HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-15-07 MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
Regular Meeting – March 15, 2007 - 12:00 p.m.
Council Chambers, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue
1. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Lomas, Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish, Tkac
Advisory Members: Bob Sherfy, Jim Movius, Marian Shaw, Steve Ewing
Staff: Jim Eggert, Robin Gessner, Marc Gauthier
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS:
Susan Aragon would like to speak on 5.4a, 5.4b and 5.4c. Ms. Aragon stated she is a resident of Silver
Creek and is concerned with the commercial locations all within 1-2 miles of this proposed project. She
stated with the downturn in real estate she does not understand how the southwest can support another
commercial project. She further indicated that the traffic on Panama Lane is unbearable and adding
another shopping center is just going to increase the traffic. She asked that enough research be done on
the possible economic and environmental impacts that this type of project would bring to a rather quiet
community.
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Non-Public Hearing Items
4.1a Approval of minutes for Planning Commission meeting of February 15, 2007.
Commissioner McGinnis moved, seconded by Commissioner Blockley, to approve the
February 15, 2007 Minutes.
Motion carried by group vote.
4.2 Public Hearing Items
4.2a Approval of General Plan Amendment 05-1551(Jerry Hendricks)
4.2b Approval of Zone Change 05-1561 (Jerry Hendricks)
4.2c Approval of General Plan Amendment 06-1031Dominique Minaerrigarai)
(
4.2d Approval of Zone Change 06-1031 (Dominique Minaberrigarai)
4.2e Approval of General Plan Amendment 06-1039 (McIntosh and Associates)
4.2f Approval of Zone Change 06-1039(McIntosh and Associates)
4.2g Approval of General Plan Amendment 06-1052(Maurice Etchechury)
4.2h Approval of Zone Change 06-1052(Maurice Etchechury)
Planning Commission – March 15, 2007 Page 2
4.2i Approval of Planned Commercial Development 06-2260 – Preliminary Development
Plan(Maurice Etchechury)
4.2j Approval of General Plan Amendment 06-1099(John Thomsen)
4.2k Approval of Zone Change 06-1099(John Thomsen)
Commissioner Tkac joined the Commission at 5:37 pm. Commissioner Tkac indicated that
he has listened to Monday’s pre-meeting and is prepared to participate in tonight’s
meeting. He further declared a conflict on agenda items 4.2c, 4.2d, 4.2g, 4.2h and 4.2i.
The public hearing is opened. David Dominguez, Cultural Resource Manager for the
Chumash Council of Bakersfield, stated he would like to remove items 4.2 c and d, 4.2 g
and h 4.2 e and f from the consent calendar.
Commissioner Spencer requested removal of item 4.2e and f, which are agenda item 5.3a
and b.
Commissioner Blockley declared a conflict on 4.2g, h and i.
Commissioner Tragish stated that he reviewed the pre-meeting CD, and further
commented that he would like to pull 4.2g, h and I, which are regular agenda items 5.4a, b
and c.
Commissioner Lomas indicated that 4.2a, 4.2b, 4.2j, and 4.2k remain on the consent
calendar.
Commissioner McGinnis moved, seconded by Commissioner Blockley, to approve consent
agenda items 4.2a, 4.2b, 4.2j, and 4.2k.
Motion carried by roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Lomas, Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tkac, Tragish
NAYS: None
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS – GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS / Land Use Element Amendments /
Zone Changes/PCD Preliminary Development Plans
5.1a General Plan Amendment 05-1561 (Jerry Hendricks)
5.1b Zone Change 05-1561 (Jerry Hendricks)
Heard on consent calendar.
5.2a General Plan Amendment 06-1031 (Dominique Minaberrigarai)
5.2b Zone Change 06-1031 (Dominique Minaberrigarai)
th
The public hearing is opened, staff report given. Staff pointed out that the March 12 memo from
th
Public Works, and the March 12 memo from the Planning Dept. need to be incorporated into
your motion. Dave Dominguez stated that due to the canal that is going through the property
there is the possibility that there might be impact to a cultural area. He stated that he would like
to see some mitigation measures which reflect information to the actual earth movers to make
them aware of proposal measures to take place if any cultural items are uncovered.
Dominique Minaberrigarai, the applicant, stated he is available to answer any questions. He
stated that they are not planning on doing any construction on the canal.
Planning Commission – March 15, 2007 Page 3
The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Blockley stated that previous concerns in the past
with similar projects as this one has been the potential for a county island, and they would like to
modify the condition to provide a half-width improvement so roads don’t zigzag in and out.
th
Commissioner Blockley said they would like to add a condition, which is on the March 12
memo, which would state that, “access to the project area from the nearest fully improved public
roadway is provided by substandard road” and follow that with “the development of the project
area, improved access to the site must be provided on Ashe Road.” He pointed out that the
modification would be that the “required improvements shall be half-width improvements meeting
city standards for arterial roads.” And the rest of the condition would remain as is.
Commissioner Lomas gave further explanation as to what is being asked for regarding the road
improvements and that this is a mechanism that the Planning Commission came up with a
couple of years ago called the David Gay condition. This condition provides half width
improvements which are streets, curb and gutters so that these improvements won’t be delayed
and provides increased safety for the public.
Staff indicated that they are asking for a “tailgate” session where someone goes on site with the
construction crew and explains the importance of certain things they may find on site that are
different than what a cultural resources survey may be looking at. Staff further commented that
a cultural resource study was done on this project and it did not recommend this “tailgate
session.” Staff pointed out that their concerns are: 1) the canal issue is a concern because they
don’t know how long that canal has been there, and may not have been around when someone
might have settled next to it. However, this hasn’t been researched. 2) There are some minor
word changes recommended. Staff stated that it is not detrimental and would not necessarily
slow down the project, and therefore Staff is agreement to this condition was worded.
Commissioner Tragish inquired if the applicant gets any credit for doing something over and
beyond what initially would improve a frontage. Staff responded that this portion of Ashe Road is
not on the transportation impact fee facility list, and therefore there would be no traffic impact fee
credits for completing that roadway. Commissioner Tragish inquired if there is any other way to
give the applicant credit for doing extra work and the additional costs the applicant has to
advance. Staff responded that park credit would not be available for that either, and the only
thing that could be offered would be that the Map Act does give a mechanism for
reimbursements for roadways for formation of a bridge and major thoroughfare area that would
essentially only benefit that interim parcel. Commissioner Tragish inquired if there currently is a
condition in it that would provide for this. Staff responded that there might be for the canal
crossing that could possibly be expanded. Staff responded condition 9 could be expanded to
include wording for Ashe Road half-width improvement.
Commissioner Johnson inquired if there is a mechanism where by the future developer of the
county island parcel to the north can reimburse this applicant should that come in and they are
able to reap the reward of the full improvements. Staff responded that the modifications to
Condition 9 will provide for this.
Commissioner Blockley moved, to adopt a Resolution making findings approving the Negative
Declaration and approving the General Plan Amendment to change the Land Use Designation
from RIA (Resource Intensive Agriculture) to GC on 10 acres, LR (Low Density Residential) on
19.29 acres, and HMR (High Medium Density Residential) on 8.4 acres as shown on Exhibit 2,
and incorporating a memo from the Planning Director dated March 12, 2007 and memo from
Public Works dated March 12, 2007, which will be modified, and recommend the same to City
Council. The modification to the additional condition from the memo is in the third sentence
where it will read that, “the required improvements shall be half-width improvements meeting city
design standards for arterial roads.” And modified condition 9 will read, “The Ashe Road,
Romero Road and Taft Road crossings of farmer’s canal need widening. The Mountain Ridge
Drive crossing of the farmer’s canal and gaps and improvements for Ashe Road need to be
constructed.” And the remainder of Condition 9 is as is. There will be an additional condition
regarding cultural resources which will read, “Prior to any ground disturbing activities, all
earthmoving and excavation contractor employees shall attend a tailgate session informing them
of potential for inadvertently discovered cultural resources and/or human remains and protection
Planning Commission – March 15, 2007 Page 4
measures need to be followed to prevent destruction of any and all cultural resources discovered
on site. The orientation will be conducted by the project construction manager, project
archeologist, and a cultural resource manager from a local California Native American Tribe and
will include information regarding the potential for objects to occur on site, somewhere if
applicable environmental law, procedures to follow if potential cultural resources are found, and
the measures to be taken if cultural resources and/or human remains are unearthed as part of
the project. As soon thereafter as possible, the project construction manager will prepare and
maintain on file a summary report verifying the following: 1) when and where the session took
place, 2) topics discussed in the session, 3) a session attendance roster signed by employees
attending the tailgate session, 4) a copy of the report shall be provided to the Planning
Department. If potential cultural resources are unearthed on the project site, the project shall be
monitored by a local Native American Tribe for the duration of any ground disturbing activities.”
Commissioner Tragish inquired if this includes the revisions and additions that Public Works is
going to put in as an additional condition. Staff responded that it specifically refers to gaps in
improvements in Ashe Road. He further inquired if the applicant puts this in and another
applicant comes in on the intervening property that they will be compensated. Staff responded
that it does include.
Commissioner Tragish seconded the motion.
Motion carried by roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Lomas, Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Commissioners: Tkac
Commissioner Blockley moved, seconded by Commissioner Spencer, to adopt a Resolution
making findings approving the Negative Declaration and approving the zone change from A
(Agriculture) to C-2 (Regional Commercial) on 10 acres, R-1 (One-Family Dwelling) on 19.29
acres, and R-2 (Limited Multi-Family Dwelling) on 8.4 acres as shown on Exhibit A-2., and
incorporating the changed conditions, memoranda, and added conditions from the previous
motion, and recommend the same to City Council.
Motion carried by roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Lomas, Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Commissioners: Tkac
5.3a General Plan Amendment 06-1039 (McIntosh and Associates)
5.3b Zone Change 06-1039 (McIntosh and Associates)
The public hearing is opened, Staff report given. David Dominguez stated he repeats his same
comments as in the previous agenda item. Roger McIntosh with McIntosh and Associates,
representing the owner, Bakersfield 19, LLC, stated he just received two of the four memos that
were referenced. Mr. McIntosh stated that they don’t necessarily agree with the condition to
require the road improvements on Engle Road, but understand the “David Gay” approach, and if
there is any way to obtain credits for the improvements on Engle they would like to receive those.
The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Lomas commented that if the neighbor goes in first
then the road improvement will already be there, and it wouldn’t have to be put in again.
Commissioner Blockley inquired that since there is no canal crossing we are not going to have a
condition to that effect correct. Staff responded that it will be the same condition and same
number.
Planning Commission – March 15, 2007 Page 5
Commissioner Tragish inquired about condition 9, and stated that it looks like it is 15. Staff
responded that it is 15.
Commissioner Blockley moved, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to adopt a Resolution making
findings, approving the Negative Declaration and approving the General Plan Amendment to
change the Land Use Designation from RIA (Resource Intensive Agriculture) to LRM (Low-
Density Residential) on 19.55 acres as shown on Exhibit A-2 and incorporate March 12,
2007memo’s from Planning and Public Works, and modifying condition number 14, changing
access to the project so that we have access to the project from the nearest fully improved
roadway, condition number 14, the sentence starts off, “the required improvements will continue
as being shall be half-width improvements meeting city design standards for an arterial road.”
Condition 15 will be modified to help pay for it, and it will read the same as on the previous one,
stating, “the mountain ridge crossing of the farmers canal and gaps in improvements for Engle
Road need to be constructed. The developer shall pay their fair share of the costs and shall aid
in the formation of a major bridge and thoroughfare district for the widening of the crossings.”
Add the cultural resources condition to the end of the other conditions, which shall read, “prior to
any ground disturbing activities, all earthmoving and excavation contractor employees shall
attend a tailgate session informing them of the potential for inadvertently discovered cultural
resources and/or human remains and protection measures to be followed to prevent destruction
of any and all cultural resources discovered on site. The orientation will be conducted by the
project construction manager, project archeologist and a cultural resource manager from a local
California Native American Tribe, and will include information regarding the potential for objects
to occur on site, a summary of actions, where and when the session took place, topics discussed
in the session, a session attendance roster signed by employees attending the tailgate session,
a copy of the report shall be provided to the Planning Department. If potential cultural resources
are unearthed on the project site the project shall be monitored by a local Native American Tribe
for the duration of any ground disturbing activities. And recommend the same to City Council.
Motion carried by roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Lomas, Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish, Tkac
NAYS: None
Commissioner Blockley moved, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to adopt a Resolution making
findings, approving the Negative Declaration and approving the zone change from A (Agriculture)
to R-2 (Limited Multi-Family Dwelling) on 19.55 acres as shown on Exhibit A-2, and incorporating
the same memos to change conditions, and added conditions as the previous motion, and
recommend the same to City Council.
Motion carried by roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Lomas, Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish, Tkac
NAYS: None
Break Taken
5.4a General Plan Amendment 06-1052 (Maurice Etchechury)
5.4b Zone Change 06-1052 (Maurice Etchechury)
5.4c Planned Commercial Development 06-2260 – Preliminary Development Plan
(Maurice Etchechury)
Commissioner Blockley and Tkac conflicted out of these items.
The public hearing is opened, staff report given. David Dominguez, Cultural Resource Manager
for the Chumash Council of Bakersfield, commented that he has the same recommendations as
on the previous item. Susan Aragon reiterated her concerns and specifically why the Wal-Mart
Planning Commission – March 15, 2007 Page 6
big box is an issue, but this current project is not. Maurice Etchechury clarified that this project is
designed as a neighborhood shopping center to serve an area with less than a one mile radius.
He pointed out that the GPA provides for this and hopes that they will be able to proceed with the
City’s adopted practices within the general plan. Mr. Etchechury stated that they are in
agreement with Staff’s conditions, in addition to the condition proposed by Mr. Dominguez. Joe
Ham, 11440 West Bernardo Court, Suite 280, San Diego, California stated that they are in
agreement with Staff’s report and conditions. He further stated that they are in agreement with
the special conditions attached to the PCD application. Mr. Ham pointed out that supermarkets
are a convenience store and shoppers generally come to a supermarket less or more than one
time per week, as opposed to a general merchandise store where they go approximately once
every two weeks. He also stated that as to the economical viability of the store, WinCo
Supermarkets, the user that they are working with on this project, has done extensive studies in
determining both the existing population and the projected population and applied those numbers
to the number of square feet or the number stores currently serving an area. WinCo had
determined that it is economically viable to establish a store. Mr. Ham further stated that they will
be providing in the conditions some road improvements which should improve the traffic along
Panama and Ashe, and they will be required to pay approximately 1.3 million dollars in fees for
general traffic improvements through the city. Mr. Ham pointed out that the trend in the
supermarket business is to grow larger and in order to compete they have to provide an
extensive array of selection of products, and so all supermarkets are going in this direction.
The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Tragish asked that Staff reiterate what the big box
ordinance provides for in conjunction with urban decay studies. Staff stated that it is a policy that
establishes thresholds for when the City of Bakersfield would require urban decay studies and
they are adopted as General Plan Policies. Staff further stated that if there is a retail shopping
center proposed or estimated to be over 250,000 sq. ft. of gross leasable area then there has to
be an urban decay study. The policy also requires that if you have a retail store that will occupy
more than 90,000 sq. ft. gross leasable area, and 20% or more of the gross leasable area is
devoted to the sale of non-taxable merchandise or groceries, they also have to provide an urban
decay study. Staff confirmed that this project does not qualify for an urban decay study under
those policies.
Commissioner Tragish further inquired as to the size of the Costco down the street, to which
Staff responded it is 140,000 sq. ft. He also inquired as to the gross sq. ft. on the corner of
Gosford and Panama, to which Staff responded that a site plan has not been provided, but they
do have a large commercial acreage and an urban decay study was provided with their
environmental impact report. The size was estimated to be about 700,000 sq. ft. Staff indicated
that it is possible that a grocery store may go in that location as well.
Commissioner Tragish also inquired about the shopping at Gosford and Harris. Staff responded
that the proposal is for the super Wal-Mart, which wouldn’t meet this criteria because they sell
groceries. Commissioner Tragish also commented that there is an Albertson’s at White Lane and
Gosford, and stated that there appears to be a substantial amount of either commercial or
shopping in this area. He stated that he voted against the ordinance because he thought the
90,000 sq. ft. was somewhat arbitrary or illusionary. He inquired how the 90,000 sq. ft. figure
was arrived at, and Staff responded that they looked at many ordinances that were struggling
with the same issues, and many of them used the 90,000 sq. ft. as a threshold. Staff also
recalled that there was a committee set up that had five of the areas best of the best as far as
retail marketing knowledge to come up with those thresholds. Staff also pointed out that the City
has air quality thresholds and traffic thresholds in the general plan like the urban decay
thresholds, biological thresholds through the Habitat Conservation Plan, and the General Plan
also establishes noise thresholds. Staff indicated that they believe the 90,000 figure was used
because that is what the Wal-Mart’s minimum was and they were considered predatory.
Commissioner Tragish stated that the problem he has with the big box ordinance is manifested
by this particular application in that it is designed in such a way to allow certain businesses to get
away with not doing urban decay studies, and some that have to do it, irrespective of what the
impact is to the neighborhood. He also commented that in this area there is a substantial
amount of commercial and grocery retail outlets existing currently. He stated that he does think
Planning Commission – March 15, 2007 Page 7
that there is a substantial impact by this particular establishment, which is to be about 89,000 sq
ft., and an urban decay study should be done. He also suggested that perhaps and EIR should
also be completed. He stated that he is not going to vote in favor of it, and doesn’t know if he
vote against it, but perhaps may have to abstain.
Commissioner McGinnis stated that given the fact that there are a number of grocery stores in
this particular area is irrelevant to the question before the Planning Commission. He stated that
it is their job to make sure the development falls within the guidelines and it is not their job to
determine the marketability of another grocery store. Commissioner McGinnis stated that he will
be voting for this project.
Commissioner Lomas commented that Costco and Sam’s Club are not grocery stores, and she
does not recall there being a grocery stores in the near vicinity. Staff pointed out that gross
leasable area is probably in the high 70,000’s and that as you get down to specifics as to what
square footages represents, it gets farther away from that threshold. Commissioner Lomas
commented that given the criteria was set and the applicant is within the criteria, given that it is
within a half a mile from any other commercial project and given that there are no grocery stores
in that area, there is no reason to vote no.
Commissioner McGinnis moved, seconded by Commissioner Spencer, to adopt a Resolution,
making findings approving the Negative Declaration, approving the General Plan Amendment to
change the Land Use Designation from LR (Low Density Residential) to GC (General
Commercial) on 18.7 acres as shown on Exhibit A-2 and recommend the same to City Council,
and incorporating the verbiage on cultural resources that prior to any ground disturbance
activities, all earthmoving and excavating contractor employees shall attend a tail gate session
informing them of the potential for inadvertently discovering cultural resources and/or human
remains, and protection measures to be followed to prevent the destruction of any and all cultural
resources discovered on site. The orientation will be conducted by the project construction
manager, the project archeologist, and a cultural resource manager from a local California Native
American Tribe, and will include information regarding the potential for objects to occur on site,
summary of applicable environmental law procedures to follow if potential cultural resources are
found, and the measures to be taken if cultural resources and/or human remain are unearthed as
part of the project. As soon thereafter as possible the project construction manager will prepare
and maintain a file, a summary report verifying the following: 1) when and where the session took
place, 2) topics discussed in the session, and 3) session attendance roster signed by employees
attending the tail gate session. A copy of the report shall be provided to the Planning
Department. If potential cultural resources are unearthed on the project site, the project shall be
monitored by a local Native American Tribe for the duration of any ground disturbance activity.
And, recommend the same to City Council.
Motion carried by roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Lomas, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer
NAYS: None
ABSTAINED: Commissioners: Blockley, Tkac, Tragish
Commissioner McGinnis moved, seconded by Commissioner Spencer, to adopt a Resolution,
making findings approving the Negative Declaration, approving the zone change from R-1 (One-
Family Dwelling) to C-2 PCD (Regional Commercial Planned Commercial Development) on 18.7
acres as shown on Exhibit A-2 and recommend the same to City Council, and incorporating the
cultural resources addendum, and recommend the same to City Council.
Motion carried by roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Lomas, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer
NAYS: None
ABSTAINED: Commissioners: Blockley, Tragish, Tkac
Planning Commission – March 15, 2007 Page 8
Commissioner McGinnis moved, seconded by Commissioner Spencer, to adopt a Resolution,
making findings approving a PCD number 06-2260 site plan for the development of a multiple
tenant commercial development on 18.7 acres as shown on Exhibit A-2 and incorporate the
memorandum from James Movius dated March 15, 2007, and incorporating the aforementioned
cultural resources amendment, and recommend the same to City Council.
Motion carried by roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Lomas, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer
NAYS: None
ABSTAINED: Commissioners: Blockley, Tragish, Tkac
Commissioner Tragish stated that his reason for abstaining is that while he acknowledges the
ordinance is in effect, and has delineated 90,000 sq. ft., he still believes the particular applications
presented are not in compliance with the intent, logic and purpose of the big box ordinance, as
well as the court rulings from the Appellate Court in Fresno, which gave rise to the big box
ordinance.
5.5a General Plan Amendment 06-1099 (John Thomsen)
5.5b Zone Change 06-1099 (John Thomsen)
Heard on consent calendar.
5.6a General Plan Amendment 06-1688 (Marino and Associates)
5.6b Zone Change 06-1688 (Marino and Associates)
The public hearing is opened, staff report given. No one spoke in opposition to Staff’s
recommendation. Jim Marino, with Marino & Associates, stated their intent is to get lot sizes that
match so that the neighborhood becomes complete to the east. He indicated that the Castle &
Cooke wall that is being built is similar to what will be built on the Darrell’s Storage lots and will be
built before any of the property is subdivided. He pointed out that the Darrell’s wall will become
the wall of the residential, but the residential will not have any columns or vertical lines. He
indicated it will have the same stucco, finish, color and brick cap. Mr. Marino stated that with
regard to the open space it will be storage buildings and the balance will be RV storage. He
thth
further stated with the March 13 Planning Department memo and March 14 Public Works
memo which clarifies some items, he is asking for approval of this project.
The public hearing is closed. Commissioner McGinnis inquired why they wouldn’t leave the zoning
from a marketing standpoint. Mr. Marino responded that when they started the project about six
years ago, the entire 40 acres was suburban residential and there was an approved 10,000 sq. ft.
tentative map. He stated that they sliced off the easterly 145 feet and the developers to the east
built 40 feet of the street so they have to build another 20 ft., which means the lots would be 125
ft. deep. He stated that the lots along Claudia Autumn varied, but the smallest lot is just over 56
ft. on the northern portion, down to about 65 feet on the southern portion. He pointed out that if
you take the 125 ft. depth their lots would be 80 ft. wide, which means that as you go down the
street you have a different neighborhood on one side then you have on the other, and they
wanted to avoid that.
Commissioner McGinnis moved, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to adopt a Resolution
making findings approving the Negative Declaration and approving the General Plan Amendment
to change the land use designation from SR (Suburban Residential) to LR (Low-Density
Residential) on 4.4 acres as shown on Exhibit A-2, and incorporate James Movius, Planning
Director’s memo of March 13, 2007 and Marian Shaw’s March 14, 2007 memo, and recommend
the same to City Council.
Planning Commission – March 15, 2007 Page 9
Motion carried by roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Lomas, Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tkac, Tragish
NAYS: None
Commissioner McGinnis moved, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to adopt a Resolution
making findings approving the Negative Declaration and approving the zone change from E (1/4
Estate) ¼ to R-1 (One-Family Dwelling) on 4.4 acres as shown on Exhibit A-2 and incorporate
James Movius, Planning Director’s memo of March 13, 2007 and Marian Shaw’s March 14, 2007
memo, and recommend the same to City Council.
Motion carried by roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Lomas, Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tkac, Tragish
NAYS: None
6. COMMUNICATIONS:
th
Staff indicated that they have sent memos confirming April 9 for the joint kickoff meeting with the Kern
County Planning Commission at the Board of Supervisor’s hearing room, which will begin at 5:30 p.m.
Staff also indicated that Public Works Director, Raul Rojas, gave a status report on the Thomas Road
Improvement Project which is the trip project that talks about all of the freeways and the report was given
to City Council, and a DVD provided to the Planning Commission.
7. COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner Johnson inquired what the process would be to put an item on the agenda for the joint
City-County Planning Commission meeting. Staff responded that he can call Mr. Movius and they will
consider it.
Commissioner Tragish commented about an article in the newspaper talking about traffic issues and he
stated he feels the main issue is problem with transporting people across town. He commented that it
appears that these projects are being approved and nothing is getting better traffic wise and in the future
it doesn’t look any brighter either. He commented that the Thomas Roads money doesn’t apply to the
Westside Parkway and construction costs are soaring
Commissioner Tragish further commented that with regard to the inference from the newspaper article
that the Planning Commission had been reprimanded by City Council, he has no memory of that, and has
never been told by a City Council person or anybody in the Planning Department how to vote, and the
inference that somehow he’s made votes in the past to that effect are absolutely ridiculous.
Commissioner Tragish stated that he has a lot of problems with the projects that are going to be coming
up in the next GPA cycle because of what he perceives to be a real humongous problem the city has with
the infrastructure.
Commissioner McGinnis inquired if Staff has any kind of agenda for the joint meeting. Staff responded
that they will be going over the basic work program and how they’re going to work through the General
Plan update. Staff indicated they will introduce some different players and if they have decided on a
consultant by then, who that consultant will be. Staff further stated that Vision 2020 is involved in the
project and their involvement will be explained.
Planning Commission – March 15, 2007 Page 10
8. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business the pre-meeting was adjourned at 7:37 p.m.
Robin Gessner, Recording Secretary
JAMES D. MOVIUS, Secretary
Planning Director
April 26, 2007