Exhibit "A" to be included as additional conditions with the exception that Condition 1 be d~ieted. ~In~reference to Public Works C0ndition_8.A, Commissioner Bjorn amended her motion indicating that Windsong Street remains a part of the condition Motion was seconded by Commissioner Marino, and carried. AMENDING THE ZONING BOUNDARIES AFFECTING THOSE CERTAIN PROPERTIES LOCATED SOUTH 'OF NORRIS ROAD, EAST AND NORTH OF THE FRIANT-KERN CANAL, WEST OF COFFEE ROAD TO R-1 (ONE FAMILY DWELLING), R-2 (LIMITED MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING), R-3 (LIMITED MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING), C-O (COMMERCIAL AND~PROFESSIONAL OFFICE), C-1 (LIMITED COMMERCIAL), RE (RECREATION), AND OS (OPEN SPACE), TO COMPLY WITH THE RIVERLAKES SPECIFIC PLAN. (FILE 5094 - MILAZZO & ASSOCIATES) Commissioner Marino declared a perceived conflict of interest. The site consists of 538 acres of vacant property in Phase I of the Riverlakes Ranch/Unibell Specific Plan, and is currently zoned R-l, R-2 and C-1 Mr. Harold Russell, 8000 Jayme expressed his concerns with the exten- sion of the proposed C-1 zoning and the 6hances of a large shopping center being built ahd the 'increase in noise and traffic, and glare from lights. Ms. Edith Lyons -cen~er 8031Jayme spoke in opposition to the larger shopping Minutes, P1/C., 3/21/91 4. ZONE cHANGE #5094 - MILAZZO & ASSOCIATES (continued) Page 4 MC. Michael Dhanens with Milazzo and Associates represented Unibell _International referred to Condition 3 of Exhibit A objecting to the language used requiring a Conditional Use Permit to be able to use that property for two of ~those uses. ~The following language was proposed; The C-O zoned~property at the northeast corner of Calloway 'Drive and Meacham Road shall b~e limited to uses generally classified as profes- sional' office, urgent care, medical, dental, child care facilities, and/or-church.. Mr. Hardisty commented that ~ublic testimony at the specific plan hear- ings did specifically list child care and churches as permitted uses. Mr~ Dhanens addrgssed the issues raised by those in opposition. Commissioners Anderson and Cohn stated their concerns with regard to a larger commercial site. Chairperson Rosenlieb commented that when this developer first proposed this specific plan there Was already an existing specific plan with a monumental amount of Commercial spread everywhere with a traffic impact that was phenomenal for the area, and a 14-acre site is certainly an adequate site size for a neighborhood commercial center. Commissioner Anderson asked for Mr. Bidwell's interpretation regarding allowable signage. Mr. Bidwell replied that it applies to numbers and areas and not to height. Commissioner Anderson stated his concern for neighbors across the street from this proposed project, and suggested that consideration be given to having some kind of comprehensive sign requirement. Mr. Milazzo commented.that they intend to be sensitive to signage, lighting, screening, loading docks, and all the features that adversely ~affect neighborhoods, and asked that additional signage restrictions not be imposed on them. Extensive discussion took place regarding signage in various shopping centers. There being no others wishing to speak, public hearing was closed. Minutes, P1/C,-3/21./~1 47 ....ZONE CHANGE ~t5094--MILAZZO & ASSOCIATES (continued) Page 5 Motion was made by Commissioner Bjorn to make findings set forth in the staff report ~and approve the zone change as proposed and advertised and recommend adoption of same to the City Council with the 6onditions in Exhibit "A" as revised; Condition 3 shall read as follows, The C-O zoned proPerty at the northeast corner of Calloway Drive and Meacham Road shall be limited to uses generally classified as professional office, urgent'care, medical, dental, child care facilities, and/or churches. Add Condition 5 to read as follows, A comprehensive sign plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of the first building permit. CommiSsioner Bjorn amended her motion to include that the comprehensive sign be att~ached to the 14 acres site exclusively. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Anderson, and carried by the following.roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Anderson, Anthony, ~jorn, .Cohn, Rosenlieb NOES: None ABSTAIN: Commissioner Marino ABSENT: C~mmissioners Powers, Frapwell A TWO-MINUTE BREAK WAS TAKEN. 5. THOSE CERTAIN PROPERTIES LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PANAMA LANE AND SUMMERFIELD DRIVE -- AMENDING THE ZONING BOUNDARIES FROM AN R-2-D ~ (LIMITED MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING-DESIGN OVERLAY) ZONE TO A C-2 (COMMERCIAL) OR MORE RESTRICTIVE ZONE. (FILE 5142 - FRANK TRIPICCHIO) Subject site consists of 3 acres of vacant property zoned R-2-D and R-3-D and designated as GC on the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, and is located on the northwest corner of Panama Lane and Summerfield Drive. Public hearing was opened. Mr. Roger McIntosh with Martin-McIntosh Engineering~represented the applicant. Mr. McIntosh referred to Condition 5 of Exhibit A indicating it was their contention that the zone change is for about a third' of the total Site, they are just bring it into conformance with the general~ plan and what is adjacent to the west. He further stated they would be opposed to agreeing to all vehicular access to be disallowed on Maybrook between'Stine and Summerfield. Discussion as to the tYpe of trees required as part of Condition 1, and it was determined that evergree~ trees would be the best type of tree. ~ .Mr. McIntosh was amenable. Minutes, P1/C, 3/21/91 =-- Page 6 FILE 5142 - FRANK TRIPICCHIO (continued) Mr McIntosh agree~ in that the access point off of Summerfield and the possible access point off of Maybrook would probably be used by those people who are in the residential~neighborhood to the north and the residential across Summerfield. Chairperson Rosenlieb asked Mr. McIntosh if he would have any objection on restricting access on Summerfield to one ingress/egress point. Mr. McIntosh commented they would be agreea.ble to one access point on Summerfield and one access point on Maybrook. Chair Rosenlieb asked Mr. McIntosh if he would be objection to C-1 zoning. Mr. McIntosh replied that he would. 'There being no others wishing to speak, public hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Marino ~o make findings set forth in the-staff report and approve the zone change as proposed and advertised and recommend adoption of same to the City Council with the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" as amended by the March 21, 1991 memo from Planning Director Hardisty and with the following further revisions: Exhibit "A", Condition l'next to last paragraph~ insert Evergreen trees. Condition 4 shall read, "Freestanding signage shall not be allowed along Maybrook Avenue from Stine Road to Summerfield Drive nor along Summerfield Drive adjacent to the site." Condition 5, add second sentence, "Access to Summerfield Drive shall be restriCted to one drive approach only." Condition 6, correct typographical error. Delete Avenue from Stine Road to Summerfield Drive. Add Condition 8, A comprehensive sign plan shall be approved by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of a building permit; Motion was seconded by Commissioner Bjorn, and carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Marino, Anderson, Anthony, Bjorn, Cohn, Ros~nlieb NOES: ABSENT: None Commissioners Powers Minutes, PI/C,-3/21/91 'Page 6. PUBLIC HEARING - GPA 1-91 SEGMENT I AND ZONE CHANGE #5090:(DEWALT CORPORATION) This item was withdrawn by the applicant. 7. PUBLIC HEARING - GPA 1-91 SEGMENT III AND ZONE CHANGE #5127:(SEQUOIA ENGINEERING (agent for Calloway Associates) Commissioner Mari. no declared a conflict of interest. His' employer owns property within a half m£1e. Proposed projeqt is located ab the northwest corner of Hageman Road and Verdugo Lane. Applicant requests amendment to the Land Use Element by changing the land use designations from GC to LR on 40 +/- along with concurrent amendment to the Zoning Ordinance chknging zoning districts from A-20A to R~i on 40+/- acres and from A-20A to RE on 13 +/- acres. Public hearing was opened. Mr. Harold Robertson with Porter-Robertson Engineering represented the property owners to the west of the proposed zone change and general plan amendment-and requested a continuance of the proposed.zone change until they can work out a suitable arrangement With Mr. Smith on the RS buffer to R-1 zoning. Mr. Bob Smith with Sequoia Engineering was present and asked about the zone change continuance, Mr, Hardisty suggested continuing the zoning at this point for 30 days for the two adjacent property owners to work out ~hatever may be an arrangement between them and allow them the ability to joint them together as a single zone change to be heard by the Planning Commission. Mr. Smith was amenable to the conditions listed in the staff report for the general plan amendment. There being no-others wishing to speak,,pubiic hearing was closed. Chairperson Rosenlieb commented that it would be a good.idea of continu- ing the Commission's original intent of buffering the equestrian site with RS uses ·Minutes, P1/C, 3/21/91 7. Page 8 GPA 1--91, SEGMENT III AND ZONE cHANGE '#5127 (continued) Motion was ma~e by Commissioner Bjorn to adopt resolution making find- ings set-forth in the staff report, approving the Negative Declaration, and approving General Plan Amendment 1-91, Segment III consisting of an amendment to the Land Use Element from General Commercial to Low Density Residential on 40+/- acres subject to condition'of approval #1 listed in Exhibit "A" and mitigation measure listed in Exhibit "B" and recommend same to the City Council. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Anthony, and carried by the following roll call vote AYES: Commissioners Anderson, Anthony, Bjorn, Cohn, Rosenlieb NOES: ABSENT: None Commissioners Powers, Frapwell Motion was made by Commissioner Bjorn to continue Zone Change #5127 to the.meetigg of April 18, 1991. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Anthony, and carried. GPA -1-~91, SEGMENT IV: (MARTIN-McINTOSH for Castle & Cooke Development Corporation) Staff recommended this segment be continued until the next general plan .cycle. Applicant requested this hearing be conducted at the April 4, 1991 meeting. Chairperson Rosenlieb waived the staff report and opened the public hearing. Motion was made by Commissioner Bjorn to continue this hearing to the April 4,. 1991 meeting. ~Motion was seconded by Commissioner Marino, and carried. 9. GPA 1-91, SEGMENT VI: (CITY OF BAKERSFIELD) Principal Planner .Jim Eggert gave the staff report indicating the Planning Department proposes to recommend adoption of a general plan designation/zoning compatibility matrix as part of the Land Use Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and would serve as a guide for future projects in which to determine appropriate zoning con- sistent with the plan's land use designation. Public hearing was opened. MS. Barbar~a Don carlos re~resented the BIA and commented that after' review by'their Industrial/Commercial Council they had concern that even though this~is to be a guideline, very often guidelines become the rule'rather than a guideline. There was also concern that the matrix may be ~omewhat premature in that revisions are being considered at this time as far aS how they relate to M-1 property. Ms. Don Carlos asked that the changes be considered prior to adoption of the matrix. M£nutes, P1/C, 3/21/91 9. Page 9 GPA 1~-91, SEGMENT Vt (continued) There being no ot~hers wishing tO speak, public hearing was closed. Commissioner~ Marino submitted a matrix of his own for review by staff as well as Commission. Discussio~ on w~ther this should be approved tonight or continued for further study. Motio~ was-made, by Commissioner Bjorn to continue this matter and send it to a Commission workshop and bring it back-at the next GPA cycle. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Anthony, and carried. A five-minute break was taken. 10. GPA 1~91~ SEGMENT VII & ZONE CHANGE 5148 (DEBBIE KERWIN, Coleman Company, agent for Thomas M. Coleman, dba Truxtun Management Cor~ .The requested general plan and'zone Change amendments consist of changes to the conditions of approval of GPA 2-90, Segment III. The requested .amendment to this condition would allow a break/traffic worm in the required median 400 to 500 feet east of Mt. Vernon Avenue allowing east bound Bernard-Street traffic access to future commercial development along the corner of Mt. Vernon Avenue and Bernard Street. Also, west bound Bernard Avenue traffic would have access to the east bound lane of Bernard Street. Commissioner Marino declared a perceived conflict of interest· His employer has done work for the applicant within the last year. ~- ~Public hearing~Was oPened. Ms. Debbie Kerwin represented Tom, Coleman, and indicated her acceptance of the condition as referenced in the staff report. There being no o~hers wishing to speak, public hearing was closed. Commissioner Cohn-commented for the record, his concerns with respect to traffic in this entire area, and was in opposition to lifting the restriction. Chairperson Rosenlieb commented that during the 2010 plan hearings requesting commercial, and then came before the Commission with a gen- eral plan amendment, staff recommended no commercial ~and the vote was 6 to 1 and the commercial corner was allowed._ She further commented that she had never wanted to see~a commercial corner there. Minutes, Pi/c, 3/21/91 Page 10 10. GPA 1-91, SEGMENT VII & ZONE CHANGE 5148 (continued). '-~ Traffi. c Engineer, Steve'Walker referenced his memo dated February .28~ 1991 indicating it has been the practice that when medians are required in an area.like this fo not necessarily tell them they will have access points, and wait until ~they have an actual plan that shows where an access would go. There was concern by staff because it was unknown the exact location of the most easterly drive and how that would effect access to the church and school property to the ~outh. He further stated they do not want a left turn into the most westerly drive, so a median is required~ He further commented that he was neutral whether there is needed a drive into the most easterly drive. After much discussion, motion was made by Commissioner Bjorn to con- tinue this hearing to the next meeting in that a couple of Commissioner's were unable to be present at this meeting. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Anthony, and carried. Commissioner Cohn voted no. 11. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1-91, CIRCULATION ELEMENT This amendment would modify two policies and an implementatioh measure in-the general plan text with fespect freeways. Public hearing Was opened. There was no one present wishing to speak either in 'favor or opposition. Public hearing was closed. Moti6n was made by Commissioner :Marino to adopt the resolution finding that required public notice has been given and the proposed amendments have no environmental impact and approving General Plan Amendment 1-91 Circulation Element consisting of amendments to policies #28, 29 and implementation measure 1-24 of the Circulation Element.. Motion was sec- onded by Commissioner Anthony, and carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Marino, Anthony, Bjorn, Cohn, Rosenlieb ~ NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Anderson, Powers Minutes, P1/C~ 3~21/91 Page 11 12. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 17.36 CH (CHURCH) ZONE OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE WITH .REGARD TO PERMITTED USES, WALL SEPARATIONS AND PLAN- REVIEW PROCEDURES AMENDMENT TO SECTION 17.38 HOSP. (HOSPITAL) ZONE OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE WITH REGARD TO WALL SEPARATIONS AND PLAN REVIEW 'PROCEDURES Staff requested a continuance of the above items to the May 2nd meeting to allow, staff time to ~propose amendments to Chapter 17.60 (Signs) and 17.04 (Definitions Section) of Title 17 which relate to the aboye. Public hearing was opened. Motion was made-by Commissioner Marino to continue these matters to the May 2, 1991 meeting. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Anthony, and carried. 13. AMENDMENT TO SECTION I7.53 (SITE PLAN REVIEW) OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE WITH PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS, APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS AND LANDSCAPING The ordinance has been amended to reflect existing site plan review procedures. Procedures originally adopted proved too cumbersome and time consuming with bi-weekly meetings to implement. The process pro- posed and currently-used (daily review of plans submitted) is more effi- cient than the original direction provided by the ordinance. 'Public hearing was opened. -Ms. Barbara Don Carlos representing the BIA commented they have several concerns and would like to either review them now or go to committee. Mr. Hardisty briefly reviewed written comments from Mr. Roger McIntosh. Ms. Don Carlos referred to page 3, "Landscape standards" of the site plan review document, and requested that if a manual does exist they would like the opportunity to review it. Ms. Don Carlos stated her concerns with item F. "shade tree" that there be a little more flexibility perhaps performance standards rather than simply saying a shade tree is a evergreen tree of that dimension. Ms. Don Carlos referred to page 10 FC. Revisions to Applications and asked if it is anticipated that there would be more work to be done if it were denied in the first place and revised thin if it were approved in the first place and then revised. Mr. Hardisty reviewed both the revisions after a denial and revisions after approval. Ms. ~on Carlos referenced page 11 #6 and stated conditions the two sections are referenced do not apply. ' Minutes, P1/C, 3/21/91 Page 12 13. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 17.53"(SITE PLAN REVIEW) (continUed) Mr. Hardisty commented that he would like to report back to the Commission on this item at the next meeting. . Ms. Don carlos regerred to H. of page 11, and indicated they would like to see commencement'of construction remain and two and one-half years due~to'concerns with financing problems and other contingencies. Mr. Hardisty'did not believe that 2 1/2 years was necessary to give a person assurances that' the ordinances are going to be the same. 'Ms. Don Carlos referred to page 12, Landscape requiremgnts and stan- dards, paragraph B and commented on the concern by the civil engineers in the association that it is extremely difficult to get landscaping plans through the Parks Department in a timely manner that .requiring that the landscape plans be approved prior to the final approval of the site plan would almost necessitate some kind of a time restriction and performance requirement for the Parks Department to respond in a timely manner with their approval. Mr. Hardisty replied that a reSp°nse to a~plan should be done in a timely manner and .landscaping of private property is not reviewed by the Parks Department. ~ Ms~ Don Carlos referred to pages 12 and 14 ~egarding completion of landscaPing Pr~ior to occupancy and surety bonds and asked that clarifi- cation needs to be made that upon approval of the 'Planning ~Director in that it makes two statements that are not quite the~same. Mr. Hardisty suggested that in the terms of response to plan~ in a timely'manner that the Planning Director be given the authority to be able to press the other departments on quick turn-arounds on plans. Mr. Dennis Fox made comment with respect to conformance of AB 235 of 199Owhich requires that all jurisdictions have a master landscape plan' that conforms to drought conditions. Mr. Hardisty informed Mr. Fox and Commission t~at staff is aware of the new law and is preparing for its implementation. There being no others wishing to speak, public=hearing was closed. Commissioner Marino referred to page 1, Section 17.53..030, first sentence, Clarify change of dse; page 1, item A, the E Zone should be ~inserted; page 3, Section 17.53.051 asked why Commission is reviewing them if Council adopts standards and policies. Mr. Hardisty replied that the Planning Commission has the authority to adopt them but the City Coudcil is in the position of having to endorse them The City Council cannot change them, simply adopt them. Minutes, P1/C, 3/21/91 Page 13 13. AMEND SECTION 17.53 (SITE PLAN REVIEW) (continued) Commissioner Marino referred to page 11, item 6, Specific Plan Lines for freeway right-of-way and indicated he shares the BIA'S concerns. He also indicated that an item 7 could be added which would be an implementation of overlook policies, page 13, in compliance is not"one word. Motion was made by Commissioner Marino to continue this hearing to the APril 4, 1991 meeting. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Bjorn, and carried. 14. VERBAL COMMUNICATION Mr. Hardisty informed Commission that the City Council referred the Omni-Mean study which was commissioned by the Kern Council of Governments to determine the appropriate cost and sharing of cost for roads in the metropolitan area to the Planning Commission to work out the det'aits of t~ose calculations to study it and make recommendation to Council. At the same time it was referred to the Intergovernmental Relations Committee to stay in synchronization with the.County's efforts. 15. COMMISSIQN COMMENTS' Chairperson Rosenlieb asked for a workshop to cover lot size and take a closer look at the Matrix. 16. ADJOURNMENT~ . There being no further business to come before the Commission, meeting was adjourned at 9:53 p.m. Isabel Williams Recording Secretary