PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MEETING OF JANUARY 18, 2018

Transcription

1 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MEETING OF JANUARY 18, 2018 Council Chambers, City Hall South, 1501 Truxtun Avenue Regular Meeting 5:30 PM 1. ROLL CALL BARBARA LOMAS, CHAIR DANIEL CATER, VICE-CHAIR BOB BELL LARRY KOMAN OSCAR L. RUDNICK DAVID STRONG PATRICK WADE 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 4. CONSENT CALENDAR NON-PUBLIC HEARING a. Approval of Minutes for the January 4, 2018 meeting. Staff recommends approval. 5. CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARINGS 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS Ward(s) 2, 3 a. Draft Making Downtown Bakersfield High Speed Rail Station Area Vision Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) Adequacy Hearing Refer comments to staff for preparation of the Final Vision Plan and EIR. 7. COMMUNICATIONS 8. COMMISSION COMMENTS 9. ADJOURNMENT Jacquelyn R. Kitchen, Community Development Director

2 COVER SHEET PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: January 18, 2018 ITEM NUMBER: 4.(a.) TO: FROM: PLANNER: DATE: WARD: SUBJECT: Approval of Minutes for the January 4, 2018 meeting. APPLICANT: OWNER: LOCATION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. ATTACHMENTS: Description Minutes of January 4, 2018 Type Cover Memo

3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Meeting of January 4, :30 p.m. Council Chambers, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue 1. ROLL CALL ACTION TAKEN Present: Chair Lomas, Vice-Chair Cater, Bell, Koman, Absent: Commissioner Rudnick, Strong, Wade Staff Present: Andrew Heglund, Deputy City Attorney; Jacquelyn Kitchen, CDD Director; Paul Archambault, Building Civil Engineer III; Daniel Padilla, Public Works Civil Engineer III; Jennie Eng, CDD Principle Planner; Dana Cornelius, Secretary 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS None 4. CONSENT CALENDAR NON-PUBLIC HEARING a. Approval of minutes for the Regular Planning Commission meeting of December 7, Motion by Commissioner Bell, seconded by Commissioner Cater to approve Consent Calendar Non-Public Hearing Items 4.a. including a memorandum from the Community Development Department. APPROVED RUDNICK, STRONG, WADE, ABSENT 5. CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6515 (Phased): Global Investment and Development, representing GID Morning 240 LLC, is requesting and extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract 6515 consisting of 240 lots for single family residential development, and one sump lot on 61 acres, zoned R-1 located at on both sides of Panorama Dr. (extended), about 650 feet east of Morning Dr., in east Bakersfield. A finding that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act will also be considered. RES NO

4 2 ACTION TAKEN b. Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6536 (Phased): McIntosh and Associates, representing Old River & Panama, LLC, is requesting an extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract 6536 consisting of 149 lots, 1 sump lot and 3 landscape lots on acres, zoned R-1 for single family residential development located at the southwest corner of Panama Lane and Old River Road in southwest Bakersfield. A finding that the project is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act will also be considered. c. Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6547 (Phased): Waylon Dunlap, representing Wingfoot Properties, LLC is requesting an extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract 6547 consisting of 91 lots on acres, zoned R-1 for single family residential development located on the southeast corner of State Highway 184 (Kern Canyon Road) and Chase Avenue in northeast Bakersfield. A finding that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act will also be considered. d. Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6551: Waylon Dunlap, representing Wingfoot Properties, LLC, is requesting an extension of time for Vesting Tentative Tract 6551 consisting of 40 lots on acres, zoned R-1 for single family residential development located on the southeast corner of South H Street and Hosking Avenue in southeast Bakersfield. A finding that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act will also be considered. e. Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (Phased): McIntosh & Associates, representing The Nicholson Group is proposing to subdivide acres into nine commercial parcels in a C-2 PCD (Regional Commercial Planned Commercial Development) zone and one designated remainder in an R-1 (One-Family Dwelling) zone located at the northeast corner of Panama Lane and Old River Road in southwest Bakersfield area. The project includes a waiver of mineral right signatures pursuant to BMC A.1. Use of a previously adopted Negative Declaration will also be considered. f. Zone Change : LAV Consulting/Engineering, representing Bakersfield 119 LLC, property owners, is proposing a Zone Change on approximately acres located along the south of Taft Highway, approximately 500 feet east of Hughes Lane from A (Agricultural) to M-1 (Light Manufacturing). A proposed Mitigation Negative Declaration will also be considered. RES NO RES NO RES NO RES NO RES NO 06-18

5 3 ACTION TAKEN Description of items 5.a through 5.f. given by Jacquelyn Kitchen, CDD Director. Public hearing open. Public hearing closed. Motion by Commissioner Koman, seconded by Commissioner Cater to approve Consent Calendar Public Hearing Items 5.a.through 5.f. including all memorandum and staff recommendations. APPROVED RUDNICK, STRONG, WADE, ABSENT 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS None 7. COMMUNICATIONS Jacquelyn Kitchen, CDD Director thanked the Planning Dept. and other departments for their hard work preparing for Planning Commission. 8. COMMISSION COMMENTS None 9. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Lomas adjourned the meeting at 5:42 p.m. Dana Cornelius Recording Secretary Jacquelyn R. Kitchen Community Development Director S:\1Planning Commission\PC\Minutes\2017\12-7 draft

6 COVER SHEET PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: January 18, 2018 ITEM NUMBER: Public Hearings6.(a.) TO: Chair Lomas and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jacquelyn R. Kitchen, Community Development Director PLANNER: Cecelia Griego, Principal Planner DATE: WARD: Ward(s) 2, 3 SUBJECT: Draft Making Downtown Bakersfield High Speed Rail Station Area Vision Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) Adequacy Hearing APPLICANT: N/A OWNER: N/A LOCATION: Approximately 2.3 square-mile area around the proposed Bakersfield High Speed Rail (HSR) Station location, along Golden State Avenue near its intersection with Chester Avenue and F Street. The Project area is bound by California Avenue to the south, Union Avenue to the east, 38th Street and the Kern River to the north, and F Street to the west. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Refer comments to staff for preparation of the Final Vision Plan and EIR. ATTACHMENTS: Description Staff Report Draft Vision Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report Type Staff Report Exhibit Exhibit

7 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Chair Lomas and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jacquelyn R. Kitchen, Community Development Director AGENDA ITEM DATE: January 18, 2018 APPROVED SUBJECT: LOCATION: DRAFT MAKING DOWNTOWN BAKERSFIELD HIGH-SPEED RAIL STATION AREA VISION PLAN AND DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (DEIR) ADEQUACY HEARING (WARDS 2 & 3) Approximately 2.3 square-mile area around the proposed Bakersfield High Speed Rail (HSR) Station location, along Golden State Avenue near its intersection with Chester Avenue and F Street. The Project area is bound by California Avenue to the south, Union Avenue to the east, 38th Street and the Kern River to the north, and F Street to the west. Figure 1, Location Map CC\PC_EIR_Adequacy_Hearing_ \SR_PC EIR Adequacy Hearing Final.docx Page 1 of 9

8 DRAFT PROGRAM EIR MAKING DOWNTOWN BAKERSFIELD VISION PLAN RECOMMENDATION: Refer comments to staff for preparation of the Final EIR. BACKGROUND California High Speed Rail In November 2008, California voters approved a bond measure (Proposition 1A) for the nation's first ever voter-approved financing mechanism for high-speed rail. According to the California High-Speed Rail Authority (Authority), the state agency responsible for the planning, design, construction and operation of the future high-speed rail (HSR) system, the HSR will connect the mega-regions of the State, contribute to economic development and a cleaner environment, create jobs and preserve agricultural and protected lands. The Authority has stated that, by 2029, a high-speed rail system will run from San Francisco to the Los Angeles basin in under three hours at speeds of over 200 miles per hour. The System will eventually extend to Sacramento and San Diego, totaling 800 miles with up to 24 HSR Stations located throughout the State. High Speed Rail in Bakersfield In May 2014, the Authority s Board of Directors certified a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Fresno to Bakersfield Project Section. The document identified a preferred alignment from the Fresno HSR Station to the Bakersfield HSR Station, which would be located at Truxtun Avenue (the Hybrid Alignment). In June 2014, the City of Bakersfield filed a lawsuit challenging the approval under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). City staff developed an alternative alignment and proposed it to the Authority for further evaluation. In December 2014, the Authority agreed to study this alternative alignment (called the Locally Generated Alternative or LGA) and a HSR station at F Street in a new environmental document, and, accordingly, the City agreed to dismiss its CEQA lawsuit. Nearly three years later on November 9, 2017, the Authority released the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (DEIR/EIS), which analyzed the LGA and compared it to the Hybrid Alignment, among other alternatives. Ultimately, the Authority determined that the LGA was the preferred alternative. Page S-24 of the DEIR/EIS summarizes the reasons why the LGA is the preferred alternative: The Authority and FRA have determined that sufficient information will be available to identify the F-B LGA as the Preferred Alternative as described in this Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS. The station associated with the Proposed Preferred Alternative would be located at the intersection of SR 204 and F Street in Bakersfield. The Preferred Alternative is estimated to cost approximately $2,687.5 million (in 2010 dollars). The Preferred Alternative would have lower capital costs than the May 2014 Project, which is estimated at $2,893.7 million. The F-B LGA reflects the ability and willingness of the Authority to work with local stakeholders to refine the HSR project to achieve positive outcomes for affected communities and the natural environment, while still meeting the overall project objectives consistent with the voter-approved Proposition 1A. The F-B LGA is the Preferred Alternative because it is supported by the local community (e.g., City of Bakersfield); would result in lesser impacts associated with agricultural lands, residential displacements, special-status plant species, riparian areas, and permanent impacts to jurisdictional waters; would cost less to construct; would improve traffic, pedestrian, and bicycle safety and circulation in the City of Shafter; and would reduce overall system-wide travel time. (Emphasis added) CC\PC_EIR_Adequacy_Hearing_ \SR_PC EIR Adequacy Hearing Final.docx Page 2 of 9

9 DRAFT PROGRAM EIR MAKING DOWNTOWN BAKERSFIELD VISION PLAN High Speed Rail Vision Plan After the settlement of the City s CEQA lawsuit, the Authority provided the City with a planning grant to prepare a station area plan around the proposed Bakersfield HSR Station. On December 9, 2015, the City Council approved an agreement with Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP (SOM) to develop a Station Area Plan to prepare the City for the benefits that will come with a HSR Station. In addition to the planning grant from the Authority, Kern COG and the City have contributed a soft match of staff time toward this planning effort, which has been branded Making Downtown Bakersfield. Since the Authority had identified the LGA as the Preliminary Preferred Alternative, the station area planning efforts focused on the LGA station location at F Street and Golden State Hwy. In January 2016, an extensive community outreach campaign was launched to engage Bakersfield residents, community organizations, non-profits, businesses, government agencies and more. The goal was to gather public input online and at partner meetings, community events, walking tours, vision workshops and community charrettes. This effort resulted in over 500 people contributing to define the values that drove the planning process and ultimately the vision for Downtown. In total, eleven Workshops and a Community Meeting were held, where over 125 participants worked collaboratively to develop ideas about where to focus growth, public realm enhancements, and other investments in Downtown. The final open house attracted more than 150 participants and sought to confirm the final vision for Downtown while collecting input for the implementation strategy. A Stakeholder Committee was also formed, which held monthly meetings to create a platform to discuss progress, action plans, improvements, outreach efforts, vision plan concepts and implementation strategies. Over the last two years, the City has hosted a variety of community workshops, meetings, and discussions, and has integrated the input received into the Making Downtown Bakersfield Vision Plan. This process revealed that Bakersfield residents want to see a Downtown that is vibrant, walkable, connected, safe, and desirable. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project is a Station Area Vision Plan that establishes a strategic vision for the future development of the area surrounding a future HSR Station at F Street and Golden State Highway in Downtown Bakersfield. The Project addresses key factors affecting future development within the Project area, including, but not limited to: land use patterns in the context of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan; urban design and infrastructure; multimodal transportation services and circulation; parking, pedestrian and bicycle access; open space and recreation; arts and culture; and other principal factors. The Project establishes a conceptual phased approach to future physical development, including a long-term (30-year) development projection, which would include up to: 2,005,000 square feet of office space; 8,570 residential units; 906,988 square feet of retail; and 2,413 hotel rooms. CC\PC_EIR_Adequacy_Hearing_ \SR_PC EIR Adequacy Hearing Final.docx Page 3 of 9

10 DRAFT PROGRAM EIR MAKING DOWNTOWN BAKERSFIELD VISION PLAN Table 1. Projected Project Development PURPOSE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ADEQUACY HEARING The purpose of today s public hearing is for your Commission to receive public comment for both the Draft Making Downtown Bakersfield Station Area Vision Plan and, in accordance with the City of Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures, to receive public comment regarding the adequacy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the plan. All comments received during this hearing, both verbal and written, will be referred to staff for response in the Final EIR. While your Commission is not considering or taking action on the project during this hearing you will be provided an opportunity to comment on the plan. Staff is available to answer any questions about the project. Written responses to all comments will be included in the Final EIR. ENVIROMENTAL SETTING & SURROUNDING USES The Vision Plan s primary function is to guide land use in the Downtown area in conjunction with projected growth associated with the arrival of HSR to the Bakersfield area. The Vision Plan identifies three 10-year phases over a 30-year period, with associated growth projected to occur in three primary areas, and establishes urban design, landscaping, and streetscape improvement strategies; parking and enhanced mobility strategies; and infrastructure improvement, and financing strategies. The study area for the project is generally located in the area of F Street and Golden State Avenue at the northern edge of Downtown Bakersfield. The project area encompasses the area around the proposed HSR station as well as our Downtown core. The project area also includes the parallel alignments of the Union Pacific Rail Road (UPRR) and Golden State Expressway (SR 204), Golden Empire Transit (GET) bus facilities, and other transit-oriented CC\PC_EIR_Adequacy_Hearing_ \SR_PC EIR Adequacy Hearing Final.docx Page 4 of 9

11 DRAFT PROGRAM EIR MAKING DOWNTOWN BAKERSFIELD VISION PLAN amenities. The project area is almost entirely built out with a variety of land uses, including single-family and multi-family residential, office and general commercial uses, light industrial, medical offices and hospitals, regional parks, schools, and governmental facilities. The major arterial providing immediate access to the project area is SR 204, which connects to SR 99, SR 178, SR 14, and SR 58. The project area s roadway network consists of a historic street grid with small blocks and alleys. In the project area, bus lines generally operate on major arterials providing connections beyond Downtown, including Chester, 23rd and 24th Streets and Truxtun. GET lines also operate on F Street, 21st Street and Q St. The Kern River, which is located adjacent to the northwest portion of the project area still supports areas of streambank vegetation, is considered a scenic resource, and still functions as a wildlife corridor. ENVIROMENTAL REVIEW AND ANALYSIS Pursuant to CEQA, the City of Bakersfield is the Lead Agency and has determined that preparation of a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) is required for the project in order to adequately analyze the potential impacts of the project to the existing environment. As required by CEQA, the EIR includes appropriate review, analysis, and mitigation measures for the environmental impacts of the proposed project. Once the review process is complete, the Final EIR could be utilized by other permitting agencies in their capacity as Responsible and Trustee agencies under CEQA. Notice of Preparation. To begin the EIR process in accordance with CEQA, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) (State Clearinghouse No ) was prepared for the project which laid out the project description and identified what the potential impacts of the project might be to the environment. Scoping Meeting. Next, a public scoping meeting was held on September 22, 2016 at the City Council Chambers at 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California to receive input on the types of environmental topics that should be discussed and reviewed in the DEIR. Draft Environmental Impact Report After the Scoping Meeting, the Draft Program EIR was prepared in accordance with CEQA and has incorporated and/or responded to all comments received in response to the NOP. The Draft EIR contains the following components: Chapter 1. Executive Summary Chapter 2. Introduction Chapter 3. Project Description Chapter 4. Environmental Setting Chapter 5. Environmental Impact Analysis Chapter 6. Other CEQA Requirements Chapter 7. Alternatives Chapter 8. References Appendix A. NOP and Comments Received during Scoping Appendix B. Traffic Impact Analysis Appendix C. CalEEMod Worksheets and GHG Emission Calculations CC\PC_EIR_Adequacy_Hearing_ \SR_PC EIR Adequacy Hearing Final.docx Page 5 of 9

12 DRAFT PROGRAM EIR MAKING DOWNTOWN BAKERSFIELD VISION PLAN Appendix D. Native American AB 52 Consultation Appendix E. Noise Measurement Data Sheet Appendix F. Making Downtown Bakersfield Vision Plan The Draft EIR was placed into a 45-day Circulation period for public review and comment, per State law. That review period began on January 5, 2018 and ends February 19, Specific issues that were found to have no impact during preparation of the NOP and are not addressed further in the DEIR include agricultural and forestry resources and mineral resources. The DEIR focuses on the changes in the environment that would result from the proposed project. If a significant adverse impact results from the project, mitigation measures are recommended to avoid the impact or reduce impacts to less than significant levels. The DEIR discusses potential impacts of the issues noted below, and if applicable, recommends mitigation measures. Less than significant without mitigation. After further study and environmental review in the EIR, it was determined that certain impact thresholds would result in a less than significant level and that no additional mitigation measures were needed: Aesthetics Geology and Soils Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and Planning Population and Housing Public Services and Recreation Less than significant with mitigation. After further study and environmental review in the EIR, it was determined that certain impact thresholds could be reduced to a less than significant level with the incorporation of mitigation measures: Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Greenhouse Gas Emissions Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities and Service Systems Significant and Unavoidable Impacts (Project). Section (b) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR describe any significant impacts, including those that can be mitigated but not reduced to less than significant. After study and environmental review in the EIR, it was determined that certain impact thresholds would have significant and unavoidable impacts after the project complies with all regulatory, statutory, and feasible and reasonable mitigation measures. Those specific impacts that would have significant and unavoidable impacts after mitigation include: Noise Transportation CC\PC_EIR_Adequacy_Hearing_ \SR_PC EIR Adequacy Hearing Final.docx Page 6 of 9

13 DRAFT PROGRAM EIR MAKING DOWNTOWN BAKERSFIELD VISION PLAN Significant and Unavoidable Impacts (Cumulative). According to Section of the State CEQA Guidelines, the term cumulative impacts refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts. Individual effects that may contribute to a cumulative impact may be from a single project or a number of separate projects. Individually, the impacts of a project may be relatively minor, however, when considered along with impacts of other closely related or nearby projects, including newly proposed projects, the effects could be cumulatively significant. After analysis and review, as provided in this EIR, it was determined that none of the project-level and/or cumulative impacts for the environmental issue areas (in accordance with CEQA Guidelines) would be significant and unavoidable. Section Statement of Overriding Considerations and Section Findings. As noted above, this project will have significant and unavoidable Impacts, even with incorporation of mitigation measures. Therefore, when this project is later presented for consideration, written findings will be included along with a brief explanation of the rationales for each finding in accordance with Section for each significant impact identified in the Final EIR Findings will also be presented, which discuss benefits and considerations that may outweigh such significant and unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. All of these benefits and considerations are based on the facts set forth in the findings, the final EIR, and the record of proceedings for the project. The benefits of the project could provide a basis for the approval of the project despite the adverse environmental effects that could and/or will occur. Additionally, a Mitigation Measure Monitoring Program will be prepared for your review. Ultimately, the City Council will be required to balance the economic, legal, technological and other benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable environmental impacts when determining whether or not to approve the project. If the proposed project s benefits outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the effects may be considered acceptable and the City Council may adopt a Statement of the Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, stating the specific reasons for approving the proposed project despite its unavoidable significant environmental effects. Alternatives Analyzed in the EIR. Three alternatives, as listed below, were identified that could avoid or lessen significant effects of the project and could feasibly attain project objectives, and these were analyzed in greater detail. The EIR, Chapter 7 discusses analyzed alternatives to the project. Alternative 1: No Project. Buildout would occur under the exiting Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan or any future General Plan. Alternative 2: Low Intensity/Density Design Alternative. This would consist of a reduction of overall commercial square footage/residential units as projected and would focus future development around the HSR station. Alternative 3: Medium Intensity/Design Alternative. This would consist of a reduction of overall commercial square footage/residential units as projected, but higher than the Low Intensity/Density Alternative. In addition, it would incorporate a building height cap to limit the height of any future high rise development in the Project area. CC\PC_EIR_Adequacy_Hearing_ \SR_PC EIR Adequacy Hearing Final.docx Page 7 of 9

14 DRAFT PROGRAM EIR MAKING DOWNTOWN BAKERSFIELD VISION PLAN The discussion in the EIR presents a description of each alternative and focuses on the degree to which the identified alternative might accomplish the project objectives and would reduce one or more of the identified significant impacts, as well as other impacts. Alternatives Considered But Rejected. The River District Alternative was considered, which concentrated mixed-use development within and/or adjacent to the Kern River and the F Street High Speed Rail Station. While this alternative would have provided the highest concentration of development near the HSR Station and would have been consistent with Smart Growth principles, the potential impacts to biological resources, hydrology and water quality, and utilities would be much more significant when compared to the Project. Further, this alternative would significantly diverge from the proposed project and would not satisfy the Project objectives to the same degree as Alternatives 2 and 3. Therefore, this option was rejected from further consideration. Environmentally Superior Alternative. An EIR must identify the environmentally superior alternative to the proposed project. Alternatives 2 and 3 could be considered environmentally superior, as they would reduce impacts related to air quality, greenhouse gas, noise, and traffic due primarily to the reduction in housing units. However, this alternative would not eliminate the significant and unavoidable impacts. No mitigation measures are available to reduce the significant unavoidable impacts. These alternatives would generally meet most of the project objectives, but to a lesser degree than the Project. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION All legally required notices were provided regarding the availability of the DEIR and notice of this evening s hearing before your Commission to accept testimony regarding the adequacy of the DEIR. Specifically, a Notice of Availability for the Draft Environmental Impact Report and Notice of Public Hearing before your Commission was posted at the County Clerk on January 5, 2018, advertised in The Bakersfield Californian and posted on the bulletin board of the City of Bakersfield Community Development Department - Planning Division on January 5, As required by CEQA Guideline Section 15205, this project requires a 45 day public and agency review period for the Draft EIR that began January 5, 2018, and concludes February 19, ASSEMBLY BILL 52 CONSULTATION In accordance with Assembly Bill 52 and the California Tribal Consultation guidelines, the appropriate native groups were consulted with respect to the project s potential impacts on Native American places, features, and objects. One letter from the Table Mountain Rancheria Tribal Government Office was received stating the project area was beyond their area of interest. Staff notes that consultation with appropriate Native American groups per Assembly Bill 52 requirements has occurred. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS In accordance with the City of Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures, this item was scheduled for a public hearing before your Commission to receive public comments regarding the Station Area Vision Plan and adequacy of the Draft EIR for the project. Staff has reviewed the project with regard to environmental concerns, and it is staff s opinion that the Draft EIR has been prepared with the best available information at this time which details the environmental effects of the project. All comments received during this hearing, both verbal and written, will be referred to staff for response in the Final EIR. CC\PC_EIR_Adequacy_Hearing_ \SR_PC EIR Adequacy Hearing Final.docx Page 8 of 9

15 DRAFT PROGRAM EIR MAKING DOWNTOWN BAKERSFIELD VISION PLAN ATTACHED: 1. Draft Making Downtown Bakersfield Vision Plan 2. Draft Environmental Impact Report and Appendices CC\PC_EIR_Adequacy_Hearing_ \SR_PC EIR Adequacy Hearing Final.docx Page 9 of 9

16 Draft Making Downtown Bakersfield Station Area Vision Plan link: Draft Making Downtown Bakersfield Station Area Vision Plan Appendix link:

17 Draft Environmental Impact Report - Making Downtown Bakersfield Station Area Vision Plan link: Draft Environmental Impact Report - Making Downtown Bakersfield Station Area Vision Plan Appendix A E link: Draft Environmental Impact Report - Making Downtown Bakersfield Station Area Vision Plan Appendix F link: