[Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music] [Music] Hey hey hey. [Music] [Music] Hey hey hey. [Music] [Music] [Music] Hey hey hey. [Music] Hey hey hey. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Don't you [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Hey. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] All right. [Music] [Music] Heat. Heat. N. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Hey hey hey. [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Hey. Hey. [Music] [Music] Hey. Hey. Hey. [Music] [Music] [Music] Hey. Hey, hey, hey. [Music] [Music] [Music] Welcome to the City of Bakersfield Planning Commission meeting. This television broadcast is brought to you by the local cable companies, the county of Kerna, and the city of Bakersfield. You can watch the rebroadcast of this meeting Saturday at 700 p.m. and Sunday at 10:00 a.m. You can download the agenda for this meeting at www.bakersfield city. us. Preciding over this evening's meeting, Vice Chair Adam Strickland. It is my pleasure to call to order the March 20th, 2025 planning commission meeting. Madame Clerk, will you please call the role? Chair Kedar, Vice Chair Strickland here, Commissioner Biddle here, Commissioner Brandt Oliver here. Commissioner Core here. Commissioner Martin here. Commissioner Neil. Madame Clerk, next item, please. Pledge of Allegiance. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you for attending tonight's planning commission meeting. This commission provides an opportunity for public participation in the development process throughout the city of Bakersfield. The planning commission considers a wide variety of projects, including subdivision maps, zone changes, general plan amendments, and more. When applications are received, the city planning division analyzes the request. Planning staff will present the facts about the project along with their recommendation to the planning commission who will approve the item or make a recommendation as appropriate. Madame clerk, next item, please. Public statements. Public statements are now received at different times depending on the item. I will call on Madame Clerk to call for public statements at the appropriate time. So, please listen carefully for the correct time to speak. Non-aggenda item 3A, public statements. Does anyone in the audience wish to address the commission regarding items not listed on tonight's agenda? If so, please come forward and state your name. Seeing none, madam madame clerk, next item, please. Agenda item 3B, public statements. Does anyone in the audience wish to address the commission regarding items listed on tonight's agenda? If you are here for non-consent public hearing item 6A, now is not the time to speak. You will be given an opportunity to speak at a later time. Hello. I'm going to read from my phone if that's okay. Sure. Could you could you just state your name for the record, please? Yes. My name is Michelle Ellis. I'm here today to um oppose a telecommunications tower that's trying to be put um roughly 150 ft behind my house. Um, I would like to talk about the depreciation value of the homes near telecommunication towers. I was presented with a study that suggested that there was no correlation in one particular neighborhood to a telecommunications tower being installed into one neighborhood that was not yet developed. Even this does not reflect the majority of neighborhoods. The articles that I have found were in regards to potential buyers not wanting to buy a pre-existing house that had a telecommunications tower with invisible site or even general location. I found several articles um that correlated with that with property value environmental health trust. So the depreciation values can be reflected as 2.65% all the way up to 9.78% depending on the situation and the visible range. Uh the National Association of Realtors also said that they saw a decrease in 7.6% if a noticeable tower is within 1500 ft. Um there are several other things. Um I I a article in San Francisco Bay Area journalist took a survey of people. 94% of the people she surveyed said they would not buy a house next to a cell tower. I have um some other issues that I was found pertinent to the issue upon researching telecommunications tower issues. I found two other problems that I find pertinent. The first being the possible health risk to the RF radiation that is emitted by the tower. While I have read that it is generally accepted that these towers do not emit enough radiation to cause medical problems. Yet in many places around the country injuries have been documented such as cancer, headaches, tonitis, and other medical problems as a concern. I did find an article from the American Cancer Association that stated, "Sell phone towers are still relatively new and many people are understandably concerned about whether the RF waves they give off might possibly have health effects. At this time, there is no strong evidence that the exposure to RF waves from cell phone towers cause any noticeable health effects. However, this does not mean that the RF waves from the cell cell phone towers have been proven to be absolutely safe. Most exper expert organizations agree that more research is needed to help clarify this especially for any possible long-term effects since a tower is long lasting. Not something like a cell phone oram example was given to me as a baby monitor can be removed from a situation this tower cannot and not very easily. Anyways, um another study said that um most of these towers should be further than 500 m from any existing dwelling and they have taken charge in many cities and even California to make sure that none of these towers can be anywhere near a school because of the hazardous effects they can have on children. That was from the Physicians for Safe Technology. Um sorry, give me a second. Uh, another concern I have which um I read a couple of studies about this is that the uh radiation that is emitted from the telecommunications towers um affects plants and animals in its surrounding. I found an article that a study was conducted of the RF radiation that comes off of these towers has been shown to interfere and dam be damaging to bees in the environment as well as birds and plants. I have many of all three of these things living in my backyard. I have a family of blue jays that live in my yard and a family of hummingbirds that frequent my yard that what will happen to them if this tower goes up. Um, not to mention bees. The bee population is already in serious decline and without bees we all die. Um, so I read an article about that and they were talking about the emissions um, greatly affect their um, I'll just read a little portion of it. Scientific studies showed electromagnetic fields from the extremely low frequency common to power lines and radio frequency radiation that comes from cell towers and mobile devices may be harmful to wildlife as well as humans. Um of the literature recommended the federal government regulates electromagnetic radiation as pollution. medical and science journalist, author of two books, an electromagnetic field on this study um even at its lowest levels cause harm in every animal model studied, especially bees and birds. They depend on the earth's natural magnetic fields to orientation, migration, food fighting abilities, mating, nests and den building, territorial maintenance, and defense. Um, my next step is to contact um the rest of my neighbors to express my concerns to them and to le counsel if necessary. Miss Bis, I'm I'm sorry. I I should have led with this. Um, items that are listed on the consent public calendar hearing are usually approved in one motion. The commission can't take action unless they're pulled from the consent and then put on the non-consent calendar. Um, would you like to have this item pulled from the consent calendar and then it'll show up at the end of non-consent? So, it'll come in after 6A for discussion. Yes, that's fine. Okay. And I I'll ask with Miss King, but I don't think we need resumation. We can take your public comment into that section, right? Um, it actually it would have to be part of the of the public hearing because it's being moved to public hearings. Got it. So, you'll have an opportunity to speak again when the item is called. Okay. So, just wait until that. Yes. Okay. I'm sorry. I I didn't want to interrupt you, but I also probably should have. I'm sorry. That's okay. Thank you. So, and to clarify, it was item 5B as in boy, right? Oh, yeah. 5B. Sorry. Um, good afternoon. I was hoping to move to move um 5C from the consent calendar to the non-consent calendar. Your name, ma'am? Caroline Frell. And you can also, if you choose to, you can give public statements now or you can wait until the item is called. Okay. Yeah. Yes. I'd like to state for the record that Commissioner Neil was seated at 5:34 p.m. Thank you, Missing. Seeing no other public speakers, um, Madame Clerk, next item, please. Agenda item four, consent calendar items. All items listed under the consent items do not require a public hearing and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of set items unless staff or commissioner requests specific items to be discussed and or removed for separate action. May I get a motion approving consent item 4 A? So moved. Commissioner Neil, may I have a second? I'll second it. Commissioner Biddle, please cast your votes. Motion passes with um Chair Kedar absent. Thank you, madam clerk. Next item, please. Agenda item five, consent public hearing items. Now is the time for consent public hearing items. If the item is not removed by commissioner, staff, or a member of the public, the commission will vote on all items in one motion without further comment. If an item is removed, it will be placed at the end of the non-consent public hearings. At this time, I will open all of the consent public hearing items. Okay. So, I'll ask for clarification, Missing. I'll read it and then you can clarify where I can fix it. So, does any member of the public wish to remove a consent public hearing item and item 5B and 5C were pulled? So, they will go to public hearings now. Okay. Thank you. The only item moving forward under consent now is 5A. Okay. Seeing no other Does any commissioner or staff wish to remove a consent public hearing item? Okay. All right. At this time, the consent public hearing items not removed are now closed. May I get a motion to adopt staff's recommendation on the consent public hearing items not removed, incorporating all staff re memorandanda and revised staff recommendations. Motion on consent. Commissioner Morton, do I have a second? I second. Commissioner Brandt Oliver. Please cast your votes. Motion passes with Cher Kater absent. Thank you, Madame Clerk. Next item, please. Agenda item six, non-consent public hearing items. Now is the time for non-consent public hearing items. Before we begin, I want to explain how the hearing will be conducted. Staff will first give a report. Then those in favor of the project will be allowed to speak. Those in opposition of the project will be able to speak after all those in favor have spoken. Each side will be given five minutes to provide rebuttal comments. Individual speakers may ask questions during their statements, but the questions will not be answered until the public hearing on that item is closed. Written comments may be given to the clerk, who will then provide comments to the commission. Please be respectful of others participating in the hearing by not repeating remarks of previous speakers and presenting any new comments or thoughts in a concise and clear way. Missing, would you please provide us with your staff report? Missing, I don't think your mic's on. There we go. Sorry. Uh, this is general plan amendment zone change 22012. Staff is recommending that this item be referred back to staff. Um it is the at the um consideration of the planning commission. You can either have the staff report read tonight or wave it for future ref for future meeting that will be advertised. So it's your choice. And to clarify, this is item 6A is that is being referred back to staff. The public can still make comments if you choose to, but it's not going to be voted on or decided on today. Ju just for direction, do I continue the script as is assuming or do we defer for presentation first? Would the planning commission like the staff report or if if it's being referred back to staff? No. Okay. Um uh open the public hearing now. Just opening the public hearing. Cool. All right. I will now open the public hearing. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in favor of the project? Please step to the microphone, identify yourself and proceed. Seeing none, is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to the project? Please step to the microphone, identify yourself, and proceed. Hi, I'm Cheryl Yakapedi Thomas. I live in the subdivision called Tuskanyany. It's a hillside division in the the east side. Uh I am in opposition to ZR22-0127. uh in in building a large apartment complexes out in the Hill area, you're disregarding the blue zone initiative of building livable multifamily dwellings close to shopping, schools, parks, workplaces, and public transportation. Uh let's just say you were to change the zoning of the area between Tesany Hills Lane and future Alagany Court to multifamily dwelling. There's no public transportation to the area. The roadway is a two-lane road with no plan for improvement. And if you've driven on it lately, you can see it has holes and crevices large enough for a large bunny rabbit. So, um, it can't handle 650 more cars going both ways twice a day. Along with it being a very dangerous exit from future Alageney Court to enter Alfred Herrow Highway, there's no sidewalks for the children so they can walk to a nearest park which is 3.7 miles. The schools are already impacted and if you're a high schooler new to the area, they bus you to Centennial. Uh the water issue is slim as it is and Tuscany's water comes from a pump in the river um that is filled from Lake Isabella and last well a couple years ago it was down to 6% and if we had dropped a little bit more percentage we would not have had any water in Tuscanyany. Um this is another reason to reszone this area to multifamily dwelling uh to a single family dwelling. The electrical in infrastructure is inadequate in the area. We have lost power multiple times in the last couple years some for more than 20 hours each time due to following electrical poles. We have endangered species in our community and these need to be protected. this the hillside topography is greater than 30% from Alagany up to the uh fence line of the Tuscany homes and any cutting into that and excavation could greatly change the stability of the upper land lots and any zone change in this hillside area I would think that it would need a EIR a squa and extensive valley fever soil testing and a current water will serve letter please do not approve this blanket reszoning Thank you. [Music] Good evening, commissioners and staff. My name is Josh Taylor, representative for the Western States Regional Council of Carpenter and president of the Carpenters Local uh Union 743. I just want to say that I concur with the staff's updated recommendation to refer back to staff and hope that you all will vote in accordance. Thank you. Thank you. Mark McGari. Uh first part as a professional geologist since the 2017 when the low density residential was converted over to C1 so they could put an old folks home there. COVID came, nobody wants old folks. They switched to apartments. I have emphasized that this specific property was identified by Kern County's Valley Fever Task Force as being one of the few developable pieces of land of the exact right age sediment in the Round Mountain silt in which approximately a half mile to the west in a sample USGS uh collected called south of calm and about a half mile to uh northwest to the southeast in a sample they called plaque on highway 178 about halfway down the slope to Rio Bravo. The concentrations in the fungal growth zone at maturity was 15 trillion parts um per cubic inch. 15 trillion per cubic inch. There are only about four laboratories allowed to handle samples like this. You'll have to go through the USGS. The developer has repeatedly told us, "Well, we'll do it before we get the grading permit." Well, the task force says you do it before you do the EIR. You definitely do it before the negative deck. You find out whether in the near surface, which means to the deepest depth that you would excavate, which is the base of a swimming pool, is there this exact right stuff? Fortunately for almost all of us, the middle of the valley, this stuff's buried by thousands of feet of sediment on top. And out here on the north and south side of the river, it's all steep slopes that nobody's going to develop on. This is a strange little bench. To the north of this is Kern River Formation, not the same. So all the stuff at at the golf course and the new track that's going in immediately to the north and cattle king, all of that, that's on a completely different sediment. And the houses up top, the houses in Tuskanyany and the houses all there, much younger sediment, not affected. It's this steep slope sediment that is an outcrop. It's a study like any other geotechnical study. It's a study like what's required by planning all the time and every time I come in front they make an excuse as why not do it. Um the second one was mentioned briefly which is we are an isolated portion of the water district. We are river water only. And when we get multiple drought years, the inlet is above the level of the river and our tanks start to drain. Cow water comes in and starts sh shutting down our valves. Our sprinklers don't work anymore because they know someday in the future there'll be a pipeline from your part of the city out there. Finally, it's the incompatibility. I measured from the closest apartment complex, which is between Morning and Fairfax, to this particular threestory apartment building over five miles. Why are we leaping over what is successfully becoming a good R1 duplex to put a threestory apartment complex directly in the view line up on top of on the west side of Alfred Herald. There are lots selling for over a million dollars and it's because they look down at the Kern River and they look at the mountains. It's the only place in Bakersfield that you have what I call Bakersfield's beach. The one place where geography makes it so that these houses are worth. We were discussing whether there are houses now in Tuscany selling for more than 2 million that are view houses. Originally the proponent told us there's just not a market for single family houses out here. We can't do it. Now, immediately across the property line to the north, there are single family houses under development. On the hillside up above, there are these big lot, you know, above the mansion that's being built with beautiful sightes of the river. And at um Rio Bravo at the end of my mante behind Solara, 400 houses there are being built, all R1, different size R1s. This was originally zoned before 2017 as large uh low density residential. It should be returned to it. It's the appropriate thing to have there. At 178, at 184 on the north, you call it city in the hills. It's that confluence of there. There's going to be commercial centers there and there's already lower income denser duplexes and quadlexes being built in there. Looks pretty organized. Looks like it's a successful way of infilling. But don't take our beach away. Don't put a threestory apartment complex between milliondoll lots and the river where they they don't have their view line anymore. This this guy can build houses and if he doesn't he can sell them to Jeremy Willer or Nicholls or somebody who will build them and they'll make good money building nice houses that are compatible with Rio Bravo and compatible with Tuscanyany and compatible with Cattle King and that's all we're asking just have a continuity of development there. Thank you. Uh, sorry. Before you walk away, could I ask you to spell your name? Spelling your name. Sorry. M A G A R G E. Thank you so much. Hello. Um, I am Ashley Blunt. I'm also a registered California geologist and I wanted to make a few comments uh that my neighbors did not cover. Um my house I live in Tuscanyany. My house abuts the southern portion of this planned uh area of review where we're expecting a a zone change. Um, when I first heard about this project, I had asked um the planning commission if there had been any geotechnical studies and I was uh sent the study that was done at the time when this area was initially reszoned for the retirement community uh project and I had followed up and asked if there was anything more recent for this current project or not and I was informed that that was the most recent geotechnical survey. So I went ahead and reviewed that on the high level um just to understand what kind of work had been done, what kind of uh technical assessment had been done and um I discovered a few things that concern me. But first before I get into that, I'd like to re uh read a portion that is submitted in the appendex of the technical study that was uh submitted by the the planner of this and it says geotechnical engineers base each report on a unique set of project specific factors. Geotechnical engineers consider many unique project specific factors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors uh include the client's goals, objectives, and risk management preferences, the general nature of the structure involved, its size and configuration, the location of the structure on the site, and other planned existing site improvements such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates otherwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was not prepared for you, not prepared for your project, not prepared for the specific site explored or completed before important project changes were made. And there have been significant project changes. Um, from what I can tell from the maps, the footprint of this project has expanded much further to the south and we've also included zone changes for the hillsides. Um, I took a highle look at the trenches and cing locations. Those do not appear to extend down to the south where we see these additional changes. Um, as a geologist, I'm very familiar with this uh formation. It's very loosely consolidated. We have a lot of what we call conglomerates and uh high permeabilility sands in this formation which when something is loosely consolidated it's very easy to disturb. You can touch it and it'll fall apart. And so the um sample studies that were run on the uh geomchanical properties of these sediments were biased towards what we would call a silty um type of sediment which is naturally going to be better compacted and hold together better. Um there's no studies on these conglomerates are very loosely consolidated sands on their own which is quite concerning. And so on the high level when I look at this with the hillside changes um from hillside open space to whatever residential um high density or medium density they want to change that to um I have great concerns about the slope stability and what additional units on those hillsides will do. Um quite frankly I'm concerned that we'll end up in a situation similar to the bluffs where we'll have sloughing down and eventually somebody's going to have to purchase those homes. We're going to have to remediate which would be extremely expensive. So my recommendation is that this needs much much much more extensive study before approval. Um thank you all for your time and listening. Thank you. I'm going to defer to someone much more technically minded than I am. Just place it under the Elmoology. Yeah. And if you don't mind, just give it a second. Let everyone clear out. Basically, what this is just one one second. Let everyone clear out first and then because it'll pick up noise on the recording. Let the let them finish leaving before you start. That way we can hear you. Sorry. And then uh and then just state your name once they're cleared out. That'll give me a chance to figure out this fancy technology. Help is on the way. Don't worry. Okay, let me just get it out of the sun. Can you get it there? You just take a shade with you. It doesn't matter. Just zing on there. So, basically, we'll just throw this out here real quick. This is, as you can see, uh, hi, my name's Dave Thomas, and this is from the zoning change from uh, 2015 0363 when they went from uh, and this is large residential open space to the senior citizens apartment that they were planning on going to. So, this is what the zoning was originally, and I'm happy with that. Okay. So, now, uh, on February 11th of 2016, Woody Gruninger and Ian Ellis sent me a letter telling me how they wanted to bring this letter right here for your record, how they wanted to bring a muchneeded assisted living facility to our area. They said, and I quote, "It will bring muchneeded living and care options to our Bakersfield residents, offering assisted living and memory care services in a resort-like living environment worthy of our seniors." End quote. Are our seniors no longer worthy of resort-like living? We need to think about all of our residents, not just the ones that make the news. Nine years ago, they claimed single family homes were not viable there. And this housing project would not adversely affect roads because their residents generally don't drive and there would be no effect on the schools. This project totally deletes that. Nine years later, with our roads and schools more overcrowded, they want to bring a highdensity housing project, a project that would have hundreds of noisy air conditioning units. The old uh assisted living would have a few central airs, but this is going to have to have individual air conditioners for for every single unit. No sidewalks for the kids, overloading schools and roads, no reliable public transit. Uber is hit or miss out there. There is plenty of vacant land closer to the school stores and employment. The old East Hills Mall would be an ideal area for this type of a project. From what I hear, the build they're doing on that, which you guys probably see, doesn't cover the whole footprint of the old east hills. That'd be a perfect place to throw some uh housing there, close to restaurants, close to the roads, close to sidewalks by building there. This would solve a problem or the best way to solve a problem is not to create it in the beginning. You have the ability to solve a problem right now. Do not approve this approve this this zoning change. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Thomas. Hello. Uh, my name is Guy Greenley. I'm also a resident of Tuscanyany. I'm I agree with uh my neighbors, but I have another perspective on this that I haven't heard voice before. and that is that Alfred Herrow Highway has become a recreational corridor. The main uses on that Alfred Arrow Highway from uh 178 over to Panorama include a golf course, a regional lake recreation area, a campground, the Comm Museum, a regional park, heart park, a regional soccer park, and a small go-kart track. To me, it has become Bakersfield's only real recreational corridor. And there are some lowdensity residential facil uh areas there. Uh Tuscany, one of them, of course. And I just think it would be a shame for Bakersfield to lose the only rural recreational quarter that exists by including highdensity residential. And I think that if we do include highdensity residential there, it may be a bad precedent for that whole corridor. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Greenley. Good evening, commissioners. Um I'm Heidi Carter Escadero and I'm a resident of City in the Hills and um I'm just echo so much um of what my fellow neighbors have said about this project. Um, the only thing that I'm going to kind of maybe touch on a little bit is just how much I really do believe in our general plan. Because what a general plan is supposed to do is it's supposed to help us define our future and purposefully and strategically grow in a logical way. And so the thing that is most disappointing to me at this juncture is that we were all dazzled and seduced with the zoning change when we were talking about providing resort style living for our seniors. And even then I've seen how it works. The sands start to shift. And so now we've gone from leapfrogging what was low density open space turned into commercial. And so now that commercial's inserted into an even larger project that disregards again the general plan in the sense that we know that these open spaces are precious. We know that these hillsides are unique and there's a reason for them not being considered for this highdensity residential. And so I just I just really respect the one comment that one of the other speakers made is that before we move forward, if a developer comes to us and they say this is the plan we have in place and we leapfrog into commercial from low density open space to a highdensity commercial development that we shouldn't just immediately start leaprogging all of the area around it forward. We should stop and go back and say, "No, this was originally open space and low density residential and we need to respect that process because the moment that we go forward and we have the commercial and we change that zoning, then look what's happening now. So now we're changing the zoning next to that and we're changing the zoning next to that and we've just expanded this project twofold." And so that's what Leaprog does. We have some amazing already designated on our general plan highdensity R3 zoning just up the road where we're building the magnificent softball fields and a giant complex and we still don't have the services even to serve that but they'll come eventually. We'll have get bus services. We'll be able to build those things. But right now what we have is Alfred Herrell Highway, a beautiful I drive it every Saturday. I run Lake Ming and I see how much this whole area has come to rely on Hart Park, Lake Ming, Kern River. This is just this is kind of our last opportunity to have the vision to plan appropriately and to respect what the community has done. We came together for this general plan. You've taken our comments over the years. The zoning the zoning exists for a reason because of vision. And so if we if we take the vision in this direction there is no going back and there are going to be consequences that will probably not be towards a more beautiful sustainable community where people want to come and live and recreate. And those honestly some of those those million-doll houses are going to make up for it in tax revenue too. because I do know that revenue is part of it. So I just respect the general plan. I ask that you as planning commissioners that's the primary purpose is planning and looking at that general plan and saying what is the best future for Bakersfield as a whole. It's not going to be in my backyard. I'm I'm suggesting you know build the R3 across the street from where I live in City in the Hills because that is a commercial area already. Let's preserve what we can while we can because once we go back there's we need to go back instead of going forward for this area. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Carter Escadero. May I point out something that really stands out on this picture? Yes, please reintroduce Mark again. See this yellow to the north of it? You see a rough graded out area? That is a residential R1. that is currently being constructed as we speak. Well, this really sticks out. Paddle King that and then Tuscanyany and then here's this monstrosity going to be stuck in the middle of it. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Robin Jasky, JAS Ke. And my concern is environmental. Directly right next door to where you're planting the monstrosity, good word for it, is a 10,000 acre working ranch owned by the Nickel family. There are there's citrus, olive trees, any number. 10,000 acres. We're talking. And I live up at the top of Tuscanyany. And I can tell you they are out there all hours of the day and night. These gigantic machines spraying chemicals. It is right next door to where they want to put this concentration of people. I don't know what they're spraying night and day. They're spraying when they're expecting a freeze. They have these ginormous fans that are out there running really noisy all the time. They set up propane cannons to deter wildlife from taking the crops. Sounds like someone out there setting off shotguns just and I know all of this because I used to keep horses on the nickel property for 19 years. I'm very familiar with with what goes on at that ranch. And I I'm just thinking of these chemicals. The winds blow up there. There's nothing to stop those winds. They come down the canyon and I mean every day the winds are ripping blowing the chemicals right where these people are going to be living concentrated. It just seems illconceived to me. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening uh staff and commissioners. My name is Richard O'Neal and I do uh I just want to ditto what's been said in opposition to these departments. Uh 250 apartments translate to a thousand people roughly. And uh we're opposed because what's been said before is that there's no services for those thousand people sidewalks to transportation and also uh the valley fever scores highly concentrated in that area and uh also because there's no parks There is a dedicated park at the River's Edge. If you know where that is, River's Edge Park. It's It's not developed, but it's dedicated on Nichols Nichols property. It's less than a half a mile from these proposed apartments. And I we feel that there's going to be a high negative impact on that river area there. There's a uh public easement running from uh roughly those apartments down to River's Edge Park. That park won't be developed until there's 150 homes minimum. Uh but in the meantime, people have no parks and then when it is opened, there'll be two highly negative impacts on the Kern River at that point. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Neil, Miss King, since there were no in favor, we skip rebuttal, right? Well, so since we are recommending that it be referred back to staff, you would just close the hearing and uh get a vote to refer back to staff. Skipping commissioner public comment. Item four, we didn't present anything. Technically, we just opened it to the public for comment because we noticed it as a public hearing. So, we we are required to allow you to speak, but we are referring it back to staff to do further work on the item. Thank you, Miss King. With that being said, I will now close the public hearing on the item and return it to the commission for comment and action. Just to be clear, um the recommendation is to refer it back to staff. We have the option to do or to not do that, right? We usually refer it back to staff when staff want that, but I just want to be clear that that it's not the recommendation is to refer it back to staff because there there's additional work that needs to be done. So staff does not feel comfortable with giving any recommendation other than referring it back to staff. Got it. Understood. I just wanted to be clear that it doesn't it doesn't automatically go back to staff just because of the recommendation. We as a commission still have to vote to refer it back to staff. just so that that's clear and transparent for anybody who doesn't understand how it works. That's correct. All right. Well, I'll make a motion. We're not there yet. We are there. We're absolutely there. I'm ready for I'll make a motion to refer it back to staff. I um now to be clear, we can't ask any questions of the people who did present. I I mean, we didn't this is technically not the hearing where the item was presented. We didn't do a staff presentation. So my recommendation would be to refer it back to staff and the public will have another opportunity to come when we notice it and we give a full presentation and again you'll have an opportunity to speak about what you what you said today. Um I just don't think it's appropriate to comment on something that we didn't really present. Okay. And if and if commissioners want to see something specific based on what we heard today in the staff report, we can send you an email. Yes. Of of that. Okay. So, I'm going to move to refer it back to staff. Can I um through the chair, I just think and I hear you have move taken it back to to referring back to staff, but I just didn't know if it's appropriate that we could should we give comments on this offline because I have a fair amount of questions and a few concerns um from folks we've heard today, even though that they'll come back. That way, since we're sending it back to staff, we might have some answers on it before we before we hear it again. Yes, you can definitely communicate with staff, okay, based on the comments that you that you heard today so that we can potentially vet out those issues before we come back. Okay. Thank you. Then with that, I'll second the motion. All right. I have a motion from Commissioner Neil and I have a second from Commissioner Martin. Uh, commissioners, please cast your vote. It says staff recommends a Wait a second. What I say? Sorry, I'm on autopilot. Uh, refer back. Sorry, let me let me just do it again. I have a motion from Commissioner Neil to refer back to staff and I have a second on that from Commissioner Martin. That's for item 6A. Item 6A. Commissioners, cast your vote, please. It's it's on our end. I want to note the voting system says staff recommends approval. not updated with the addendum from today's memo. So, do we roll call that or do we We could do roll call. Yes. I think it was a it was a decision made like at noon. So, thank you. Okay. So, I'm going to I'm going to ask Madame Clerk for a roll call, but to say again for item 6A, we've got a motion from Commissioner Neil to refer back to staff and a second from Commissioner Martin. Vice Chair Strickland, yes. Commissioner Biddle, yes. Commissioner Brent Oliver, yes. Commissioner Core, yes. Commissioner Martin, yes. Commissioner Neil, yes. Okay. Motion passes to refer back to staff to staff with Cher absent. So, uh, vice chair Strickland, now the next item is 5B as in boy. Okay. So, madame clerk, next item, please, which I believe is item 5B, which was moved to non-consent public hearing. All right. Now that we seem to be settled down a little bit, missing, could you give your or your staff presentation on item 5B? Item 5B is director review and approval permit number 24- 0003. I'd like to introduce to you the planner um project planner and I right. Good evening commissioners and staff. My name is Tanaya Wright, assistant planner with de with with the development services department. Today I'm presenting agenda item 5B, planning director's re review permit number 24-00003. The proposed project site is located south of Wilson Road and north of Han Avenue at 3001 Stein Road. The applicant Terraco 2013 LLC and T-Mobile representing Fellowship Baptist Church is seeking approval to allow construction of a 65- ft tall stealth monucalyptus wireless telecommunication facility and ancillary equipment on a 6.25 acre parcel in the R1 single unit dwelling zone. According to the developer, the primary objective of this telecommunications facility is meant to substantially enhance and expand the wireless coverage for both local and the surrounding area without implementing significant or invasive aesthetic alterations. As proposed, the lease area is set back approximately 824 feet south of Wilson Road and 1,750 ft north of Plans Road. The nearest adjacent lot zoned or designated residential is located approximately 150 ft west of the project site. The project equipment compound will be surrounded by an 8-ft tall concrete block wall. The requested height of the project is 65 ft. The packet includes a photo simulation comparison of the proposed cell terror to um to the existing trees in view offering a perspective of the project scale in relation to the surrounding area. Staff recommends your commission adopt the resolution accepting the planning director's report on the director review and approval permit number 24-00003 as depicted in the project description and subject to the listed conditions of approval. That concludes my presentation. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Wright. The public hearing on item 5B is now open. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in favor of the project? Please step to the microphone, identify yourself and proceed. Hi, good evening everybody. My name is Joshua Alba. I do represent Towerico and I'm here to to speak and and answer any questions that you guys may have and that um anyone else um out here in the public may have. Um to start off um you know we've worked diligently and hard with the um uh city planning department uh to make sure that this project um is the most uh aesthetically pleasing appealing uh tower that that is available to us. Uh a mono eucalyptus tree is is the uh the highest standard that we have um for stealth trees. Um, and we also made sure that we followed everything within the municip municipal uh municipal code. Uh, which is I believe why they do recommend us that that it be approved. Um, regarding a few things, I would like to read a statement um, regarding health and I believe that um, the city attorney uh, probably agrees with us on on in this sense. So uh this is from section 704A of the telecommunications act of 1996 uh which states no state or local government or uh or instrumentally thereof may regulate the placement construction and modification of personal wireless facilities uh service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the event I'm sorry to the extent that such facilities comply with the commission's regulations concerning such emissions and um T-Mobile is a FCC licensed holder uh for the frequencies that they use and as such is obligated to always operate their wireless communication sites within the safety parameters of the FCC and missions uh standards. uh frequencies uh frequency licenses are auctioned off by the FCC to the highest bidder and cost wireless carriers billions of dollars for the right to use those frequencies. Um operating communication sites outside of FCC safety standards could result in uh revocation of FCC frequency licenses which are the lifeblood of every operator. In addition, there is no functional benefit to using higher power than allowed because it raises the noise floor uh for the entire network and it confuses the cell sites and degrades network performance. So um we take um we take the FCC guidelines seriously. We stay within those guidelines um and follow the rules uh that uh that are or the guidelines that are put forth to us. So, um, so just regarding the health part of it, I I do I just wanted to make that statement. Um, regarding the the the aesthetics and and everything that we put into this um into this proposal. Um, I noticed that a couple things weren't uh weren't up here yet, and I don't know if you guys have them available or not, but uh we did an extensive um study of several sites. So there's an area that that that we have a significant gap of coverage and that's why we're here because there is a significant gap of coverage in this area. So when we get that from an RF engineer, there is a radius that we have to look and stay and stay within that radius. Um so do we do we have do they are I don't know if these are up there or not. I do have them on my computer. It's included in our report. It is included in your report. Okay, we read it. Um, so in in regards to that, you can see that we did a a full study of the entire neighborhood of the entire I mean we we went through every possible piece of land that that could pos that we could possibly locate on and either the landlords weren't interested or there just wasn't enough space and we couldn't stay within the municipal code on those pieces of property. Um, and you can see on the on that site analysis that we eliminated those properties and we gave the reasons why those properties were eliminated and then we stayed with the church because that was the most um that was the leasable uh and zonable property that was available to us. Um, also I know there were a couple concerns that uh I believe Miss Ellis and I'm sorry Miss Ellis. Okay, that Miss Ellis brought uh to your attention yesterday. Um and we addressed those issues and I believe you have a memo um in regards to that. There was a shadowing um concern that we addressed um that shows that that that wouldn't be a concern. And then um you know there was also concern regarding uh I believe uh property value. So uh what's tough with property value is um it's really not there's no factual evidence um that shows either way. We did provide a PowerPoint study that we've done in the past. Um it actually was just last year of a new development that's located near these 200 uh foot 200 uh two tall 200 foot uh wireless facilities that were not stealth completely uncovered. Uh the homes were $500,000 homes and I believe it was five years later some of them sold for like 43% above what you know what they what they uh were listed at back in 20 I think it was 2019 to 20 24 so what for 5 years um so I mean we don't have a bunch of extensive studies all over the place you know we do them when we can um but that was one study that proved that uh that property values don't diminish. Um, you know, I myself am a realtor. I'm 42 years old. I've been a realtor since I was 18 um in in Southern California. I've never to this day have had an issue selling a home and or finding a home for a buyer because of a cell tower. So, um, I can say that personally. Um, but I know that doesn't speak to, you know, other people's other realtor um, you know, possible um, opinions of what they think a house should or shouldn't have. Uh, a lot of realtors don't think houses should have solar um because they think that the it won't sell, you know, especially if it's leased. Um, so there's so many variables that go into home values that I I I don't think that something like this can be considered. Um but I will say that what we have what we have proposed um is something that won't be vi it's not something that you go by and you say oh that is a cell tower. I mean we we we were using a mono eucalyptus tree which is one of the best stealth trees that is available on the market. And um as you can see from the photo sims, I mean it really is a gorgeous tree and it covers you can't even see the antennas from it. Um so I I don't think that that would be a factor. Uh and it's also across the other the other side of the canal. Um you know the the residents I believe where Mrs. Ellis lives and everybody else is on one side of the canal and this is on the other. Um, so I I think that that helps as well. Um, trying to address everything here because I don't know. Am I going to get a chance? Should I come up here? I mean, do I get a chance to come up and rebuttal? Do I am I do I need to speak to anything else? You'll have a chance for a rebuttal. Yes. Okay. Okay. So, um, yeah, you guys, uh, at this point, um, I think I've said everything I needed to say. Um, and I'm happy to answer again any questions you guys have. uh any uh to to the extent of my abilities and um I'm happy to address any concerns that Mrs. Ellis has um besides obviously uh the things that I've already mentioned here, you know, up on the podium. So, thank you for your time. I really do appreciate it. And uh let me know, do you guys have any questions for me? Thank you, Mr. Alba. I think I think we still got to go through in favor opposition before questions. [Music] Are there any others in favor of the project that would like to speak? Seeing none, is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposition of the project? If so, please step to the microphone, identify yourself, and proceed. Hi again. Can you hear me? Yes. Uh, my name is Michelle Ellis. Um, I am opposing the T-Mobile Tower project. I have several concerns with this telecommunications tower being developed behind my residence. Um, I would like to talk about the depreciation value of homes near telecommunication towers. I was presented with a study that suggests that there was no correlation in one particular neighborhood to a telecommunications tower being installed into one neighborhood that was not yet developed at that time. This does not reflect the majority of neighborhoods. The articles that I have found were in regards to potential buyers not wanting to buy a pre-existing house that had a telecommunications tower with invisible sight or even general location article. Um, so a couple of those articles, one of the articles that I came upon was actually from the national national association of realtors that said that we find that homes close to towers cell towers sell for a discount of up to 7.6% 6% and that any noticeable effect dis disappears at 1,500 ft. Mine's going to be 150 ft or so from that particular tower. Um, another environmental health trust property value issue. On average, the potential external cost of a wireless tower is approximately $4,000 per residential property, which corresponds to a negative price effect of 2.65%. The negative price impact of 9.78% is much more severe for properties within visible range of a tower compared to those not within visible range of a tower. Um I have several other concerns about this tower going in. Um I know that um I'm sorry I didn't want to do Oh Joshua um had had talked about um the legalities of health risk that the government can't say you can or can't because of health risk. But if the health risks are one of the reasons that people don't want to buy my house in the future because they're worried about those same issues, then that is to me part of the same equation. So upon researching um telecommunications tower issues, I found that there were actually two other problems um that were pertinent. Um the first being the possible health risk to the RF radiation that is emitted by the tower. While I have read that it is generally acceptable or accepted that these towers do not admit enough radiation to cause medical problems, yet in many places around the country, injuries have been documented such as cancer, headaches, tonitis, and other medical problems in as a concern. Um, I did find an article from the American Cancer Association that I'd like to read a small portion of. Get to that real quick. Cell phone towers are still relatively new and many people are understandably concerned about whether the RF waves they give off might possibly have health effects. At this time, there is no strong evidence that exposure to RF waves from cell phone towers cause any noticeable health effects. However, this does not mean that the RF waves from cell phone towers have been proven to be absolutely safe. Most expert organizations agree that more research is needed to help clarify this, especially for possible long-term effects. Again, it's something that's going to be stationary for a very long period of time. It's not something that can easily be taken away if it comes to proof that there is a problem with it being so close to a residence. And even further to say, there was a group called the Physicians for Safe Technology that did a study on children that was able to figure out that their children were having many side effects to being very close proximity to towers. And they actually made in certain cities in California, they actually made certain pertinance that you could not have a cell tower within 500 feet of a school or place where a children spent most of their time. So again, that speaks to me as that there could be potential health risk to that and again that can also affect my resale value at some point. Um the second um concern also pertains to the radiation that is emitted from the telecommunications towers is to the plants and animals surrounding it. I found an article that a study was conducted on the RF radiation that comes off these two towers or off these towers has been shown to interfere and damage the bees in the environment as well as birds and plants. I have many of all three of these living species in my backyard. I have a family of blue jays that live in my yard and a family of hummingbirds that frequent my yard and I'm pretty sure live next door. What will happen to them if this tower goes up? Not to mention the bee population is already serious in serious decline and without bees we all die. Um there was an article that they did a very intense study about um and I'll read just a little bit of it. A growing body of scientific studies um showed electromagnetic fields from the extremely low frequency common to power lines and radio frequency radiation, the kind from cell cell towers and mobile devices may be harmful to wildlife as well as humans. A three-part review of the literature recommended and federal government regulate regulate electromagnetic radiation as pollution. uh Blake Levit, medical and science journalist, author of two books and electromagnetic fields and study of co-author said radiation RF radiation even at low levels caused harm in every animal model study especially bees and birds. Um one other point that I'd like to touch on just because my husband does work for Spectrum and so he understands a lot about um frequency and that there is a possibility that these frequencies coming from this tower could disrupt our Wi-Fi. We are not on a T- bomb network because we're a spectrum. Um, so I don't know that what the cooperation is there, how they work together or don't, but he did tell me that he thought that that could be an issue. Thank you. Thank you again, Miss Ellis. Thank you. Seeing no others in opposition, does any commissioner have questions for the public on this item? Remember, this is not the time to express opinions on the matter. is only time to ask [Music] questions. Go ahead, Commissioner Martin. Um, yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, Miss Ellis, you indicated that a or um that there's a potential 9.7% drop by National Association of Realtors review or survey when you folks put these towers in. We have a report uh a very good report that staff's put together that indicates that that is not the case. Do you have a copy of that uh survey or whatever it was? I have a a link that I can send. Okay. I was just curious and and um chair through the staff through the chair as well. Um is there any So there has not been any indication that this could reduce property values based on what I'm seeing and and the market seems to be still doing quite well even with interest rates. So, I mean, we're not finding that at all. Right. Commissioner Martin, um, to clarify, the information you received regarding market values in your memo was submitted by the applicant. The applicant staff takes a neutral position related to property values. We're looking at more of the planning principles and service to the public, right? and not necessarily property values. Okay, thank you for that. And then I I have one other question regarding the uh potential health concerns and I guess we all use cell phones every day and all this, so maybe there's something with all of that. Who knows? But to to our understanding and staff and and I was reading through all the documents, there is no posed health risk to the public for the folks surrounding a tower like this. No substantial evidence. I mean, we it could be a what if, but no substantial evidence that we know of. Commissioner Martin, we wouldn't have that information. I mean, like you said, we use cell phones every day. I I mean, it could there be some potential risk. It's possible, but it's not something that we analyzed or was considered as part of this um application. Okay. Well, obviously they probably wouldn't be having these towers put up everywhere and we wouldn't have cell phones in our ear every day if it was was too big of a risk, right? So, anyway, just curious. Yeah. All right. Thank you, Commissioner Neil. Yeah, my question is for the applicant. Um, we have photo simulations to illustrate the effects of shadow casting from the tower. Um, and I'm just wondering how those were developed. Hi again, my name is Joshua Alba. I represent Towerco. Um, so those were developed by a company that that um specializes in shadow and um uh what is it called? Shadow and um SNS. Shadow and Shades um for cell towers for for uh situations just like this. um they do them uh they do them on a on a per need basis, but they've been doing it for I think the last probably 15 20 years. Um and they present them when it's needed. So, uh we were able to get that done uh within a 24-hour period uh when Miss Ellis brought that up as a concern. And then I I believe as you can see from those depictions uh it it is there is no concern of shadowing. Yeah. Um I just have a question to that. Did they only provided pictures for this study or was there any statement provided by the company as well? Um, so the only statements are if you if you look at the study, they're they're they're kind of in the it'll say A, B, C, and D, and it'll say no effect, no effect, small effect, whatever. And then it'll have a note on on those photos. It'll say something to the effect of All right, let me grab my I have it pulled up here. So let me just um so it'll say whether it has an impact or no impact and then it'll have a note of like for example on page uh three uh it says no environment is generally dark at uh 8:00 a.m. during the winter solstice. Uh just to show that uh the shadowing um just to show the shadowing goes that way. But it's also dark at that time or it's the darkest time of the the morning I guess. Okay. So it's just an estimation pre prepared by some software not the actual data taken. It's an it's an estimation prepared by a software. Yeah. Okay. That analyzes shadows and the sun and um you know an object. Okay. Um and I have a question for the staff just to fact check. Um I think you mentioned something about uh radio radio frequency emission. There's no regulation that city or state can put on those. That's correct. Okay. Is that is that correct? Was that that's correct? Okay. Yes. And and uh one more thing on the on the shadowing thing. I will say that there there are several trees in her neighborhood in that neighborhood. Um there's even a a tree that's somewhat bare right now, but it's right kind of abutdded. I actually have photos of it buted up against her uh I guess I think it's her neighbor's tree once it's full. I mean uh that would have more effect on on her solar panels than than uh I mean anything else. I mean our honestly ours is not even close. So uh but there are other factors in that area that would affect that than than ours. Okay. And um will that um affect any other cell phone provider service? For example, if uh AT&T, it will slow down. Yeah, good question. We use our own frequ Everyone has their own frequencies. So, um again, the FCC uh assigns certain frequencies to every carrier. Um even uh not just every carrier, but also uh police stations, fire stations. We cannot cross frequencies with any other um telecommunications company. So, none of those none of those uh frequencies ever cross each other and it will not be affected. Now the only time that I guess the only time that does happen is if uh we are like abudded like if say our antenna is abudded up against a um a police station antenna they have to have a certain separation but that doesn't apply in this sit in this case. So um this this tree does allow up to three carriers. Um so we it could help um you know whether AT&T, Verizon, whoever else needs coverage in this area. Dish um who's who's a a new player in the game, they can also uh colllocate on this tower. So, we did make it a collocatable tower so that uh more doesn't need to be built and really more can't be built in this area because we we we looked and there's just no other space for it. So, okay. I I just have a question for the applicant. I I talked to staff about this, but you developed these east elevation, south ele the elevation drawings for this application, correct? Uh elevation, we did. Yes. Okay. I had a question if you don't mind on the south and east elevations. Again, I spoke to staff on I just want to confirm on the south and east elevations. We're showing a chain link fence that ab butts against the um block wall. On the site, the compound area plan, the site plan, we're just showing a block wall around the entire facility. Yeah. Could you reference what that just tell me what that chain link fins on east and south elevation? Uh if you go back uh go back. You just passed it. Um I'm sorry. Who? Uh right there. So right is that on the right side, right? Yeah. South elevation. So that's actually it's actually behind it's actually the chain link fence that exists that goes along the can uh canal. It's the church's chain link fence and it's actually behind that brick wall. you obviously you can't see that that depth there, but um you know I can ask my guy we actually usually fade that out a little bit more so it doesn't look so like it's a part of it. So I I can definitely have my architect fade that out for when we go into building safety just to make it more more clear. I just want to confirm that the facility being constructed for this the only chain link being added is the chain link double swing gate. The rest of it is a block facility 8 foot tall. Right. Yeah. And it's not even a chain. It's It's actually I think it's a um it's it's a uh um like a steel door like a like a I think it's like um I don't know what you want to call it. Uh I'm not a construction guy, so it's going to be it's look nicer than a ch it's it's nicer than a than a chain link double door open. So all right. Yeah. All right. Yeah. Hopefully that answers. Sorry. I'm not a I don't know. You know, it does and I don't think it matters much. I just want to make sure we're not Half of this is gonna be chain link half blocks. You've answered that. Yeah. Thank you. And that's all I had. Did we have any other staff? No. Okay. So, at that point, I am going to open up for rebuttal on this item. Uh, and we started with in support. So, is there anyone in opposition who would like to Oh, go ahead, Miss King. I was going to say that it's five minutes uh for the rebuttal on first. Oh, sorry. Sorry. Yeah, I I should have gotten to that. All right, I'll just read the whole thing. I'll stop ad libing. Is there anyone who wishes to provide a rebuttal on this item? If so, please be prepared to step to the podium. Each side will have only five minutes to make your comments succinctly without repeating the remarks of previous speakers to ensure that everyone wishing to provide rebuttal comments has a chance to do so. Opposition? No. those in opposition. Okay. So, if there's no opposition, then we don't need the rebuttal for in favor. That's correct. Perfect. At this time, I will now close the public hearing on the item and return it to Commission for comment and action. Commissioner Neil. All right. Um, just a couple of comments um regarding the um issues raised by the neighbor that showed up today. um regarding two things. One seems to be a health concern issue. The other one seems to be like a neighborly nuisance um kind of issue. And so regarding the um the health concern issue, it is true that RF missions uh health concerns about them can't be the legal basis to block the tower if it complies with FCC guidelines. And this is a federally preempted um fact. Um, and with that though, I do understand um our the neighbors um concerns regarding the RF exposure limits because um the towers uh the guidelines the limits were adopted in 1996 uh from a 19 uh from guidelines in 1991 developed by organizations like the Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers and the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Um but since then um in 2019 the FCC actually reaffirmed the 1996 RF exposure limits. Um and that review was based on the FDA input, EPA input and the National Cancer Institute uh input which all found no conclusive evidence of harm from RF exposure. Um and in 2021 um it actually became um was heard in court um regarding the effects on children and long-term exposure. Um so um as of now um the FCC has not changed its exposure limits. Um but it is under pressure to re-evaluate it because of some of the health concerns and risks that you know um have been seen in certain areas. Um and I actually have a little bit of knowledge about this because of school cell towers on school sites which related to my daytime job. Um so um I definitely understand your concerns. Um, there are things though that a person can do to protect their home and themselves from RF exposure if that's a significant concern. And that would be a a personal matter of finding a way to make sure that if you think it might be a um unhealthy uh amounts of RF exposure, there are things you can do to your home. Uh and there are consultants uh for that and all sorts of things you can do to your home to limit um your exposure on the side of your home where the where the where the um exposure is coming from. So that's something that I wanted to note. And regarding um the nuisance items regarding the Wi-Fi shadows on on your solar and property values, those are actually civil legal matters. Um that if it actually manifests that you experience those issues, um that's that's a civil matter and it's a civil nuisance matter and can and that's a different uh route of pursuing making those arguments. But as far as the commission is concerned today, um we have to vote on um what's actually in front of us. Um and as long as it's meeting um the requirements, um we can't consider the nuisance and the health concerns today. But we do hear you and I just wanted to uh point that out. So with that being said, I that's my comment. I'm going to wait for other commissioners to comment. All right. I very succinct, Mrs. Neil. I appreciate that so much. Um, and I I don't see any other staff comments. So, or commissioner comments. I'm looking for a motion. So, moved. Second. I I need a motion. A motion to approve staff recommendation. Commissioner Martin. Thank you. Second. Seconded by Commissioner O'Neal. Staff, please. Uh, I'll say it for item 5B. Uh, please vote on recommendation from Commissioner Martin to approve and seconded by Neil. Motion passes with Chair Keed absent. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Uh, Madame Clerk. Um, excuse me, vice chair. May I read the appeal statement? Shorten, please. You may appeal a commission decision to the city council by submitting your request in writing to the city city council and care of the city clerk's office 1600 Truxton Avenue Bakersfield within 10 days from the date of the commission's decision. Your appeal must satisfy the requirements of the Bakersville Municipal Municipal Code and possibly include a um filing fee. If you are within the mailed public notice area, there is no charge for the appeal. Thank you. Thank you. Missing, will you give us your presentation or staff report on item 5C? For item 5C, I'd like to introduce the project planner, Yazid Aligori. Uh good evening commissioners. Uh my name is Yazid Aligaryi and I am an assistant planner with the city of Bickersfield's development services department planning division. Agenda item 5C is general plan amendment zone change number 24-0372. The applicant is Lav Pinnacle Consulting and Engineering on behalf of the property owner the Fred Gemini 2008 Living Trust. One one second. Do we have a staff report to show for this on presentation? I'm sorry I spaced out. It looked like the exact same one from the last one. It is. Oh, okay. Okay. Yeah. Sorry. All right. I You know what? I knew what I meant to say, but I said it wrong. The project site is located on the northwest corner of Taft Highway and Michelle Street on approximately 2.63 acres. Next slide. The project site has a zone classification of C2 regional commercial and A agriculture. The project site has a general plan designation of GC, general commercial, and SR, suburban residential. The intent of this general plan and zone change is to clean up the parcel and make it all general commercial C2 allowing it to be consistent with neighboring parcels which are all general commercial and industrial. The properties to the north and to the west are county properties. A mitigated negative declaration was prepared by staff in accordance with SQUA and all public noticing requirements were met. Staff recommends approval and the same to city council. That concludes my presentation. Thank you. Thank you. Excuse me, vice chair. There was a memo transmitted to the commission for late correspondence. Thank you, Missine. All right. The public hearing on item 5C is now open. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in favor of the project? Please step to the microphone, identify yourself, and proceed. Good evening, commission and staff. My name is Doug Gosling. I have the opportunity to work for the owner of the property. We're here tonight to ask that the commission adopt the recommendation of staff. As Mr. Aligaryi noted, there's some inconsistency that's being cleaned up. This will be productive. It'll fulfill the commission's purposes of expanding south of town right here. And so the uh staff has reviewed comments. You received two public comments. Current Delta, they're in favor of this. Well, they want to see how it works out. We're going to work with them. We understand there's a letter been submitted tonight. The letter is the same letter. It's already been submitted in the past. Staff has worked through it. So, there is levels of of environmental review that should be done. However, if you do look at the staff report, I'm so sorry. All right. I know Miss Miss Oliver, you did the u you'll note that uh there is no proposed project at this time. This really is a zoning cleanup and therefore the mitigated negative negative deck would be the appropriate solution to approve on this. And I believe that concludes my comments. It's a straightforward process. We hope that the uh the court I apologize the commissioners will adopt and pres uh provide this over to the city council for uh for adoption. Thank you for your time very much. Thank you, Mr. Gosling. And we definitely have no power of a court here. So, is there anyone else in favor of this project to speak? Seeing none, is there anyone who wish to speak in opposition of the project? Please step to the microphone, identify yourself, and proceed. Good evening. Uh my name is Caroline Frell and I'm an attorney appearing on behalf of uh supporters alliance for environmental responsibility or safer. Uh Richard Drury from llo and Drury uh submitted a comment letter one in January. Um and then another one just a couple of days ago based on the response to comments that the staff prepared um for the staff report for this meeting. Um, I have extra copies of those comments if they're needed or if you have them. Um, I'm happy to to provide a few comments. Um basically uh the comments in essence present evidence that there's a fair argument that the general plan amendment and zone change um have a significant impact on the environment and require the preparation of an environmental impact report as opposed to a mitigated negative declaration. Um even though there's no specific project attached to this general plan amendment um this kind of authorize this amendment would authorize new uses um at the project site including like auto repair um anything from sort of retail commercial crematorium is one of the allowable uses and warehouses some of which are not allowed. uh some of which are by right and do not require an additional conditional use permit. So that raises questions about whether there will be future environmental review at the site. Um in addition within the letter there were two expert reports prepared. One by Dr. Clark who's an air quality expert, one by Dr. Shu Smallwood who is a ecologist and a wildlife expert. and both of which conclude that there are potentially significant impacts on the environment which is the requirement under SQA for an environmental review uh or an environmental impact report. Uh in terms of air quality, Dr. Clark points to potential cumulative air quality impacts uh from the site given that um the community where this will be located the area is in the top 5% of impacted communities for PM2.5 in the state and in the top 1% for ozone based on kalen virro screen 4.0 which is the state's kind of screening tool for cumulative impacts. Dr. Clark also pointed to the fact that construction activities on the site um could be a source for Valley Fever spores to be released um and also suggested a series of mitigation measures for valley fever that were not included in the mitigated negative declaration as proposed um and those were listed in exhibit A of the January letter on pages 6 to9. In addition, uh Dr. Clark pointed that there was no analysis orlo disclosure of mitigation for possible toxic air contaminants. Um and he modeled a potential land use um of a 75,000 ft warehouse which would be something that could be allowed by the zone change and general plan amendment and concluded that the daily emissions would be significant um under the thresholds of significance from the air district and also given the the area the sensitivity and vulnerability of the area where uh the project is would be located. In terms of the biological uh survey, Dr. uh Smallwood um commissioned a survey site where they walked around the perimeter and in a three-hour uh survey found 27 species of vertebrate wildlife detected, including six special status um uh species. In addition, um Dr. Smallwood reviewed the Mesa biological report and the literature review contained in that um and found that there were some inconsistencies with um California fish and wildlife guideline compliance in the methodology. He also pointed to two unstudied impacts that would be potential from some of the land uses that would be allowed under the general plan and zone change amendment. And that included habitat fragmentation that could lead to the reproductive capacity of birds in the area as well as um uh traffic mortality given some of the land uses of retail and in the area. Um and also he in terms of the mitigation that's included within the mitigated negative declaration right now Dr. Smallwood pointed that a lot of the mitigation focused on preconstruction surveys which are very different from detection surveys which are usually done at the be before an environmental impact uh analysis is concluded uh rather than before project begins. So he was pointing out that these are two different studies and that jumping from like no study to a preconstruction study would be insufficient um and would not address the loss of habitat or the reproductive capacity um of birds at the site. He also Dr. Dr. Smallwood also pointed some to additional mitigation measures um that could be included but were not in the current mitigated negative declaration. In conclusion, this presents a a substantial evidence that there is a fair argument that the project may have a significant impact on the environment particularly regarding air and air quality and biological resources. that requires the preparation of an environmental impact report and we respectfully request um that the planning commission refer this back to staff for preparation of an environmental impact report. Thank you. And I'm happy to answer any questions um if you have them on me. Thank you, Miss Frell. And could I get you to spell your last name? Sure. Frell F as in Frank, A R E L L. Thank you so much. My favorite kind. That was a great question. Yeah. Yeah. Uh, so are there any others in opposition of the project to speak forward? All right, seeing none, does any commissioner have questions for the public on this item? Please remember this is not the time to express any opinions on the matter. It is only the time to ask questions. Commissioner Neil or Commissioner Core. Darn it. Um I have question for the staff. Um since there is no project decided right now that what's going to be on this property and once it's decided what they're going to build on this property, will it come before commission? The proposal um provides a by right entitlement. So if the proposed use is allowed under the zoning ordinance, it will just uh be processed through an administrative process, site plan review and not come to the planning commission directly. Okay. And when is the environmental report um environmental impact report requested? Is it based on the project or on property? An environmental impact report is based on the proposed project. So in this case they are uh requesting changes to portions of a single parcel. Um the process is the staff prepares the initial study that evaluates and makes a determination on the level of significance of any impact and um staff determine that all the impacts uh are to the are mitigated to levels less than significant which um proposes a negative negative declaration and not rise to the level of EIR. Okay. And is there a way of u commission putting a request on this parcel uh that whatever project is decided in future it comes to the commission at that time or is that a possibility? That is a possibility. However, you will end up with what's called split zoning on the property because um it doesn't show directly, but the portion to the southwest that's right on the corner there that and including the property subject to this um GPA zone change application is one parcel. And what we're trying to do today is to correct the split zoning and split land use entitlements within the one parcel. So, uh this the only portion that is subject to your uh purview tonight are is outlined in yellow. And if we place a overlay or combining zone for a planned commercial development, it would only apply to what's bordered in the in the yellow. Okay? And so three/arters of the property would not have the the planned commercial development overlay. So again, you have split zoning. Mhm. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Neil. But for serious this time, It's suburban residential, right? Commissioner, I believe it's less than an acre along the northern boundary. It's shaded in kind of a blue with a crosshatch. That is suburban residential. Let me see. Okay. It's less than an acre. Okay. All right. And then um because it's going from residential and commercial um what would be the impact of having um the difference of having a C1 designation versus a C2 here? Again, you you end up with a split zoning situation within one parcel. Mhm. And a C1 is is less intense development than a C2. Um and it would be difficult to create a site plan. Um perhaps straddling one use could straddle the zoning line and the use could be allowed in the C2 but not in the C1. So it would be difficult to approve that kind of site plan. Got it. Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone who wishes to provide a rebuttal on this item? If so, be prepared to step to the podium. Each side will have only five minutes, so make your comments succinctly without repeating the remarks of the previous speaker to ensure that everyone wishing to provide rebuttal comment has a chance to do so. Mr. Chair, good evening again, Doug Gosling. Uh, commissioners, if you're able, or uh, Miss Sullis, can you go to page five and page six of the uh, staff report? On the staff report that I printed off, it has page five of 34 and page six of 34. My is that not how they have it? Sorry, Miss Zing. Who's controlling the monitor, Miss Zing? I am not sure which document you wish to have that photo on the aerial on the screen. Okay. There you go. Beautiful. Uh, commissioners, um, some of the questions, Commissioner Neil and Commissioner Carr, just that top section of the yellow is currently residential and you can't build anything on it as it is right now because of how unfortunately in the past this slipped through the cracks about how it was zoned. And so it's it's uh it's it's it's not worthless, but obviously cleaning it up would be that way. So there's no productive keeping uh that that top portion as residential. And you'll also note, are you able to go to the next page? The surrounding environment is commercial and um and south of the current commercial is truck stops and I5 is right there just to the east of all this development. And so 247 trucks and farming equipment are accessing and paying and getting gas and going to Weed Patch Highway. I go to Lindos down there and have lunch. So, it's a very active environment at this time. And so, I just wanted to provide that if you haven't driven through there, there's some more uh boots on the ground. Thank you, Mrs. Zing. Thank you, commissioners. Thank you, Mr. Gosling. All right. I am going to switch to opposition rebuttal. [Music] Thank you. All right. Seeing none, I will now close the public hearing on the item and return it to Commission for comment and action. Uh, Commissioner Morton. Yeah, I think um to to Mr. Gosling point, it seems like, you know, there's there are different parcels that we have that, you know, maybe like it it did appear based on this to to slip through the cracks and and not be consistent with its neighbors in this case just about in every direction, especially in that location. and I I know the the road well also. So, it seems to make sense that we fix some of these um holes so we can be more consistent in how we develop and move the city forward in a positive manner. So, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Any other commissioner comments or maybe a motion? I make a motion to approve item 5C. Commissioner Brent Oliver. Do I have a second? I'll second that. Commissioner Biddle, Commissioners, please cast your vote. Motion passes with Cher absent. Thank you, Missing. Are you going to Yeah. May I read the appeal? Absolutely. You may appeal a commission decision to the city council by submitting your request in writing to the city council and care of the city clerk's office 1600 Truxton Avenue Bakersfield within 10 days from the date of the commission's decision. Your appeal must satisfy the requirements of the Bakersfield municip municipal code and possibly include a $1,326 filing fee. If you are within the mailed notice area, there is no charge. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Ing. Madame Clerk, next item please. [Music] Agenda item seven, communications. Does staff have any communication items? Yes, thank you. Um, I'd like to remind um the commission and and the public that the city council is now recruiting for two seats on the planning commission uh due to two expiring um terms. And please contact the city clerk's office. you are interested and I believe that uh recruitment closes April 11th. Um there will be no meeting April 3rd. Um our next meeting will be April 17th. Thank you. Thank you, Miss E. Madame Clerk. Next item, please. Agenda item 8, commission comments. Does any commissioner have any comments? All right. Seeing none, Madame Clerk, next item, please. Agenda item nine, adjournment. This meeting is adjourned at 7:14 p.m. [Music]