AK S:\03_Advance Planning\01_GPAs\01_Active\2023\23-0560_Taft & Ashe_Housing&Commercial\01_Hearing Documents & Noticing Documents\CC_8.26.26\12_Staff Report 23-0560.docx
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: July 16, 2026 AGENDA CATEGORY: TBD
TO: Chair and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Jennie Eng, Assistant Planning Director
DATE: July 10, 2026
FILE: General Plan Amendment and Zone Change No. 23-0560 STAFF PLANNER: Ashley Knight, Assistant Planner
REQUEST: (1) An amendment of the Land Use Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan land use designation from HMR (High Medium Residential) to HR (High Density Residential) and GC (General Commercial); and (2) a change in zone classification from R- 2 (Single Lot Single -Unit Dwelling) to C -2 (Regional Commercial) and R-3 (Medium Density Multi-Unit Dwelling) zone (Ward 7).
APPLICANT: McIntosh and Associates OWNER: ATG Investment, LLC 10800 Stockdale Highway, Suite 103 6349 Houghton Road Bakersfield, CA 93311 Bakersfield, CA 93313
PROJECT LOCATION: 9737 Ashe Road; at the southwest corner of Taft Highway and Ashe Road
APN: 184-260-09
PROJECT SIZE: Approximately 24.86 acres CEQA: Mitigated Negative Declaration
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: HMR (High Medium Residential) EXISTING ZONE CLASSIFICATION: R-2 (Single Lot Single-Unit Dwelling)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of GPA/ZC No. 23-0560, its Mitigated Negative Declaration, and recommends the same to the City Council.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The project site is undeveloped land, except for petroleum-related pipeline and storage located in the southeast corner . Surrounding properties are primarily developed as: north – the Kaiser Permanente Sports Village; east– undeveloped land; south – fallowed farmland; and west – single- family residential and semi-truck parking.
File No. General Plan Amendment and Zone (GPA/ZC) No. 23-0560 BACKGROUND AND TIMELINE:
• July 18, 2008 - City Council approved the annexation of the project site to the City of Bakersfield as part of Annexation No. 576, Ashe No. 6 (Resolution 166-07).
PROJECT ANALYSIS:
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change (GPA/ZC).
The General Plan Amendment (“GPA”) and Zone Change (“ZC”) request submitted by Cornerstone Engineering Inc. (applicant), on behalf of David Gill (property owner) is (1) proposing a GPA to change the Land Use Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan land use designation from HMR (High Medium Residential) to HR (High Density Residential) on 18.50acres and GC (General Commercial) on 6.36 acres; and (2) a change in zone classification from R -2 (Single Lot Single -Unit Dwelling) to R-3 (Medium Density Multi-Unit Dwelling) zone on 18.50 acres and C-2 (Regional Commercial) on 6.36 acres or a more restrictive zone on a total of approximately 24.86 acres to facilitate the development of multi -family residential and commercial retail. The project parcel is located on the south west corner of Taft Highway and Ashe Road, in southwest Bakersfield [Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 184-260-09].
The project intends to develop 6.36 acres at the southwest corner of Taft Highway and Ashe Road.
Development along the Taft Highway frontage is subject to City Council Resolution No. 063 -12, which requires certain design standards and policies along Taft Highway, such as an expressway width standard and a 30-foot-wide landscape parkway, and limited access. The southern 18.50 acres of the project site is proposed for a 499-unit multi-family residential development. No formal plans have been submitted, with the exception of preliminary conceptual plans. The residential density range for this zone is 6.1 to thirteen dwelling units per net acre, which is consistent with the proposed HMR designation of the project site.
In addition, the existing R-2 zoned parcel is not included within the City of Bakersfield 6th Cycle Housing Element Vacant Land Inventory and is therefore not subject to the No -Net-Loss state mandate, which would require the City of Bakersfield to retain the residential zoned parcel for potential future housing.
Since this parcel is not listed in the vacant land inventory , the City continues to ensure that residential development opportunities remain available even with the conversion of the existing residential zoned parcel to a commercial zone. The remaining sites that are identified in the City’s Housing Element sites inventory can accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA).
Approve Zone Change as Requested. If the zone change is approved to C- 2 and R-3 as requested, an application for site plan approval is required for future commercial and multi-family residential projects.
The project will be reviewed by the Site Plan Review (SPR) Committee, as listed below, for compliance with City development standards. The Development Services Director may then approve, conditionally approve, or deny t he site plan. There is no requirement for Planning Commission consideration unless the Development Services Director’s decision is appealed.
CALIFORNIA STATE HOUSING BILLS:
Housing Accountability Act. The Housing Accountability Act, Government Code Section 65589.5, establishes limitations on a local government’s ability to deny, reduce the density of, or make infeasible housing development projects, emergency shelters, or farmworker housing that are consistent with objective local development standards and contribute to meeting housing need. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65589.5(3)(j), when a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the application was deemed complete, but the local agency proposes to File No. General Plan Amendment and Zone (GPA/ZC) No. 23-0560 disapprove the project or to impose a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, the local agency shall base its decision regarding the proposed housing development project upon written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that both of the following conditions exist:
1. The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density. As used in this paragraph, a “specific , adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.
2. There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact identified pursuant to paragraph (1), other than the disapproval of the housing development project or the approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower density.
Regional Housing Needs Assessment. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (“RHNA”) is a process mandated by California state law that requires jurisdictions to plan for new housing to accommodate projected growth. The RHNA assigns the number of housing units that the California State Housing and Community Development Agency (HCD) determines is necessary to build in an eight -year cycle for each jurisdiction, organized by affordability level. The project would contribute additional R-3 residential units on 18.5 acres to the City of Bakersfield’s 6th Housing Element Cycle from 2023 through 2031.
Compatibility with Land Use Element. Staff has reviewed the proposal for compatibility with the applicable goals and policies contained within the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Land Use Element and finds the following:
Goal 2: Accommodate new development which provides a full mix of uses to support its population.
The project is consistent with this goal because the property owner determined the market is driving a need for multi -family residential within the project area. Additionally, the State encourages the densification of residential uses within cities throughout California.
Goal 3: Accommodate new development which is compatible with and complements existing land uses.
The project is consistent with this goal by providing multi -family residential housing densification to support the local population.
Goal 4: Accommodate new development which channels land uses in a phased, orderly manner and is coordinated with the provision of infrastructure and public improvements.
The necessary infrastructure and public improvements are available to accommodate multiple -family residential developments or, if the project is approved, will be developed through the fair-share payment of impact fees by the property owner. Therefore, the project is consistent with this goal.
Policy 2: Allow for the development of a variety of residential types and densities.
The project provides multiple-family land use within an area that predominantly consists of single-family residential use. Allowing multiple-family residential at the site would allow for the increased development of a variety of residential types and dens ities beyond the current condition. Therefore, the project is consistent with this policy.
File No. General Plan Amendment and Zone (GPA/ZC) No. 23-0560
Policy 3: Ensure that residential uses are located in proximity to commercial services, employment centers, public services, transportation routes, and recreational and cultural resources.
The proposed project site is across the street from the existing Kaiser Permanente Sports Village, along Taft Highway a major transportation route and one (1) mile from commercial services. There are nearby employment centers as well as others throughout the city that can be easily accessed via the existing circulation system.
Policy 75: Provide adequate land area for the expansion of existing uses and development of new uses consistent with the policies of the general plan.
The project site is located on existing residential land near residential land uses. Therefore, adequate land is available for the project, and the project expands existing residential land uses at a different density.
Therefore, the project is consistent with this policy.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND DETERMINATION:
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), staff has reviewed the potential environmental impacts of the project. The Initial Study was based on the following project-specific analysis and technical studies: Air Quality Impact Analysis; Phase I Cultural Resource Survey; Biological Resource Evaluation; Trip Generation and Vehicle Miles Travel Analysis.
The initial study determined that compliance with the recommended mitigation measures, local ordinances, state laws, and construction to the standards of the Uniform Building Codes will reduce impacts to a less- than-significant level. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for this project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The MND was circulated for a 30-day public and agency review period starting March 30, 2026, through April 28, 2026 (SCH No. 2026031051).
Comments Received. One comment letter was submitted by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). SJVAPCD’s comments and staff’s response are as follows:
1. SJVAPCD suggested that the City consider incorporating vegetative barriers and urban greening to help reduce air pollution exposure to nearby sensitive receptors and improve community aesthetics.
Response: Staff acknowledged this recommendation. Landscaping and site design elements will be reviewed through the development review process in accordance with applicable City standards. The project proponent was advised of this recommendation.
2. SJVAPCD recommended consideration of electric lawn and garden equipment and participation in available District incentive programs to reduce emissions associated with landscape maintenance.
Response: Staff acknowledged this recommendation and advised the project proponent of available District incentive programs related to electric landscaping equipment.
3. SJVAPCD suggested incorporating on-site solar power systems as an emission reduction strategy consistent with state renewable energy goals.
File No. General Plan Amendment and Zone (GPA/ZC) No. 23-0560 Response: Staff acknowledged this recommendation. Installation of solar energy systems may be incorporated at the discretion of the project proponent and in accordance with applicable building and energy code requirements. The project proponent was advised of this recommendation.
4. SJVAPCD recommended the installation of electric vehicle charging infrastructure and noted the availability of District incentive programs to support charging equipment.
Response: Staff acknowledged this recommendation. Electric vehicle charging infrastructure will be provided in accordance with applicable state and local requirements. The project proponent was advised of available District incentive programs.
5. SJVAPCD noted that the project may be subject to applicable District rules and permitting requirements, including Rules 2010, 2201, 9510, 4002, 4601, Regulation VIII, Rule 4901, and other applicable District regulations
Response: Staff noted that compliance with all applicable San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District rules, regulations, permits, and mitigation requirements is required. The project proponent was advised of these requirements.
6. SJVAPCD indicated that the project is subject to District Rule 9510 (Indirect Source Review) and stated that an Air Impact Assessment application should be submitted to the District.
Response: Staff acknowledged this recommendation. Compliance with District Rule 9510 and any associated Air Impact Assessment requirements will be addressed directly with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. The project proponent was advised accordingly.
7. SJVAPCD recommended that a copy of the District’s comment letter be provided to the project proponent.
Response: Staff acknowledges this recommendation. A copy of the District’s comment letter has been provided to the project proponent.
Environmental Conclusion. The State CEQA Guidelines and the City of Bakersfield’s CEQA Implementation Procedures have been followed in the evaluation of the environmental effects of this project. With mitigation, significant environmental impacts were not identified for the proposed project.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
Public notice for the proposed project and environmental determination was advertised in The Bakersfield Californian and posted on the bulletin board in the City of Bakersfield City Hall North, 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California. All property owners within 300 feet of the project site were notified by United States Postal Service mail regarding this public hearing in accordance with city ordinance and state law. Signs are required as part of the public notification process and must be posted between 20 to 60 days before the public hearing date. Photographs of the posted signage and the Declaration of Posting Public Hearing Notice signed by the applicant are on file at the Planning Division.
Comments Received. As of this writing, no comments have been received.
File No. General Plan Amendment and Zone (GPA/ZC) No. 23-0560 Tribal Consultation. In compliance with Senate Bill (SB) 18, staff mailed a letter on March 10 , 2025 , notifying the American Indian Tribes of the proposed project and location of the site. The notice starts the 90-day consultation period required under SB 18. As of this writing, no tribal consultation has been requested.
CONCLUSIONS:
Consistency with Surrounding Development. The project would provide for an increase in density for residential use to complement the existing single-family residential development in the area.
Consistency with General Plan/Zoning Ordinance . The proposal is consistent with land use goals and policies as contained in the General Plan related to multi- family development, as noted above. As conditioned, the site plan review is required to comply with requirements and regulations as set forth in the Bakersfield Municipal Code Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance) and City Development Standards.
Recommendation. Staff finds that the applicable provisions of CEQA have been complied with, and the proposal is compatible with the surrounding area, land use designation, and zoning ordinance.
Therefore, staff recommends your Commission: (1) Adopt Resolution ADOPTING Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to Section 15074 of the California Environmental Quality Act; (2) Adopt Resolution APPROVING the general plan amendment to change the land use designation from HMR (High Medium Residential) to HR (High Density Residential) and GC (General Commercial) and (3) Adopt Resolution APPROVING change in zone classification from R -2 (Single Lot Single -Unit Dwelling) to C -2 (Regional Commercial) and R-3 (Medium Density Multi-Unit Dwelling) zone to facilitate the development of multi- family residential and commercial retail.
ATTACHMENTS:
Map Set
• GPA/ZC Aerial
• GPA/ZC Zone Classification
• GPA/ZC General Plan Designation
Conceptual Site Plan, Elevations, Landscape Plan
Mitigated Negative Declaration with Attachments
Planning Commission Draft Resolutions
• MND with Attachments
• GPA with Attachments
• ZC with Attachments