Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/04/96MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMM/SSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Held Thursday, January 4, 1996, 5:30 p.m., City Council Chamber, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California. 2. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: Present: JEFF ANDREW, Chairperson DOUG DELGADO, Vice-Chairperson STEPHEN BOYLE MATHEW BRADY KENNETH HERSH ROBERT ORTIZ WADE TAVORN MICHAEL DHANENS ADVISORY MEMBERS: Present: JUDY SKOUSEN, City Attorney JACK LAROCHELLE, Civil Engineer STAFF: Present: STANLEY GRADY, Planning Director MARC GAUTHIER, Principal Planner ISABEL WILLIAMS, Recording Secretary Chairman Andrew gave an Overview of the December meeting. MARKETPLACE EIR - COMMENTS ON THE DE1R (continued from the 12/21/95 meeting) Jill Kleiss asked those that were present and for downsizing the Marketplace to stand. She then made reference to the 2010 General Plan, page 2-19. Ann Anderson stated that the planning review system be examined. Michael Callagy with Cornerstone Engineering representing the 22 members of the California Council of Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors in the Kern Chapter plead on behalf of the engineers and surveyors to the Commission to recommend certification of the EIR, make whatever mitigation measures there are to make, and let the project proceed. Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 2 MARKETPLACE EIR - COMMENTS oN THE DEIR Michael McCabe commented that the Marketplace plan is a very bad idea. He also stated that the concept and the negative issues that will come out of the implementation of the current plan, should it take place will be a profound disappointment to the entire community. He also stated that a downsized plan would be an enhancement to the Bakersfield community at large. Mary Jo Ek commented that Castle & Cooke has the right to develop a commercial project; however, the EIR is not adequate and should not be accepted, recommended or certified in its present form. Maurice Etchechury referred to agenda item #7.3 and asked that it be continued to the next available meeting and requested that it be placed on the consent calendar. Bob Wright, attorney representing the Southwest Community Action Committee stated that a pro-business point of view is to get the facts first then act. Leon Lim urged the Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council to use the 1992 Castle & Cooke plan as a design basis. Mark Ashley spoke in opposition. David Milazzo represented himself as a private citizen and an architect commented that project exceeds any other project you could measure against in our community. It is a far more high quality project. Commissioner Hersh asked Mr. Milazzo how would he define the objective of CEQA. Mr. Milazzo replied that is purely a vehicle to allow the government planning process to be sure that a project isn't unduly impacting a segment or an area of the community. Each E1R has its own unique focus based on the criteria and the project that its looking at. Conni Brunni commented she supports private property rights, supports legitimate planning decision with proper zoning, and supports the appropriate technical roll of the Planning Commission and supports the Marketplace in whatever format is consistent with the zoning ordinances adopted and enforced within this city. She further stated that she is concerned about the continuing rewriting of history undertaken by certain members of the audience and the Planning Commission from time to time who have referred to themselves as the Southwest Community Action Committee. Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 3 MARKET PLACE E1R - COMMENTS ON DE1R She also stated that this property has been zoned since 1993. She further stated that - Castle & Cooke are doing what the neighbors told them to do in 1992. There was an EIR done in 1973 as well as 5 years of hearings held from 1985 to 1990 and another EIR adopted in 1990 by the Planning Commission and through the Bakersfield City Council. She read the following comment into the record, "During an interview with a then Planning Commissioner applicant, I asked him if he had been involved with the group opposed to rezoning at Ming and Gosford and advocating that the project be built at mid- Ming, he said no. After he was appointed to the Planning Commission, I confronted him with documentation that he had in fact been involved, and he restated his position to yes, he had been involved. As hearing judges, I question this Planning Commissioners ability in this particular instance to be impartial on this matter, "please note I am not naming this particular individual because I do not want it to be construed as personal". The fourth item is, I believe the EIR on this project is necessary, but it is more than adequate. Based on a local judges ruling, your roll as a Planning Commission has been objurgated. If all project decisions are to be political from this point forward, the city doesn't need a Planning Commission. It also doesn't need a full time professionally trained staff`to review the technical merits of projects because everything will simply be an emotional and political free for all, and I am concerned as a property owner what that commentary means for the future of my personal property values. If everything is simply emotional, it will become a campaign it sounds like. That is very sad. Since an EIR is already done for this project, it is a moot point. The EIR before you, I believe is more than adequate, and I will close with a comment as I tried to read the last time from the bible, the Holy Bible. It is from Romans 16 versus 17 and 18. It is a letter written by Paul to the Romans, and as we know the Romans ignored Paul and they fell: I urge you brothers to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teachings you have learned. Keep away from them for such people are not serving our Lord Christ but their own appetite by fluid talk and flattery, they deceived. I will repeat that, for such people are not serving our Lord Christ but their own appetite, be not deceived." Commissioner Hersh referred to the March 1990 EIR that Ms. Brunni voted against and asked her what that was concerned with. She replied that it was the 2010 General Plan and it covered a large number of properties that had been in place for a long time, and there was an opportunity at that time for those folks to revisit any issues and concerns that might have been there. Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 4 o o MARKET PLACE EIR - PUBLIC HEARING ON DEIR (continued) Dave Homestead will speak later in the meeting. Hollis Carlisle stated his concern for the marketing available for this shopping center. The Marketplace is a regional shopping mall, it cannot depend on a one or two mile circle for customers. At this time the area to the west is not fully developed which means there is not any customers to draw from. Robert Karpe commented that this marketplace facility is the best and perhaps only chance to regain part of the high end market which Bakersfield has lost, and that means employment. Barbara Norcross spoke in favor of the project. PUBLIC STATEMENTS Chairman read the notice of fight to appeal as set forth on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Brady stated that at the pre-meeting he asked Ms. Davis, the recording secretary to check into the spelling of one of the names in the November 16, 1995 minutes and received a note JACO Oil should have been spelled EMJAYCO and requested that an amendment to the motion be made to adopt with respect to November 16, 1995 minutes this correction to that name. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Hersh, and carded. Commissioner Dhanens stated he would not be able to participate on this item, as his firm has received income from the developer within the last 12 months. Commissioner Boyle asked for a 5-minute break. Commissioner Delgado stated that he was not present at the pre-meeting but listened to the tapes. Chairman Andrew stated that a couple of requests have been made to move some items forward. Motion was made by Commissioner Hersh to move items 6, 7, 9 forward for action at this time. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Brady. Motion carded. Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 5 REVISED TENTATIVE TRACT 5679 (PHASED/VESTING) Chairman Andrew stated he had a conflict of interest because he has received income from DeWalt in the last year. Commissioner Delgado stated that he also has a conflict since he rePresents the subdivider in this matter. Commissioner Hersh chaired the meeting. Staff report was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened. There was no one present wishing to speak either in favor or opposition, public hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady to adopt resolution, making all findings set forth in the staff report, and to approve proposed Revised Vesting Tentative Tract 5679, and modification for reduced lot area, width, frontage and depth, subject to the conditions outlined in Exhibit "A" and the January 3, 1996 memo from Jacques LaRochelle to the Planning Commission. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Ortiz, and carried. EXTENSION OF TIME - TENTATIVE TRACT 5418 Staff report was given. Public hearing was opened. Patricia Harbison with Sequoia Engineering represented the developer on this item and accepted the conditions as written. Public hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Delgado to adopt a resolution to approve a one year extension of time for tentative tract 5418 to expire December 19, 1996, in accordance with the conditions outlined in Exhibit "A". Motion was seconded by Commissioner Ortiz, and carried. Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 6 7.2 EXTENSION OF TIME - TENTATIVE TRACT 5456 Staff report 'was given. Public hearing was opened. Patricia Harbison with Sequoia Engineering represented the developer and accept the conditions as written. Public hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady to adopt resolution to make all findings set forth in the staff report, and to approve a one year extension of time for Tentative Tract 5456 to expire December 20, 1996, subject to.the conditions outlined in Exhibit "A". Motion was seconded by Commissioner Ortiz, and carried. EXTENSION.OF TIME - TENTATIVE TRACT 5661 A request to continue item this to the next regular meeting was made by Maurice Etchechury earlier in the meeting. Commissioner Hersh made the motion to continue this item to the next regular meeting. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Brady, and carried. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDING - DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY AT 28 AUGUSTA STREET, APN #0!8-180-02 Staff report was given. Public hearing was opened. There was no one present wishing to speak either in favor or opposition, public hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Delgado to make a findings pursuant to Government Code Section 65402, that the proposed sale by the County of the residential parcel at 28 August Street is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Ortiz, and carried. Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 7 5. MARKETPLACE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT -- TIME SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR Public hearing was opened. Dave Homestead commented that in studying the EIR and in the associate references that the study really does lack site specific collaboration issues such as the accelerated growth as a result of the project and diversionary trips the university students take to fast foods. Mr. Homestead proposed mitigation that he thought would make this a better project such as reducing the size of the project by eliminating satellite pads because these are the pads that have the real high traffic, trip-per-hour load ratios. Fast food, mini-marts, 12-pump gas stations. Reduce the scope of the project from this mega mall to a neighborhood center. Reduce the theaters to 2,000 seats. Reduce the headlight stream traffic impacts by installing landscape mediums in Scarlet Oaks and Haggin Oaks to help the traffic in crossing the street. Restrict the remaining satellite pads, the low traffic businesses such as girls, florists, etc., and in particular, consider the alternative site plan. Consider passing along a recommendation to the City Council to adopt the alternative site plan, which simply moves the pads to the back of the center. Commit office space currently depicted on the site plan to remain office space through deed restriction so that in any case a commercial outfit cannot come into the offices by deed restriction. Eliminate the mid- block ego traffic light. Increase the height of the block walls on the south side of Ming Avenue to Gosford Road and includes Stockdale Estates due to resulting traffic and truck noise that would be coming down to access this center. Reduce the hours of operation to 10:00 to 7:00 p.m. Hollis Carlile made his comments related to the APCD letter of December 30, 1995, pointed out a discrepancy between what was provided by the ARB and the DEIR regarding the supermarket and the number of trips per square feet. He also stated a need to correct the traffic estimates so there will be realistic figures as to what the traffic is going to be. Also, the APCD suggested mitigation means such as people using buses and bicycles to the shopping center. The people in that area don't ride buses and bicycles, so there needs to be better mitigation methods than that. The Al>CD also suggested offsets of emissions be obtained for this project. This will only help the regional air basin but will do nothing for the area, for the shopping center of the surrounding area. The APCD also lists 15 mistakes in the EIR which can be readily corrected. Jill Kleiss addressed the shared parking premise. The shared parking concept sounds like a very good idea and, in fact, probably is because oftentimes, one will go to the grocery store, at the same time pick up a prescription and that sort of thing. Mark Ashley commented on the commercial impacts as outlined on Page 1-3 of the DEIR, Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 8 MARKET PLACE EIR - COMMENTS ON DEIR (continued) indicating that it attempts to address crime and indicates that the primary mitigation effort to be utilized is a security service to be operated by the tenants of the project. He also made reference to page 7-6 of the EIR where it clearly stated that the alternative site plan is environmentally superior to the Marketplace center plan, and asked that the Commission pay careful attention to that paragraph and recommend that the alternative site plan be utilized. Ruth Gelman asked that the economic impact be addressed completely to see the impact benefit cost analysis, the impact on these different strip commercials, all the shopping centers, everything that has been put in over the years, and now they look about one-third empty. Bob Wright, attorney representing the Southwest Community Action Committee and Jill Kleiss commented that the EIR does not address economic and social impacts of approving the project. He also stated that there are going to be a number of very serious environmental issues such as air pollution violations, traffic, noise, farm land conversion, and the ground water overdraft. Mr. Wright wished to make a memo from Sergeant Henry of the Bakersfield Police to ChiefBrummer, information on Valley Plaza. This is January through December of 1995. "Valley Plaza had 2 robberies, 4 assaults, 15 peace disturbances, 457 thefts, 5 vandalisms, 26 auto thefts, 101 forgeries. East Hills Mall, 2 robberies, 1 assault, 1 peace disturbance, 80 thefts, 6 vandalisms, 15 auto thefts, 20 forgeries. White Lane and Gosford, 2 robberies, 3 assaults, 1 peace disturbance, 18 thefts, no vandalisms, no auto thefts, 17 forgeries, 13 public intoxications. UA-6 Theater, 4 thefts, 5 auto thefts, 2 public intoxications." He further commented that this is an example of the EIR just not taking that candid, hard look giving that environmental full disclosure of what the true cost of doing this actually are. Bruce Freeman representative of Castle & Cooke clarified that on the Buena Vista project, that project is a completely separate project and at some point will go through a full EIR with a public hearing. He also stated that crime comes with more shopping and people and population and the degree of the crime on the site is entirely up to the adequacy of the on-site management company. Phyllis Hawkins resident near the White Lane Vons/Wal-Man shopping center stated in order to have food in Vons and to have clothing in these retail stores and movies in these movie theaters, there will be large trucks. She did not feel that the DEIR considers some of these things such as lights, the noise and the deliveries, she knows she has put up with it for a couple of years. Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 9 5-minute recess was taken. MARKET PLACE EIR - PUBLIC HEARING ON DEIR (continued) Larry Hoggle stated that in reviewing the EIK other than the air quality and attainment status that has been discussed before, was also discussed by the environmental consultant last time, that there are no significant impacts in this EIR and in this project. It was his opinion that the traffic impacts are overstated in this report. He also stated that the EIR's aren't held to a standard of absolute perfection but require that the city has made an objective, good faith attempt at full disclosure and exhaustive issues are not required. Roger Mclntosh addressing traffic stated that'his firm did an independent study prior to this EIR and reiterated that Ming Avenue is designed to carry 60,000 cars per day, so there's more than enough capacity in that system to carry the traffic. He also stated that in designing the site they have 12 points of access to the site. Public hearing was closed. Chairperson Andrew stated for the record that all of the documents he has received will be put in the public record. Commissioner Brady stated that he has turned over the piles of information and disclosed that he has read articles in the paper on the Marketplace. He also stated that the focus of his record review has been on the adequacy of the EIR, not whether for or against it. Discussion took place between Chairperson Andrew and Planning Director Grady regarding retail use versus office building use and parking if at some point and time office space is changed to retail space. Planning Director Grady replied that when a site plan review is submitted, the project is evaluated based on whatever was submitted. Commissioner Brady asked if there was any way that an attempt can be made to obtain a condition on the project, if the portions on the project which are now designated as office space are changed, that there is a public review process involved with the Planning Commission and City Council. Planning Director Grady replied that it would not come back to Commission because the Commission is only looking at the adequacy of the EIR unless the Commission were to find that there was some impact that may be mitigated by requiring that some different Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 10 MARKET PLACE EIR - PUBLIC HEARING ON DEIR (continued level of review, other than what's provided in the ordinance, would be necessitated because it's going to have some other impact. Commissioner Brady asked if it's a feasible mitigation factor to place a berm as a part of the landscaping around the gas station. Roger Mclntosh replied that some of the exterior of these projects or of the buildings along Ming Avenue are designed to be esthetically pleasing, go well beyond what is typically seen in a stuccoed wall. There's a lot of brick treatment, etc., and to mitigate noise, it is feasible to put a berm around that gas station, and other impacts such as lighting have to have a pretty high berm, but it's something that could be looked at. Commissioner Brady asked about the nearest connection to the bike path along the river from this project. Jacque LaRochelle replied that the nearest connection was directly through Cai State in which a new access point and bridge onto the bike path through the signal at Dawn Heart Drive East is being completed. Commissioner Brady asked Mr. Mclntosh about the feasibility of having bike lanes from Camino Media to Old River Road to the bike path. Roger Mclntosh replied that he has spoken to Dr. Secor prior to his retirement from Cal State, about the opportunity to provide bicycle lanes or access through the university, and Dr. Secor assured us that anyone is eligible or available, free to go onto their campus to get the bicycle access, pedestrian access, or vehicular access through the campus. City Attorney Judy Skousen apprised Commission as to what their role is here because the Commission seems to be getting a little bit afield. Commissioner Brady stated that if he was not able to to question the consultant concerning the comments made by the San Joaquin Valley Pollution Control District then he would be unable to judge the adequacy of this DEIR because he would not know whether these comments were significant or not. He then raised all those concerns as set fOrth by the San Joaquin Valley Pollution Control District in its letter conceming the Draft EIR as potential reasons why theDEIR is not adequate. He raised concerns about the models used to determine the vehicle trip ends for the project. Jacque LaRochelle replied they do not look at the number of trips that are taken away from another development. What is looked at is the number of trips that are produced by that development. Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 11 MARKET PLACE EIR - PUBLIC HEARING DEIR (continued) Commissioner HerSh referred to the water section, Section 5.4 which discussed the county water system and should go into more depth about the city water bank and the water service companies and the wells in the area, the down draft to those systems over the years, and some kind of projected effect in the end that this project will have. Commissioner Hersh also referred to comments made by the APCD on the air quality and their concerns with the level of inaccuracy of information provided in the document to support the emissions calculations assigned to this project. They also pointed out that, whereas the air quality evaluation in Chapter 5 of this Draft EIR attempts to be a fairly comprehensive dissertation of air pollution problems, and for this reason finds that the portion of the air quality needs to be amended. Commissioner Hersh stated that a good faith effort was made to model growth using.a 4 percent per year escalator and was concerned that the impacts will be much greater than the model. There is also no accumulative impact assessment on the additional noise generated by this project and its traffic, along with the other related projects and the adjacent.vacant acreage. He also stated his concern about the level of Service C and the maintenance of that level of Service C, and finds a bit of inadequacy in the traffic and considerable questions by the public. On impact fees, Commissioner Hersh stated there is no DEIR discussion anywhere whether development assessment fees are adequate in terms of public services, including traffic improvements, schools, police and fire. Commissioner Hersh addressed economic impacts commenting that development of this huge center will likely take business from other locations, including downtown, resulting in closure and eventual physical deterioration of those areas and centers. In closing, Commissioner Hersh commented that the DEIR fails to serve as a basis for informed public review and comments on the project. The DE1R fails to serve as the legally required instrument of information about this project and its environmental impacts so as to afford informed public in the public agency review of this project. He further commented that he would like to see all the comments made by the public, taken properly as an EIR, as a DEIR, and all the comments made by the Commission, and I would like to see a recirculation of the DEIR becauset believe it's required because, as it stands, it's inadequate, and in nature it needs further review. Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 12 MARKET PLACE EIR - COMMENTS ON DEIR (continued) Commissioner Boyle made the disclosure of all the documents he has received as well as conversations with people during the last six weeks. Commissioner Boyle wanted to make sure he understood that in looking at this EIK are they assuming that a recommendation is made of inadequacy, it's not that the Commission is saying there's no impact but instead saying there's no significant impact after the mitigation.'? City Attorney, Judy Skousen replied, that is correct. If the Commission makes the recommendation that the EIR be found adequate, the Commission is saying that all of the significant environmental impacts have been addressed and that they have the mitigation measures, to mitigate them to a level of insignificant, and when the questions are raised, those can be responded to. Commissioner Boyle asked Jacque LaRochelle for his department's position about an impediment, that shared parking doesn't work. Jacque LaRochelle replied that his department usually looks at parking configuration rather than parking number, and referred the question onto Planning Director Grady. Planning Director Grady commented that the department has had that experience with other projects because most of them are typically done with buildings setback and all the parking in the front. If you believe that multiple trips are going to be reduced because you can't get to the theater unless you walk down the promenade, which they are designing for people to walk down to get to the theater, I think assuming the people will be shopping, then maybe one might view promenades as an impediment. We have not had a theater in the back with its own separate parking and parking out front for other in-line tenants. Chairperson Andrew recognized Roger McIntosh who Commented that the shared parking model is, if you have a use that is not being in use at the same time that another use on the site is being used, like a grocery, store is not being used the same time as a theater might be in use, then you can use the shared parking and use those same parking spaces that would normally be required for that as a separate use to combine the two and use that as shared parking. As to an impediment, Mr. Mclntosh did not know where that comes into as an issue since the center's designed to allow you to go to the center and have pedestrian access through the theater, to the back, to the front, and all around the site. The model is designed to allow for the uses in different times of the day or of the week. Commissioner Boyle asked Jacque LaRochelle about the advantages and disadvantages of timed lights as opposed to trip lights. Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 13 MARKETPLACE EIR - PUBLIC HEARING DEIR (continued) Jacque LaRochelle replied that most all of the traffic signals in the City of Bakersfield are traffic-actuated. Whether it's a camera or whether it's a loop of wire stuck in the road, it's a traffic actuator. He then used California Avenue in between Stockdale Highway and Real Road as an example indicating the main street of California' Avenue has a background cycle and would create a synchronization phase. A sync phase, all of the lights are · therefore timed in step with that sync phase, and then the side streets are allowed to be actuated or activated in certain windows only. If a vehicle were to trip that, the side street or a left turn within that window, then to get through sometimes in the side streets, you have to wait a little bit longer. The progression on the main streets takes precedence over the side street. So that's what we do in that situation. Commissioner Boyle asked what was envisioned for this project. Jacque LaRochelle replied that this project would be done in a similar fashion. In addition, part of the initial study was to do a progression analysis, and there are various tools. He further commented that a passer model was done, which is a program that is used, and also a Transit 7-F model to make sure that the spacing signals are adequate, that they would allow for a good progression of traffic to go through at one time. That is all calculated in with the level of service, in the delay, average delays for all phases, each intersection. Commissioner Boyle was concerned with traffic impact on pass-through traffic into the Oaks, Haggin Oaks, and then asked if a "Not a through street" sign could be put up. Jacque La_Rochelle replied the city does not do that. In closing, Commissioner Boyle commented that the E1R in general is sufficient to make an informed decision. There is the DEIR, four hours of public testimony last week, several hours of public testimony tonight, voluminous written reports, and it would be absurd that the record that has been generated to this point and that record will be further supplemented by additional responses by the lead agency will not be sufficient to give necessary information to the city to identify items which require mitigation, and felt that the entire process will give the city the information they need to make that decision. He further commented that on items for mitigation, he did believe there does need to be a bike lane on Camino Media, and there should be a pedestrian light at Oaks and Camino Media so that, if people go to things like little league, they will have a way to cross that street. He also felt that the project should include an internal multi use path for bicycles. He also commented that all-weather public transit stop should be a mitigation measure, with designated walkway to the center. Another reasonable mitigation measure mentioned by the Air Quality Board is preferential parking for employees of Ride Share. Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 14 MARKET PLACE EIR - COMMENTS DEIR (continued) On noise issues, Commissioner Boyle felt that increasing the wall size on South Ming due to both noise and to glare from headlights is a reasonable mitigation measure, and landscaping on the south of the project and staggered landscaping as well so that the fast food outlets and gas station are truly sheltered off. On the issue of the 14 screen theater is a red herring. Commissioner Ortiz commented that he was concerned about some of the negative impacts that were brought up because the lack of positive impacts that were brought up about this project. The revenue of sales tax will help out the City of Bakersfield considerably with the stores that will be going into the shopping center complex. He also commented on the increase in employment opportunities for young adults, as well as entry level people. As for crime, this is not going to be a closed mall, there will not be an accumulation of young adults other than around that service station or mini-mart. He further commented this will be an up-scale, positive development and will be recommending that this EIR is adequate to City Council. Commissioner Delgado commented that he is trying to look at the project itself, the zoning, whether the issues that are before the Commission have been mitigated or not. If there are problems with the regional traffic impact studies or if there's problems with other things, we'll work on those down the road, and let's get on it if there's problems, but let's not penalize something that was designed and approved based on the current codes. Commissioner Delgado also commented that the issue of growth was mitigated because the EIR showed a 4 percent annual increase. He also believed that what is trying to be done is as the 2010 plan states, to create hubs where people will go for one-stop shopping instead of going here for the movies and there for the groceries and her for a yogurt. There were also comments made that growth increases traffic and continues to increase and increase at an intersection. He gave several'examples of various intersections within the city where the intersections have been the busiest over the years to show that growth doesn't necessarily mean that the traffic is just going to continue and continue to grow at this intersection. Commissioner Delgado went on to say that EIR's are never going to be perfect, but it's designed to mitigate issues to the point that they're not significant. He also commented that from his point of view and as a businessman, the DEIR is adequate. A brief recess was taken. Commissioner Brady asked for Robert Veflaan's comments regarding the San Joaquin Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 15 MARKET PLACE E1R - PUBLIC HEARING ON DEIR (continued) Unified Air Pollution Control District suggestions. In reply, Robert Veflaan stated that the basic findings for the air quality of the EIR, requirement for air quality is that, on a cumulative basis, the air quality impacts are significant. The basis for that findings is that you're in nonattainment. The basin is in nonattainment, and in this particular area, the project specific air quality emissions were looked at in two basic ways. There is a certain amount of stationary emission threshold and standards against which the emissions are based, and we are under those thresholds. For mobile emissions, there are no thresholds of significance, and so the projects impacts were declared as insignificant on the basis of the project's designed mitigation measures that are incorporated into the project, and it was our opinion that the determination of significance rests with the lead agency and remembering that the Dr~ EIR is part of a process to get to a final EIR. Commissioner Brady indicated his concern with respect to the undemtilizationofthe prope.rty as well as the people who live on Ming Avenue and Camino Media. Commissioner Brady further commented that this E1R, Draft EIR is not perfect. The law doesn't require it to be. However, in most areas it's adequate. There needs to be some mitigation, and agreed with many items of mitigation. Commissioner Delgado commented that one thing that bothers him about this EIR is the conclusionary nature and didn't have a diversification of opinions to look at, perhaps maybe a pro and con approach. He concluded that he is not ready to come to a decision as to whether this EIR, DEIR is adequate or not, and it will not be adequate until there is a doCUment which is going to be reviewed by City Council. Chairperson Andrew commented that it has always been his understanding that this was a special EIR, that the Planning Commission was not to vote on, rather to hold public hearing, take input, put our input in, and pass it on to City Council. Commissioner Hersh asked Planning Director Grady if a regional traffic impact study was being done on this project. Planning Director Grady replied there is an ordinance in place that adopts the regional impact fee. Commissioner Hersh stated that until he sees some improvement on the present DEIR, and see some of the things that have been addressed by the public both graphically and verbally in this E1R, then he would not be willing to consider its adequacy at this point. Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 16 MARKET PLACE EIR - PUBLIC HEARING ON DEIR (continued) It has nothing to do with the project. It has nothing to do with the zoning. It has nothing to do with anything else in that area. Chairperson Andrew asked counsel if a motion was needed to include into the EIR the comments made by the Commission. City Attorney, Judy Skousen replied the City Council has the authority to add these comments or any other comments to the EIR if they desire. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady to add Commission's comments to the EIR. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Boyle, and carded. Motion was made by Commissioner Hersh to include the public arguments, graphically and verbally after the public hearing was reopened in the EIR to the City Council. Commissioner Delgado seconded the motion. Motion carded. Commissioner Hersh asked the City Attorney what happens at this point. City Attorney, Judy Skousen stated that the comments would be forwarded to the City Council. What you have before you is the DEIR, and you have made your comments on that DEIR. The document that you are requesting to see is the FEIR, and that document will only be Presented under City CEQA guidelines to the City Council. So the City Council will have before it the FE1R, which will include all public comments received during the public comment periods and the consultant's responses to all of those comments, and that will make up the FEIR that's presented to the City Council. At that time the Council can make a determination whether or not they wish to certify the EIR as it's submitted to them, whether they wish to add your comments, to add the public comments at the public hearing tonight, whether they wish to add their own comments, whether they wish to make modifications} changes, or suggestions. Once they have made all those determinations, if, in fact, they substantially change the project or the mitigation measures or the information in the EL-R, then they will be called upon to make a decision about whether or not they have so substantially changed the items in the information of the EIR that they would want to, or it would need to be recirculated. However, it is not within our guidelines that the Commission review a FEIR, only review the DEIR. Minutes, PC, 1/4/96 Page 17 10. 11. 12. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONE CHANGE #P95-0113 Staff repOrt was given. Public hearing was opened. Jeff French was present and amenable to stew s recommendation. Public hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Boyle to adopt resolution with the findings and facts as set forth in the staff report approving the negative declaration and approving the requested zoning from RS (Residential Suburban) to R-1 (One Family Dwelling) on.84 acres as shown on Exhibit "A", and recommend same to the City Council. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Hersh, and carried.by the following roll call vote: AYES: Boyle, Brady, Delgado, Hersh, Ortiz, Tavorn, Andrew COMMUNICATIONS There were no written or verbal communications. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Hersh reminded the Subdivision Committee they will meet next week. CommissiOner Hersh asked that the City Attorney come up witha good wholesome alternative to the present site plan review process. Commissioner Delgado requested an educational workshop that would discuss the roll of a Planning Commissioner and what the responsibilities are prior to the next EIR. City Attorney Skousen replied they can work on putting together a workshop. Chairman Andrew commented that he appreciated how professionally Commission and staff were while the EIR hearings were going on. DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THE NEXT PRE-MEETING Motion was made by Commissioner Tavorn to cancel the next regular pre-meeting. Motion carried. Minutes, PC, 1/4/96~ Page 18 13. There being no further business to come before the Commission meeting was adjourned at 12:30 a.m. Isabel Williams Recording Secretary Planning Director