[music] [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] >> Hey, hey hey. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] >> Hey. Hey. Hey. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Beautiful. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hey, hey, hey. [music] >> [music] >> Hey, hey hey. Heat. Hey Heat. Hey. [music] Hey. Hey. >> [music] >> Wow. Wow. >> [music] >> Hey, hey, hey. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Hey, hey hey. Super. Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hey, hey, hey. [music] [music] [music] Heat. Hey, Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. [music] [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. N. [music] [music] Heat. Heat. N. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] >> Hey, hey, hey. >> [music] [music] >> Hey, [music] hey hey. >> [music] >> Heat. [music] [music] [music] Hey, Heat. [music] Hey [music] [music] hey hey. [music] Hey hey hey. [music] [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hey, [music] hey, hey. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] >> Hey, hey hey. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. [music] Hey, hey hey. >> [music] >> down. >> [music] >> Down. >> [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 [music] of Bakersfield. You can watch the rebroadcast of this meeting Saturday at 700 p.m. and Sunday at 10:00 a.m. The agenda [music] for this meeting can be downloaded at www.bakersfieldcity. US. Preciding over this evening meeting, Chair Adam Strickland. >> It is my pleasure to call to order the February 5th, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. Madame Clerk, will you please call the role? >> Chair Strickland >> here. >> Vice Chair Bidd here. >> Commissioner Brandt Oliver >> here. >> Commissioner Kedar. Commissioner Core >> here. Commissioner Martin, Commissioner Neil. >> Madame Clerk, next item, please. >> Pledge of Allegiance. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. 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 Clerk, >> agenda item 3B, public statements. >> Does anyone in the audience wish to address the commission regarding items listed on tonight's agenda? Please note that staff distributed or staff submitted a blue memo asking for non-consent public hearing item 6A to be referred back to staff. Seeing none, madam clerk, next item, please. >> Agenda item four, consent calendar items. >> All matters 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 said items unless staff or commissioner requests specific items to be discussed and or removed for separate action. May I get a motion approving consent items 4 A and 4B? >> So moved. Commissioner Brand Oliver, do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> Commissioner Core, commissioners, please cast your votes. Motion passes with Commissioner Kedar, Commissioner Martin, and Commissioner Neil absent. >> Thank you, Madam Clerk. Next item, please. Agenda item five, consent calendar public hearing items. >> Now is the time for consent calendar public hearing items. If the item is not removed by a commissioner, staff, or 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 hearing items. At this time, I will now open all consent calendar public hearing items. Does any member of the public wish to remove a consent calendar public hearing item? If so, please step to the microphone, state your name and the item you'd like to remove. >> Uh, my name is Gordon Nip. I'd like to remove 5D, vesting tenative track number 7386. >> Thank you, Mr. Nip. We'll move 5D to the end of the non-consent public hearing items. >> Chair Strickland, can I interrupt a minute? Uh, always >> I just want to reiterate that our computers aren't working where I can um achieve or look at the attachments. So, when we're going to have to review item 5D, I won't be able to see the maps and the things like that. It is work. I apologize everyone. [laughter] >> Sorry about that. >> Strickland, I'd like to indicate that there are two memos provided to you tonight. One memo is on item oops 5D and one memo regarding item 5E. Thank you, Miss Ing. Does any member of the public have any other items they'd wish to remove? Seeing none, does any commissioner or staff wish to remove a consent calendar public hearing item? And just let the record reflect that Commissioner Martin showed up at 5:36. Thank you. At this time, the consent calendar public hearing items not removed are now closed. May I get a motion to accept staff's recommendations on the consent calendar public hearing items not removed incorporating all staff memorand staff recommendations? >> I'll make a motion. >> Vice Chair Bidd. May I get a second? >> Second. >> Commissioner Brent Oliver. Commissioners, please cast your votes. Motion passes for item 5 A, 5B, 5 C, and 5E with 5D moved to non-consent public hearings. >> Thank you, Madam Cler. >> Oh, wait. With with um Commissioners Kater and Commissioner Neil absent. >> Thank you, Madam Clerk. Next item, please. Agenda item six, non-consent public hearing items. >> As noted at the beginning of this meeting, staff submitted a blue memo recommending item 6A be referred back to staff for further review. While the public can still make comments today, we encourage you wait to wait until the item is renoticed at a later date. Is there anyone that still wishes to provide comments on 6A? All right, I'm going to continue on with that. Okay, seeing none, I will now open and close the public hearing and return to the commission for action. Are we bringing it to vote to let it go back to staff? Is that what our vote and signifies? Okay. >> Uh, Commissioner Biddle, yes. The motion is to refer it back to staff and we will agendaize it at a later time. >> So, we're only voting on 6A. >> Correct. >> Not six I mean not 5D. Okay. >> Correct. >> May I get a commissioner's motion to refer 6A back to staff? >> So move, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you. >> I'll second that. >> All right. First and second. Uh commissioners, cast your votes, please. I apologize. Who first who moved first? >> Commissioner Morton >> Martin and then Bidd was second. >> Vice Chair Bidd was second. Yes, ma'am. >> Thank you. Motion passes with Commissioner Kater and Commissioner Neil absent. >> Thank you, Madam Clerk. Uh >> Madam Clerk, can you show the screen with a vote? >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Madam Clerk. So, I think next item would be uh item 5D. M missing, would you or your staff provide us with the report on item 5D? >> I'd like to introduce Veronica Martinez, the project planner on this uh project. >> Good evening, commissioners. My name is Veronica Martinez, associate planner with the development services department. I am here to present agenda agenda item 5D. Item 5D on the agenda is a request to adopt a mitigated negative declaration and approve besting tenative trackm 7386 for a proposed project at the southeast corner of Morning Drive and Paladino Drive. The applicant Sanwalken Engineering represents the property owners Mlin LLC plan to divi subdivide 58.29 29 acres into 245 single family residential lots, five landscape lots, one drainage basin, and one designated remainder in the R1 single unit dwelling zone. The residential lots will range in size from 5,000 ft to 12,670 ft with a typical lot size of approximately 50 ft wide by 100 ft deep or 5,000 ft. Access to the subdivision will be provided from Morning Drive to the west and Paladino Drive to the north. Staff has reviewed the development for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. An initial study found that with mitigation measures for air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, and traffic, there would be no significant environmental environmental impacts. The mitigated negative declaration was made available for a 30-day review, public review. Notifications were sent to the property owners within a 300t radius and published in the lo local newspaper. Staff also received written feedback which has been addressed in a memo that you received today. The applicant is here today to respond to your questions. Staff concludes that the project complies with SQUA and is compatible with its surroundings, land use designations and zoning. Therefore, staff recommends the commission adopt the resolution approving the mitigated negative declaration and approve vesting tenative trackm 7386. That concludes my presentation to the project. Thank you. >> Thank you so much, Miss Martinez. The public hearing is now open. Is there anyone who wishes to speak in favor of the project? If so, please step forward to the microphone, identify yourself, and proceed. >> Good morning. My name is Brandon Martin. For the record, B R D M A R T I N. Uh, thank you, Chair Strickland and Vice Chair Bill and distinguished members of the commission. Uh this project is one more project in my continuing effort to help uh bring affordable housing as a term of art. This also is something that we can uh rely on here for people who grew up with me in Bakersfield uh to to have uh for the future in our community. Um it's very similar to uh or at least in proximity to other projects that you have uh recently approved. Uh so it's not a kind of leapfrog development where we're out in the middle of nowhere. Uh we are next door to other houses as part of your general plan vision for housing. Um we think of the our project helps uh with the housing element. Um and uh I was just hired on um today. [laughter] So what I'm going to do is I'm going to listen to u Mr. nip uh a little bit and see if I can rebut some of his comments, most of which seem like a generic form letter we see on every project from the Sierra Club, but I do want to give him a chance before I predict what he's going to say about this project. In the meantime, um I'd love it if you'd have a chance to have the project formally introduced by Brett Dawson, our civil engineer. >> Thank you, Mr. Martin. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in favor of the project? Good evening uh chair and fellow commissioners. My name is Brett Dawson with Sanwaqen Engineering. We are the civil engineer for the project and representing the land owner and subdivider Emlin LLC. [clears throat] I'd first like to thank staff um for all their time and effort with working uh with us now for over three years. Um, I didn't realize it was that long, but we've uh worked through an increased density revision from our initial submittal and comprehensive special environmental studies, all in an effort to meet affordable housing mandates and SQA requirements. [clears throat] Excuse me. As you know, and for the benefit of the audience, the city's housing element update provides for the planning of some 37,000 homes. This represents the Bakersfield share of the regional housing needs allocation determined by the state. [clears throat] The state mandate is driven to asssure local governments are providing for the adequate housing needs for all income levels. To that end, this project is consistent with residential zoning and the general plan. The site previously held full development entitlements with an approved tenative map. However, this new map with the vast majority of lot sizes under 6,000 square ft and predominantly made up of lots from 5,000 to 5,500 square ft dramatically better serves these state mandates and the need for more affordable housing. [clears throat] With regard to the positive surrounding development attributes, this project essentially serves as infield development with existing development to the west and to the east. Additionally, there's an elementary school in in close proximity and the project site adjoins existing major roads and sits directly south of a major bike path. In conclusion, we respectfully request your support of the staff recommendation and seek your approval of this tenative map. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Dawson. >> Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in favor of the project? Seeing none, is there anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to the project? If so, please step forward to the microphone, identify yourself, and proceed. My name is Gordon Nip. I'm the vice chair of the local Sierra Club chapter. Um, I should I should mention that the Sierra Club is not opposed to new housing per se. The Sierra Club would be supportive of any new housing project that thoroughly addresses its impacts and its affordability issues. Unfortunately, this project addresses neither its impacts nor its affordability issues. I've submitted 14 pages of comments for the Sierra Club on this project a and its mitigated negative declaration for tonight. Because of time constraints, of course, we will have to leave most of the issues to the written record while I focus comments on one basic issue, and that is that the city has not addressed the cumulative impacts of this project. Cumulative impacts to air pollution, to habitat loss, to the climate crisis, and others. In not addressing these cumulative impacts, the city risks violating state law sequ and and most importantly it risk vi it risks harming its citizens. This project tracked 7386 is not the only project in the works by any means. I've listed 12 other current uh housing projects in in the letter that I turned in, many of which are in the vicinity of this project. And a recent local environmental impact report lists 51 new projects in the works in its list of cumulative uh projects. Collectively cumulatively these projects impacts are significant even if their individual impacts are small. So, cumulative impacts to air pollution. We have the dirtiest, unhealthiest air in the country, and the city in in in in not addressing cumulative air pollution doesn't seem to be concerned about the health of its citizens. I checked the air district's uh downtown monitors the other day for PM2.5 pollution, the very small particulate matter that gets into people's bloodstreams and and and and can harm the heart and the lungs. The current health standard for PM2.5 is 9 micrograms per cubic meter. PM2.5 at that time was at 58 micrograms per cubic meter. more than six times the current health standard. Terrible, unhealthy air. I checked it this afternoon just before I came down here. The st it was at uh 40 43 as I recall micrograms per cubic meter. Almost five times the current standard. Terrible unhealthy air. While this project's emissions themselves are are relatively small, these are new emissions that together with small emissions from dozens of other projects add to the burden, making our air even worse. At the very least, every new project, including this one, should work with the air district to fund air pollution reduction projects that would offset their new pollution so that at least our air doesn't get even unhealthier. Cumulative impacts to habitat loss. Now that the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan is no longer in effect, the city must find another way to effectively address the project's contribution to cumulative habitat loss. Where are the kit foxes and the burrowing owls supposed to go if we urbanize more and more of their habitat? Without the Metropolitan Bakersfield habitat conservation plan, the city must admit the significance of cumulative impacts to biological resources and should require viable mitigation measures for these impacts in including a requirement to purchase replacement habitat as in the past under the under the old habitat conservation plan. Cumulative impacts on the climate crisis. The climate crisis is inherently a cumulative impact. No one project is large enough to to heat the atmosphere. But cumulatively, our stupid species continues what United Nations Secretary General Antonio Gutirez calls, and I quote here, "The madness of incinerating our only home." the madness of incinerating our only home. Since the city has shelved adopting a climate action plan, it must be extra diligent in assuring that individual projects like this one satisfy state goals and regulations and legal requirements through adoption of feasible mitigation. We've listed numerous such measures in our submission. The city should require specifically defined and enforcable mitigation for the climate crisis. So the city must effectively address these cumulative these cumulative impacts. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. >> Thank you Mr. Nip. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in opposition to the project? If so, please step forward to the microphone, identify yourself, and proceed. Hi, I'm Steve Snitchler. I'm a homeowner just to the right and down from that project and um so lived out there about 18 years. Uh if you don't live in the area, you probably don't realize, but it it's a very nice area. Most of the houses around us are sort of 2200 ft² in a average, but lots of them are 3,000 square feet. A few are less than 2,000, not a lot. But I want to show you what just popped up just to the east of this proposed project. If it's a little hard to see, but we have a a concrete jungle has popped up. What was supposed to be R1, I believe. I I got I downloaded it. It used to be R1 and now it's a little concrete jungle. And these are duplexes. Sir, there the projector there. It's going to be a little weird, but there is a projector pointing down that you can >> Yeah, the monitor will switch over to it. Should make it easier. And then if you want to >> So, this this is right in the middle of 2,000 ft houses. This is a little concrete jungle with the front house is about 1,400 ft². The back house is about 700 ft² with a garage in the middle. But I want you to notice something here. You notice how this duplex has a common driveway with the duplex next door. So, it's actually a forplex because they're all using the same driveway. And this is this is the closest uh settlement to this. So, here's here's the thing. I I'm not against this necessarily, but 5,000 square foot lots, it's totally out of character for our area. Second thing is is that we don't I don't even know what the square footage is going to be, but I bet it's going to be 1500 square feet. It also out of character with our area. And now these duplexes that are popping up, they've popped up on the south side of 178 now. And you know, it's just it's almost like a deliberate attempt to change our area. So, hope you'll keep that in mind. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. And before you walk off, could I ask you to spell your last name? I uh didn't catch it fully. S N I T C H L E R Steve. >> Thank you, sir. >> Is there anyone else who wishes to speak in opposition to the project? Please step to the microphone, identify yourself, and proceed. Seeing none, does any commissioner have any questions for the public on this item? Remember, now is not the time to express any opinions on the matter. Uh it is only time to ask questions. Seeing none, but I don't know if that's a thing. I I did have a question for staff. Um Mr. Nip had mentioned a letter he sent in in response to both uh it sounded like the mit mitigated neg uh the is staff aware of a letter. um it wasn't in the um report. The report said no comments had been received. So I want to clarify that the Sierra Club letter is attached to the blue memo. I believe uh I knew that received that. We talked about that and uh thank you. And then uh I believe Commissioner Core had questions. >> Yeah. Um I have a question for the staff. Um in the memo sent by Mr. Gordon, um he mentioned some um oil wells that are leaking gases. Is there a mention of those in any of the M&D study? >> No, there is no mention because we are not aware of that. Um we have not have been given notice of that um that leakage but it would be a fire department um process and we didn't we didn't not hear from the fire department and also the state has some jurisdiction. So is that something that comes up when the once the construction starts or or isn't it all the wells should be uh properly plotted already anyways? >> Um prior to recordation of a final map is when the wells um would need to be properly abandoned and tested. Um and and that's usually a year to more years out of when that happens. not at this stage is when it usually is not happening. >> And was there an increase in the size of the project from what was previously um approved? >> The density meaning the number of homes or lots has increased >> and how does that impact the um M andD? >> The M andD was evaluated on the current project which is the increased density. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. So, seeing no further commissioner comments or questions, is there anyone who wishes to provide a rebuttal in on this item? If so, be if so, please be prepared to step to the podium. Each side will have only five minutes. So make your comment succinctly without repeating the remarks of previous speakers to ensure that everyone wishing to provide rebuttal comment has a chance to do so. >> Thank you. Brandon Martin again uh for the applicant. Um I I think the first issue I'd like to address is the cumulative impacts specifically cumulative air impacts and cumulative uh environmental or biological impacts. Um we do have an obligation under SQA to address and analyze cumulative impacts and we believe we've done a sufficient job but if we need to do more we will in a final e and fir before the city council votes. Um, for tonight's purpose, um, I would just say that listing 50 projects that are ongoing in Gordon Nibb's estimation, um, is a way to challenge us to speculate as to what the built environment might look like in the future. This project itself had a map that was recorded. And if past projects had had to analyze that old map um or rumors about what the old map might look like, they probably would have overmitigated or underminitigated, but they certainly wouldn't have been accurate in their idea of determining cumulative impacts. Um so we just can't deci unfortunately a lot of what was approved in 2007208 for instance just didn't become part of our environment and if we were to go ahead and take on that burden of fantasy buildout that never happens um we would have inaccurate analysis of cumulative impacts. Having said that, I have seen um projects where they do not um analyze correctly cumulative impacts to the extent that we can bolster our analysis, we will do so um before the city council meeting. Um the idea that there's no longer an HCP, uh that's kind of a red herring. That's not a reason to to avoid approving our project. We would love to see a habitat conservation program uh and because it streamlines development. It's a it's a good thing at the at the right um finan point for everybody where it makes sense. It's a good thing and we'd encourage it. So I agree with Mr. Nip in that sense. However, that doesn't mean that we're not mitigating for loss of biological resources. In fact, we and because there isn't an HCP, we may have to go through and again, this is speculation, an incidental take permit or some other kind of state process. Uh we also have the city's other conditions to protect biological resources as well. Um Mr. Schnitzer commented um and he made some really good comments, but they were about somebody else's project. Uh obviously, I'm new for this project. I'd have no idea uh what the challenges are involving the forplex um or whether that's a code violation or not, but I would recommend that he um he contact the planning department. If there is a code violation, he can report it. It just doesn't have anything to do with your item tonight. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Martin. Is there anyone else who wishes to provide rebuttal in favor of the item? Seeing none, uh, give us a second to reset and we will set for rebuttal in opposition. All right. Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Nep. >> Are you ready for a rebuttal in opposition? We're ready. Yeah. You're good. Yeah, we're ready for a rebuttal in opposition. Yes, sir. >> Okay. I I I just I I just wanted to to um react to what Mr. Martin said, a couple of points that he that he was making. He was saying that we were sort of speculating about um about cumulative uh projects. Really not speculating. I listed 12 I I I I have a list I put a list of of projects in the in this 14page letter that I sent in. 12 of which were were were tenative track maps that that you have recently many of which you have recently approved in one way or another. These these are not old these are not old tracks. These are these are new ones that are that that mostly haven't been built yet. Um and the um the um the IPG uh industrial complex EIR listed 51 uh uh new projects for the Bakersfield area. That's not speculation. Uh these may not all be built. That's that's pro that that that's probably true. But still many of these u many of these projects are in the works and and and we need to be addressing the cumulative impact of all these rather than just looking at the individual impacts of each one. Our our our air is terribly dirty as it is. If if if all we do is is look at the individual impact of of every project and say, "Well, it's tiny, so we don't have to worry about it." Look at what that's led to at this point. the the the the the air now is is terrible. It's uh it's it's it's incredibly dirty. Almost more than six times the um the uh the uh the um the ambient air quality uh level for PM2.5 in some days. Um people get sick from this and and I get sick from this. Uh uh I'm I'm old enough that I that that that that I really need to deal with. I I I really can't go outside and work when the air is that bad. And I'm not alone on in in that. So So these are all this is not speculation. There are many many projects coming up and uh and and and and we need to address the cumulative impacts of all these projects not only to air pollution but to but to habitat loss. Um there [clears throat] isn't any HCP. you used to be addressing habitat loss through the HCP. The HCP used to require um um projects to pay a per acre fee that would go to to purchase offsite habitat that would be preserved for for for these species. Kit foxes and and and badgers and and bluntnose leopard lizards and and and and uh many many other species, Bakersfield cactus. um that's no longer the case. You don't have an HCP. And so these developers at this point without an HCP are getting by without without uh uh preserving habitat. Habitat just just goes and and and and and the kit foxes, where are they going to go? They they if they don't have a place if they don't have a place to forage, um kit foxes aren't going to survive. Maybe we don't care. Maybe we only care about developers profits. Anyway, let me just leave it at that. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Nip. Is there anyone else who wishes to provide rebuttal in opposition to this project? >> Seeing none, I will now close the public hearing on this item and return it to the commission for comment and action. I'm sorry, new technology. Uh, Commissioner Morton. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, first I want to thank the applicant for coming out today and and those who spoke on either side. And when we look at this, you know, Bakersfield, we talk about this a lot up here that we are dealing with a housing crisis. You know, the average cost, I was just looking it up. The average cost of a two-bedroom apartment in Bakersfield today is $1,500. $1,500. 10 years ago, it was $900. So, when we look at that, the average income for a family of four in this city today is $58,000. And so when we look at that, the average cost of an apartment, we're talking from northwest, southwest to the east side, takes up 33% of our folks income in this town. And so we have an obligation. As much as I look at the 5,000 foot lots, that's roughly.11 of an acre. So that's much smaller. 10 years ago even, we were we were twice that. We've had these discussions up here. But at the same time, we have a housing crisis and people can't afford to live here. The income is not keeping up for what they can afford. And part of that is because and hopefully we we have SQL reform potentially on the ballot in November. And and because these projects get slowed down and so for me when I look at this, we have to bring these costs down. And that is our job to the limited capacity we have when we look at these projects. And to the gentleman who spoke as a neighbor, I believe Steve, and I I can also um I also feel for you too that these are popping up around, you know, larger homes and larger lots, but we have an obligation to bring down cost. The cost of building has gone through the roof. Uh all of these regulations and people can't afford it and they won't be able to live. And so with that, um I I understand what the opposition said too, but we have to put people over kit foxes. and and that's just a reality. We have to do it responsibly. We have to do it smartly. I I like Commissioner Cow's comments about the the oil wells. That's a great question. We have to do it responsibly, but we have to grow and make sure that our people can afford to live. Uh and so with that, I am in favor of this. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Commissioner Morton. Commissioner Brandt Oliver. >> Um I appreciate your passion. Um, Matt, M. Commissioner Martin. Um, I will though clarify a little bit my position on the habitat conservation plan that um I just want to say in opposition to Mr. Nip's view of not having a habitat conservation plan in place in the city of Bakersfield does not mean that we're ignoring the um habitat. It does not mean that at all. we all these developers are still faced with um addressing any um habitat that they find during that process. There is still a process in place. There's still a take permit process in place. Just because there's not a blanket plan for all the land in this city does not mean that we are ignoring it and it will still be addressed as they come up. um just as um the clients have said um same thing with the oil that will still be addressed. Um I don't think that approving this um this request will mean that we're ignoring that. So I just wanted to state my opinion and and fact on that. >> Thank you, Commissioner Brent Oliver. Uh, Vice Chair Bidd Gordon, we really appreciate Mr. Nip. We really, Dr. Nip, actually, we appreciate you coming out here. I say it over and over again. I hope that more community members have the tenacity and the time that you take on each of these projects. But I hope we see that in future generations because it does scare me when people kind of throw their arms up and think that their voices aren't heard. It's so important that people like you show up to these meetings and continue to voice your your opinion and your concern with how our projects are built. And I think that keeps us continuously on our toes, making sure that we can do everything that we can to make sure these projects are good for our community and fit into the location that they're at. I I did look at it and I know that there's a lot of questions that are still going to come up in the future. But when we do look at our housing market and how the growth of this city is going, we're seeing big pushes into the southwest, which is more of our agriculture land. You know, we're seeing these big pushes outward. We do need to see more densification inward. We do need to look at more of these infill sites that are available for our developers to go ahead and build different types of housing, but at the meantime, we are very low and short on our housing. So, this is a project that fits into Ward 3. It it is scary to know that vacant land is being developed, but at this point in this state with the laws changing on a monthly basis or a yearly basis, we're very unclear of what's going to be legal or allowed to be put there in the future without our consent up here. So, as we see these sites start to infill, let's look and make sure that there's smart growth and things that fit in. And I do feel like this is a project that fits in W three. Thank you, Vice Chair Biddle, and and I'll round out comments. Uh again, thank you, Dr. Nip, for coming in and understanding the frustrations of the Sierra Club and others. You know, I look at I used to do a lot of work at Orville Service and there was no one out there regulating on-site every day that we were looking out for Kit Fox, that we were looking out for Blunt Node Lizard. It was taken on by other employees there on the field. We took a lot of pride in If we saw anything burrowing, we stopped the process. And it's my hope that that's what our developers are doing. Regardless of an HCP, regardless of someone standing on site forcing them to do it, I really hope that that's the pride they're taking for the individual project. We can't hold against the developer that there's no HCP or that we want strengthened. Not saying that I don't agree with a lot of what you've said. We can't then hold the developer against that. I we don't have a right to reject their proposal when they're meeting the requirements of sequ mitigated neg deck. Um but the comments are received. I want to make sure that we don't just sit here and like let you talk and then we're done. We are receiving it. It's just there's not a lot we can do on a lot of these items. Um and then I I think Mr. Snitzer left, but I I wanted to thank him for coming out. Um we we're hearing this a lot. We're going to hear it a lot on some of the smaller density houses. I think Commissioner Martin spoke well on the need to reduce building costs and that's where the density is coming from. But realistically, it's also people generally don't want large houses anymore. That's not where we're seeing the market. I I can promise you the developers aren't building something that the market doesn't want. Um, so unfortunately, [snorts] that's where we're going to start seeing this. And we do appreciate people coming out with these comments. And some of this is forced by development standards that are out of our control. You can't tell them they can't build 5,000 foot if it fits the state mandates for housing. So, those comments are really appreciated from the public. They're not just ignored. Even if the outcome of the result may make it seem like they're not taken in, they they really are. They're heard every time. Um, and with that, I'm going to turn it over for commission for action. >> So, move, Mr. Chairman. >> Uh, what's to support uh to support staff's recommendation? Thank you, Commissioner Morton. >> I'll second that motion. >> Thank you, Vice Chair Bidd. Uh, commissioners, please cast your votes. >> If it doesn't pop up, I'll have to do um just a speaking vote. >> You know what? Let's round out the speaking vote. That sounds great. >> Chair Strickland, >> yes. Vice Chair Bidd, >> yes. >> Commissioner Brandt Oliver, >> yes. >> Commissioner Core, >> yes. >> Commissioner Martin, >> yes. >> Motion passes with Commissioner Kater and Commissioner Neil absent. >> Thank you, Madame Clerk. Next item, please. >> Agenda item seven, communications. Uh before we move on, sorry we never showed the vote. Should we show the vote? Should the I'm >> Oh, there's no there's no Okay. Okay. I didn't know. >> Okay, that that's fine. The the vote is as read. Okay. Does staff have any communication items? >> I'd like to read the appeal statement. >> Oh, yes. Repeal statement. So, let's back up again anyway. find it. Any item on tonight's planning commission meeting may be appealed to the city council and care of the city clerk at city hall north. There may be a field a fee involved um and they can contact planning staff if they have any questions. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Ing. Madame clerk, next item please. >> Agenda item eight, commissioner comments. >> Does any commissioner have any comments? >> I just want to thank Cassie for just saying what I probably should have said a little softer. You're very encouraging and I appreciate that. And I felt all those things, too, but I didn't say any of that. So, you're awesome. >> And perhaps, Mr. chairman. Yeah. And you guys do know I do get passionate up here and I do hear both sides um on an issue. It's just, you know, we're put in a tough spot sometimes and we know that because we know what our community is feeling and at the same time we need to make sure that we that we do it uh environmentally sound but while we allow our city to grow and make sure it's affordable for people to stay here and continue to move here. So, thank you guys. >> Thank you, Commissioner Morton. And I would like to make a comment to make sure Miss Ing doesn't have any more comments. I'd just like to announce we will have a meeting on February 19th. Thank you. >> Thank you, ma'am. Madame clerk, next item please. >> Agenda item nine, adjournment. >> The February 5th, 2026 planning commission meeting is adjourned at 6:17 p.m. >> [music]