[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] for [Music] [Music] e [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] welcome to the city of Bakersville Planning Commission meeting this television broadcast is brought to you by the local cable companies the county of karna and the City of Bakersfield you can watch the rebroadcast of this meeting Saturday at 7 p.m. and Sunday at 10:00 a.m. the agenda for this meeting can be downloaded at www. Bakersfield city. us priding over this evening's meeting chair Zack Bashir [Music] toos good evening it is my pleasure to call to order the October 16th 23 special Planning Commission meeting uh Madam clerk would you please call the role chair Basher TSH here Vice chair ker here commissioner bidle here commissioner core here commissioner Coman here commissioner Neil here agenda item two Pledge of Allegiance please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance 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 Bakersville 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 recommendations to the Planning Commission who will approve the item or make a recommendation as appropriate Madam clerk next item please agenda item 3A 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 non-agenda item 3B public statements does anyone in the audience wish to address a commission regarding items not listed on tonight's agenda if so please come forward and state your name seeing none Madame clerk next item please agenda item four consent calendar item thank you all matters listed under 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 request specific items be discussed and or remove for separate action may I get a motion approving the consent items please I'll make a motion my sh cater thank you may I get a second I'll second that thank you commissioner ble Commissioners cast your votes motion passes with commissioner Coman abstaining thank you madam clerk next item please agenda item five there are no consent public hearing items thank you Madame clerk next item please agenda item six non-consent public hearings wonderful now is the time for non-consent public hearing items this is a continuation of public hearing appeal 6A that was originally opened on October 5th 2023 Planning Commission the Planning Commission meeting public hearing appeal 6A was opened at that time and at that time staff requested that it be continued to today in order to meet notification requirements I want to explain how the appeal hearing will be conducted staff will first give a report then those in favor of the site plan review will be allowed to speak those in opposition to the site plan review will be able to speak after all of 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 appeal hearing on that item is closed written comments be G may be given to the clerk who will provide copies to the commission please be respectful of others participating in the hearing by not repeating the remarks of previous speakers and presenting any new comments or thoughts in a concise and clear way Mr Johnson would you please provide us with your staff report yes thank you for attending tonight's special meeting this is an appeal of site plan review number 21- 0399 project site is located Southeast corner of bive Drive Newson drive just west of Highway 99 it is a department of V Veterans Affairs community- based outpatient clinic or seok located on approximately 10 acres single story construction with just under 40,000 square ft of area there is no overnight stay they have primary and specialty care provided which includes Dental hearing vision and such to explain the site plan review process we follow the green arrows for this case the application was submitted it was reviewed for completeness the application then went to our site plan review committee which consists of seven different departments after their review a SQ review was done and it was determined that a environmental impact report was necessary as you may recall on September 7th this year you certified that environmental impact report as we're following down on the right hand side after that sequel approval the development services director approved the site plan review on September 8th that decision was appealed in a timely manner by progress for Bakersfield veterans or pbv through their attorney Channel Law Group so we are now at the site plan review appeal at the Planning Commission it's also important to note that your certification of the eir was also appealed and that will go to city council for consideration any person not satisfied with the decision of the development services director May file an appeal within 10 days and the appeal must contain the precise basis and issues on appeal and we did receive again a timely appeal three pages from Channel Law Group on behalf of pbv for three of the topics the the appellant failed to provide a precise basis for their assertions as such no further response can be provided beyond what is written in the staff report without a specific issue being raised the other two topics can be discussed as one because of the relationship in essence the appellant alleges the project should not be defined or permitted as an outpatient clinic instead it should require a conditional use permit because it will treat patients with contagious diseases as well as those suffering from drug Andor alcohol addiction it's worth noting that the Bakersfield Municipal Code aligns that type of treatment with Hospitals sanitariums and Clinics that provide for overnight stays and I'll provide a little bit more discussion on that in subsequent slides bride background the site is located in the M2 Zone which is the general manufacturing it is the most inclusive Zone that the city has the way Bakers field uses its nested zoning concept any permitted use in the co C1 C2 M1 is considered a permitted use in the M2 Zone and that includes the uses that you see on the right Medical Dental psychiatric and other health practitioner offices and Clinics family and Social Services clinics and centers pharmacies in conjunction with medical clinics in contrast the applicant is likely referring to the use shown on the left of the pyramid which requires a conditional use permit in the M1 zone so the proposed cach is an outpatient clinic and not intended for extended state unlike hospitals and sanitariums or other buildings that provide for overnight stays or longer as noted in the definition stated there even the parking calculations reflect a difference with inpatient clinics versus outpatient clinics inpatient clinics are parked per bed while outpatient clinics are parked per square foot of floor area so there is a difference and again this is an outpatient clinic outpatient clinics are located in commercial industrial zones throughout Bakersfield for comparison this map shows there are at least 10 Healthcare facilities that are located in the M1 and M2 zones all without a conditional use permit furthermore if the staff report it discusses how the current cbok on Westwind Drive was initially permitted in the M1 Zone without a conditional use permit and without an environmental impact report so to allege that the proposed seach requires a conditional use permit is without warrant when considering this appeal your Planning Commission has the authority to determine whether or not an adopted development standard zoning regulation or policy applied or not applied to the project was done consistent with authority granted by the ordinance you do not have the authority to add delete change or modify adopted standards regulations or policies except as required to comply with the conditions necessary to mitigate unavoidable environmental impacts if you recall the September meeting the only unavoidable environmental impact was the greenhouse gases Planning Commission has two options you may deny the appeal and uphold the development services director's approval of the site plan in this case a project would be approved and a VA Outpatient Clinic can be constructed your other option is to uphold the appeal and overturn the development services director's approval in this case the project would be denied and VA Outpatient Clinic would not be constructed I would like to note we did receive two comment letters the first was provided to your commission in a memor memorandum it was submitted by calr um they recommended that or I should say they stated that they have reviewed the project and they have no comments second letter that we just received just prior to coming over tonight is from Channel Law Group on behalf of pbv and I want to go ahead and go through this point by point there is no memorandum but I want to make sure everything's in the record for your consideration of this appeal for item one they state that the site plan application includes an incomplete project description and that is addressed in the staff report so there's that's not a new comment the project is prohibited number two under the Bakersfield General plan and number three the project is prohibited under the Bakersfield zoning ordinance again that is addressed in the staff report so those are not new comments number four the city has not properly considered proximity of the project to Meadows Field Airport specifically when looking at the airport land use compatibility plan or the Alp I would note that in the draft eir the Alp and this proximity was addressed in sections 2.4.3 4.8.1 4.8 8.4 4.8.5 4.8.3 4.1.5 4.2.4 and the draft e concluded that the project was consistent with the requirements of the metals field Alp as such the project would not result in an airport safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area Point number five the project violates the subdivision map act and appears to involve or require the creation of one or more new Parcels would note that this is a legal lot and an address was issued by the current County assessor's office point six the site plan lacks evidence of required review specifically the decision includes no evidence that all or any required members of the committee in this case would be site plan review committee other than the planning director participated in the review of the site plan Andor submitted comments that's unequivocal L an inaccurate statement as evidenced by the attachment of the development services director's letter approving the site plan review there are conditions and points of contact from the building division planning division fire department Water Resources engineering division Traffic Division and solid waste division all reviewing the project number seven the decision includes no evidence of compliance with zoning land use Andor Public Works required re Ms of Kern County they are alleging that uh part of this is in the unincorporated area of the county I would note that the Kern County Public Works did comment and there are referenced in the final eir as comment letter b and this the draft ER was sent to the county for review and comment number eight the site plan does not comply with the city's ordinance regarding water usage again there's no precise basis for this comment no specificity so it's it doesn't warrant a response at this time number nine written of notice of hearings the city failed to provide proper notice to pbv of the October 5th 2023 hearing of the Planning Commission uh the city did actually notify pbv however it was through their previous law firm and not Channel Law Group however we recognized that error and it was acknowledged which is why on October 5th we continued it to today's meeting we also sent out new hearing notices to every one that was uh involved to include Channel Law Group number 10 the E does not properly address the Project's environmental impacts again as a reminder your commission certified the IR on September 7th 2023 and as noted in this presentation that certification was appealed to city council who will determine the E's adequacy based on the pelant's comments in conclusion the letter states that PB V opposes the decision and respectfully requests that the Planning Commission Grant the appeal direct that the project applicant file for zone change and cup conditional use permit and require further review of the Project's environmental impacts this comment is acknowledged and staff believes the record stands for itself and therefore we recommend option one which is to deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the development services director approving the site plan review that completes my presentation thank you Mr Johnson as previously mentioned this is a continuation of a public hearing appeal that took place on October 5th 2023 Planning Commission meeting is there anyone who wishes to speak in favor of the site plan review please step to the microphone identify yourself and proceed attorney with the firm Routan and Tucker we were retained by the applicant to process their land use approvals I'm here tonight uh promise to keep it exceptionally brief uh here to support the project also support staff's conclusions they did an excellent job and we affirm all points made therein uh I would just draw the commission's attention to our October 3rd letter which explains why this appeal is bereft of any legal Merit and we would urge the commission to deny this appeal tonight unless you have any questions uh thank you for your time and consideration thank you so much is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to the site plan review please step to the microphone identify yourself and proceed seeing none is there any commissioner oh does any commissioner have any questions for the public on this item remember this is not a time to express any opinions on the matter is only time to ask questions chair M sheos I would just like to clarify that the October 3D letter was included as a memorandum to the October 5th Planning Commission meeting so it was aack attached as an attach or it was included as an attachment to this staff report for this meeting also thank you I don't have the the can you pull the thing up does anybody want to talk just want to make sure I'm missing okay perfect that's what I thought is there anyone who wishes to provide a rebuttal on this item you have a question go ahead this is for staff just to clarify um the project is the appeal or the project is the project and therefore is the speaker in support or opposition to the project does that make sense correct I won't answer for the speaker but what you're you are considering the appeal and So speaking in support of the project would be supportive of the appeal of the project I believe it would be supportive of the denial of the appeal okay sorry I'm just clarifying just wanted to make sure there's a lot of uh double positives and negatives okay thank you yep do we need a rebuttal we don't we don't need a rebuttle okay at this time I will close the public hearing Appeal on the item and return to commission for comment and action I am looking for some action commissioner colan thank you chair Basher Tash um well here we are again with this same project um I've read all this stuff and I I'm I'm I'm supportive of the project I've been a supporter of the project since the beginning um I think that the uh the applicant has exhausted all the remedies there all the has met all the uh hurdles that we've set for them uh for this project um I I I'm bothered by the progress for Bakersfield veterans because I don't believe they represent any veterans I think they represent uh the the property owner that currently ex has the current clinic and that concerns me uh it concerns me that channel Law Group uh attempted to drop this uh five page four page uh thing on us on the day of the uh meeting and in some vain effort to not be able to have us respond to it I wanted to thank uh uh director Johnson for addressing each one of these line by line and reiterating that we've already crossed these off our list so um that said um I support this project wholeheartedly I support denying the application to deny it denying the appeal is that is that a motion I yeah that's a motion thank you very much do I have a second second oh that was a motion okay I'll second that commissioner car thank you so much Commissioners please cast your votes so just to clarify can you so the the motion was to deny the appeal and uphold the development services director's approval and the project is approval yes my motion will be to deny the appeal and uphold the development services director's approval period thank you okay please cast your votes who I'm sorry who second the the motion thank [Music] you four so here you're correct commissioner Coleman did you get a chance to vote Commissioners please cash your votes do we want to do a roll call just so make sure that we unless did they it's commissioner colan's vote didn't show let's go and do a roll I don't motion passes thank you can just for clarity sake do we want to do a r call mod yes I don't want this guy to have any reason to do this stupid stuff anymore yeah chair Basher Tosh for vice chair Kar yes four commissioner bid yes commissioner core for commissioner Coman yes commissioner Neil yes motion passes thank you so much Madam clerk next item please agenda item seven Communications the staff have any communication items yes first uh thank you for coming out tonight for the special meeting and those in the audience we will have another meeting this Thursday October 19th 5:30 p.m. thank you agenda item eight commission comments does any commissioner have any comments please I I can't tell if you do so oh he does I always have something to say I just want to thank director Johnson for coordinating all this we had a couple of uh difficult uh projects over the last month or so and you know the switching around of the dates and all that we I really appreciate your extra effort coordinating all that and providing us the information that we need for uh to make a competent decision so thank you very much for you and your staff thank you Madame clerk next item please agenda item nine adjournment this meeting is adjourned at 554 October 16 2023 thank you so much [Music] [Music]