Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/17/98 AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Council Chamber,.City Hal ThUrsday, September 17, 1998 5:30 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL JEFFREY TKA C, Chairman MICHAEL DHANENS, Vice-Chairman STEPHEN BOYLE MA THEW BRAD Y MARTI MUNIS-KEMPER ROBERT ORTIZ WADE TA VORN ALTERNATE: RON SPRAGUE NOTE: Agendas may be amended up to 72 hours prior to the Planning Commission meeting. A final agenda may be obtained from the Planning Department 72 hours prior to the meeting. 2. PUBLIC STATEMENTS ANY PERSON WHOSE NAME APPEARS ON THE AGENDA OR WISHES TO SPEAK REGARDING A PUBLIC HEARING NEED NOT FILL OUTA SPEAKER'S CARD. ALL OTHERS WISHING TO SPEAK BEFORE THE COMMISSION MAY FILL OUT A SPEAKER'S CARD AND PRESENT IT TO THE SECRETARY PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF THE MEETING. NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAl Planning Commission decisions on Zone Changes, Parcel Maps and Tentative Subdivision maps are subject to appeal by any person aggrieved. No permit shall be issued for any use involved in an application until after the final acceptance date of appeal. Such appeal must be filed in writing within 10 days from date of hearing, addressed to the City Council, cio Office of the City Clerk, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301. A $330 non-refundable filing fee must be included with filing of the initial appeal for those appeals filed by the applicant or any person outside the notice area. All appeals filed on land divisions will require a $330 non-refundable filing fee. If all appeals are withdrawn prior to the City Council hearing, it will not be conducted and the decision of the Planning Commission will stand. If no appeal is received within the specified time period or if all appeals filed are withdrawn, the action of the Planning Commission shall become final. Agenda, PC, ThUrsday - S~tember 17, 1998 Page 2 CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS - (marked by asterisk (*) These~items.will-be.,acted~on .as-a-grou p-~ithoutJnd~Jdual..staff, pr~sen~ations .if_no~member~of_the Planning Commission or audience wishes to comment or ask questions on a case. The items are recommended for approval by staff. The applicant has been informed of any special conditions and has signed an agreement to conditions of approval and requested to be placed on the consent, agenda. If anyone wishes to discuss or testify on any of the consent items the item(s) will be taken off consent and will be considered in the order on the agenda. If not, the public hearing will be opened and the items acted on as a group. PUBLIC HEARING- EXTENSION OF TIME - Continued from September' 3, 199R VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 5684 (Telstar Engineering) Located south of Palm Avenue, approximately 660 feet east of Jewetta Avenue. Consisting of 36 lots on 20 acres, zoned E (Estate). (Negative Declaration on file) Staff Recommendation: Approve with conditions Group vote. RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY THE FINAL EIR FOR THE NORTHEAST BAKERSFIELD BIKF PATH AND WATER FACILITIES PROJECT WHICH HAS BEEN COMPLETED COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA, THE STATE EIR GUIDELINES AND THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD CEQA IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES. (City of Bakersfield) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution making findings and recommending certification of the Final EIR to · the City Council. Roll call vOte. PUBLIC HEARINGS - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS, ASSOCIATED RFTONINGS, ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS, KERN RIVER PLAN ELEMENT, RIVERLAKES RANC,u SPECIFIC PLAN AND CIRCULATION ELEMENT AMENDMENTS 1) General Plan Amendment File No. P98-0039 - City of Bakersfield Water Resources Department has proposed an amendment to the Land Use Element of tl~e Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan from Low Density Residential to Public Facilities on 40 acres located about .5 miles east of Morning Drive and .5 mile north of Paladino Drive. The project also includes a complex of related water storage and distribution facilities and a 3.7 mile bike path. (EIR) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions Roll call vote. A~genda, PC, ThUrsday - tember 17, 1998 Page 3 2a) General Plan Amendment File No. P98-0490 - Martin-Mclntosh requesting a change to several conditions of approval related to traffic and landscaping; and ......... revisionsto.~the-site plar~-~elated.to .building .square footage,* height~and orientation, location of the detention sump, and parking. Generally located between SR-99, the Arvin-Edison Canal, South "H" Street and Berkshire Road. (Negative Declaration on file) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions Roll call vote. b) zone Change File No. P98-0490 - Martin-Mclntosh requesting a change to several conditions of approval related to traffic and landscaping; and revisions to the site plan related to building square footage, height and orientation, location of the detention sump, and parking. Generally located between SR-99, the Arvin- Edison Canal, South "H" Street and Berkshire Road. (Negative Declaration on filei STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditiOns Roll call vote. 3) General Plan Amendment File No. P98-0475 - Martin-Mclntosh requesting an amendment to the Land Use Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan to change the designation from OS-P (Parks) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 2.38 acres and from LR (Low Density Residential) to OS-P (Parks) on 2.44 acres located south of Chamber Boulevard between Buena Vista Road and Grand Lakes Avenue, north of Stockdale High School. (Negative Declaration on file) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Deny Roll call Vote. .4a) General Plan Amendment File No. P98-0480 - Martin-Mclntosh changing the land use designation of the Land Use Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan from GC (General Commercial) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 16 acres, from HMR (High Medium Density Residential) to GC on 10.64 acres, from LMR (Low Medium Density Residential) to GC on 5.36 acres and from LMR to HMR on 10.65 acres located along the northwest and southwest corners of Buena Vista Road and Ming Avenue (extended). (Negative Declaration on file) b) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions Roll call vote. Zone Chan~le No. P98-048o changing the zoning from C-2 (Regional Commercial) to R-1 (One-family Dwelling) on 16 acres and from R-2 (Limited Multiple-family Dwelling) to C-2 on 16 acres located along the northwest and southwest corners of Buena Vista Road and Ming Avenue (extended). (Negative Declaration on file) 'Agenda, PC, Thursday - ~ptember 17, 1998 Page 4 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions ..... Roll-call *vote. Sa) General Plan Amendment File No. P98-0506 - Jim Marino changing the land use designation from LR (Low Density Residential) to GC (General Commercial) on 9.08 acres, from OS (Open Space) to GC on 0.925 acres and from OS to LR on 2.46 acres generally located between Stockdale Highway, Cross Valley Canal and Allen Road. (Negative Declaration on file) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions Roll call vote. b) zone Change P98-0506 changing the zoning from R-1 (One-Family Dwelling) to PCD (Planned Commercial Development) on 9.08 acres, from OS (Open Space) to PCD on .925 acres and from OS to R-1 on 2.46 acres located between Stockdale Highway, Cross Valley Canal and Allen Road. (Negative Declaration on file) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions s) Roll call vote. RiverLakes Ranch Specific Plan Amendment File No. P98-0493 - Fruitval~ Properties L.L.C. to amend the Specific Plan to allow vehicular/pedestrian access from two HMR/R-2 lots to Coffee Road on property located west of Coffee Road between Olive Drive and Hageman Road, specifically along lots 4 arid 8 of Tract 4263 Phase 1. (Negative Declaration on file) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Deny RoiI call vote. PUBLIC HEARING -Zone Change File No. P98-0615 - Martin-Mclntosh consisting of. a change in the zone from a P.C.D. (Planned Commercial Development) to a C-2 (Regional Commercial) zone on 5.27 acres located at 5700 Stockdale Highway (on the north side of Stockdale Highway, approximately 1,000 feet west of California Avenue.) (Negative Declaration on file) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions Roll call vote. PUBLIC HEARINGS ~ ORDINANCE AMENDMENTR 1) An ordinance adding and amending sections of Chapters 17.52 and 17.54 of Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance) of the Bakersfield Municipal Code related to revisions to site Plans for development projects in PUD (Planned Unit Development) and P.C.D. (Planned Commercial Development) zones located city-wide. (Categorically exempt) Agenda, PC, ThurSday- September 17, 1998 Page 5 10. 11. 2) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Roll. call vote. Approve resolution recommending adoption. An Ordinance adding and amending sections of Chapters 17.14 and 17.16 of Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance) of the Bakersfield Municipal Code related to minimum lot sizeand on-site park like amenities in Limited Multiple-Family Dwelling zones for projects with four units or less located city-wide. (Categorically exempt) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Roll call Vote. Approve resolution recommending adoption. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDINGS - Continued from September 3, 1998 General Plah consistencY finding pursuant to Section 65402 of the Government Code for vacation of pedestrian walkway easement extending between El Toro Drive to Wayside Alley, in Tract 1470, requested by the Public Works Department. (Categorically exempt) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Make finding Group vote. COMMUNICATIONS A) Written B) Verbal COMMISSION COMMENTS A) Committees DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THF NEXT PRE'MEETING. 12. ADJOURNMENT September 14, 1998 p jr Planning Director £ e~creta MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ...... OF-TH E.ClTY-OF .BAKERSFIEL-D Held September 17, 1998, 5:30 p.m., City Council Chamber, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California. 1. ROLL CAEL COMMISSIONERS: Present: AbsenL' JEFFREY TKAC, Chairperson MICHAEL DHANENS, Vice Chairperson STEPHEN BOYLE MATHEW BRADY MARTI MUNIS-KEMPER WADE TAVORN ROBERT ORTIZ ALTERNATE: RON SPRAGUE ADvISORy MEMBERS: Present: CAR L HERNANDEZ, Deputy City Attorney JANICE SCANLAN, Deputy City Attorney II DENNIS FIDLER, Building Director' MARIAN SHAW, Engineer IV STAFF: Present: STANLEY GRADY, Planning Director JIM MOVIUS, Principal Planner JENNIE ENG, Associate Planner MARTIN ORTIZ, Associate Planner PAM TOWNSEND, Recording Secretary PUBLIC STATEMENTS The chairman read the notice of right to appeal as set forth on the agenda. Commissioner Tavorn reported that although he did not attend the meeting of September 14, 1998 he reviewed the tapes and will be participating in this meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR '~.... None Minutes, PC, ThUrsday, September 17, 1998 Page 2 m PUBLIC HEARING- EXTENSION OF TIME - Continued from September 3, 1998 VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT $684 (Telstar Engineering) Located soUth of Palm Avenue, approximately 660 feet eaSt of Jewetta Avenue. Consisting of 36 lots on 20 acres, zoned E (Estate). (Negative Declaration on file) A staff report was given; staff recommends approval with conditions. The public hearing portion of this item was opened. Mr. Leonard Cook_opposed the proposed design for this project as it will invade his property on Shellabarger Road, and suggested that the owner reconfigure his project towards Palm. Mr. Cook also stated that traffic generated by this project will cause congestion at the six-lane under crossing at Calloway. He also expressed some concern that certain waivers granted his property will not be transferable if he decides to sell. Mrs. Bonnie Cook submitted signatures which she stated represents 96% of the residents of Shellabarger against the road going through as proposed. Mr. Michael Turner, a resident of Shellabarger, states that several people, himself included, ride horses along that property and that farm animals often cross the road. He believes that the project as designed will create a hazardous condition for the current residents. Mr. Mark Schraeder opposes the project since the proposed road will not only take a portion of the Cook's property but eliminate the driveway of the house Mr. Schraeder shares with Mr. Turner. Mr. Schraeder stated that because Shellabarger is basically over four thousand feet of good straight road, it tempts younger drivers to speed. He believes the addition of the proposed curve will create a hazard which could cause serious accidents when speeding cars-come upon such a curve unexpectedly. He also stated that because it is a back road, it is often used by those who drink and drive, posing an even greater danger. , Mr. Carl Moreland, Telstar Engineering, asked approval of the extension of time and stated that the vesting map was designed in accordance with the requirements of the ' Kern County Fire Marshal at the original hearing. The public hearing portion of this item was closed. Commissio~ier Kemper asked staff to clarify exactly how much the two properties in question would be reduced. Mr. Cook, using an overhead visual aid, explained how his property wOuld be affected. Ms. Kemper asked if it would be a practical mitigation to have the City physically relocate Mr. Cook's house. Staff replied that the City would not assume such a responsibility since it was a private subdivider's map. Minutes, PC, Thursday, September 17, 1998 Page 3 ~-~mrnissi~ner~Brady=stated~that`th~ugh~.he`was-n~t~c~mp~ete~y:satis~ed~with~the map, it .... was his understanding that the Commission had no authority to declare whether it was bad or good but could only decide whether or not to extend the life of the map for one year. Staff replied that this was correct. Mr. Brady also asked if the extension were denied, what kind of finding would the Commission be required to make. Staff replied that denial would have to be based on a significant health or safety issue. Commissioner Boyle asked if there were any history as to whether opposition was filed in 1993 when the map was approved. Staff said that it would research the matter and report back to the Commission. Mr. Boyle asked Mr. and Mrs. Cook if they were residing in the same area in 1993 and if they were aware that the map was granted in 1993. Mr. Cook replied that though he and his wife were living in the same house in 1993, they were unaware that the map had been approved. Mr. Cook stated that a road had first been propoSed going straight west, and that he had opposed it; consequently, the applicant had gone no further with it. He indicated that he had not known of the current plan until a few weeks ago. COmmissioner Boyle suggested that this item be continued for two weeks in order to research what kind of notice had been posted in 1993. Commissioner Dhanens referred to Mr. Moreland's statement regarding the design requirements of the Kern County Fire Marshall, and asked him to give a brief summary of how the present configuration had been designed. He also asked if the knuckle in question could be eliminated. Mr. Moreland stated that he had been contacted by Tom McCarthy, Kern County Fire Marshall, who had required that a street go through the property asa safety issue. While Mr. Dhanens agreed that the design was a poor one, he indicated that without evidence of a significant hazard to the immediate community, he felt he had no choice but to approve the request for extension of time. Mr. COok sUggested alternatives that might satisfy the Fire Marshall's requirements. Mr. Schraeder referred the Commission to public records of at least four different accidents that occurred on the property in question, and asked if that would satisfy the Commission's need for significant evidence. Commissioner Sprague asked Mr. Moreland if the developer was willing to try to mitigate this problem by reconfiguring the map voluntarily in exchange for a waiver of certain · fees. Mr. MOreland indicated that it was the Fire Marshal's concern regarding secondary access for the residents along Shellabarger that resulted in the present design; since a straight road was not allowed, incorporating a curve had been necessary. He stated there was no way to mitigate the problem at this intersection since this was the only location the property touched Shellabarger. Commissioner Tavorn asked if the road in question was a City or a County road; staff replied that it was a County road. Mr. Tavorn asked staff if proper notification was the responsibility of the County. Staff replied that it was the responsibility of the applicant. Mr. Grady indicated that according to his records, the Cooks had been notified of the tentative map in 1993. He indicated that if they did not understand what the map meant, it was their responsibility to contact the proper agency and request clarification of What precisely was planned for the property in question. Minutes, PC, Thursday, September 17, 1998 Page 4 -.,.~ommissiO~er. Boyle~asked4f~there~was,,a n~existing-easement._where.the-roadwould Curve, or if .the City planned to condemn the property in order to put in the road. Public Works stated that any off-site dedication would have to be represented in a recorded copy, before improvement plans could be signed. Mr. Boyle asked if this meant that the Cooks or their predecessors in title would have had to sign a documentapproving the knuckle on the corner of their property. Public Works said that they have seen no such document, that to their knowledge it has never been dedicated nor the plans signed. Mr. Boyle asked staff if the applicant will then have to negotiate with the CoOks to purchase the right to put the knuckle on their property. Mr. Moreland stated that it would be going through eminent domain through the County:, however, Mr. Cook indicated that his house was within the city limits. Mr. Boyle asked Mr. Hernandez if the City would then be responsible for processing the eminent d°:main suit; Mr. Hernandez explain that according to the law, if an applicant needs to use property they do not own for an off-site improvement required by the City and the owners of that property will not allow it to be used, the City is then authorized under the Subdivision Map Act to begin condemnation proceedings to acquire the property on behalf of the subdivider. CommissiOner Sprague asked for specific figures as to how far the Cooks' house would be set back from the street should the improvements be made, and if the resulting change would violate setback limits set by City code. Staff replied that they did not know exactly how much property would have to be taken, but if the Cooks sustained a reduction ih their setback, they would not be penalized in any way nor would their house be required to be'moved. Mr. Sprague asked how far back the house presently sat from the northern property line; staff replied it was approximately forty to fifty feet. A motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Boyle, to approve a One-year extension of time for vesting tentative Tract 5684 to expire August 4, 1999 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached resolution Exhibit A, incorporating the Planning Director's memorandum of September 16, 1998. Motion carried. ; Commissioher Dhanens made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Sprague to move Agenda Item 8.1 to be heard at this time. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS - ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS 1) An ordinance adding and amending sections of Chapters 17.52 and 17.54 of Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance) of the Bakersfield Municipal Code related to revisions to siteplans for development projects in PUD (Planned Unit Development) and P.C~.D. (Planned Commercial Development) zones located city-wide. (Categorically exempt) A staff report was given; staff recommends approving resolution recommending adoption. The public hearing portion of this item was opened; no one spoke in opposition. Minutes, PC, ThurSday, September 17, 1998 Page 5 -~ .......... ~he,:public,headng.,portion.of. this.item.was,clesed:_ cOmmissioner Dhanens made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Kemper, to adopt the resolution approving the proposed text revisions to Title 17 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code as contained in the attached Exhibit A. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AyEs: Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Dhanens, KemPer, Sprague, Tavorn, Tkac NOES: None RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY THE FINAL EIR FOR THE NORTHEAST BAKERSFIELD BIKF PATH AND WATER FACILITIES PROJECT WHICH HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA, THE STATE EIR GUIDELINES AND THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD CEQA IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES. (City of Bakersfield) Commissioner Sprague declared a conflict of interest on this item. Commissioner Kemper made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Boyle, to move the RiverLakes specific plan' amendment P98-0493 (Item 6) to begin the public hearing portion of that item. Motion carried. It was noted for the record that at 6:36 p.m, Commissioner Ortiz was present. Mr. Michael Houlihan'of Michael Brandon and Associates gave a presentation of the findings and response to comments in the final EIR. Staff recommends adopt resolution making findings and recommending certification of the final EIR to the City Council. Commissioner Brady asked if drawings of the proposed bike paths connections were available for review. He expressed concern over the interface between bicyclists and vehicles at Alfred Harrell Highway, and felt that he did not have enough information to make a sound decision as to which alternative was safest. Mr. Jim Holliday, design engineer, explained thefour alternatives for crossing Alfred Harrell Highway. A brief discussion followed which included the following: locations and lengths of each crossing, line of sight determinations, speed limits, potential hazards, slope grades and how they m!ght affect use by families, especially younger children, adequate drainage and the possibility of flash flood, distances between certain points, and safety measures. Mr. Brady indicated his support of the adoption of this resolution. Commissioner Boyle indicated that it was his understanding that the Commission did not have the authority to address issues of economics such as how the project will be financed, the cost of hook-ups, etcetera. Mr. Boyle stated that he supported the design concept as Presented, and would be in favor of approving the final EIR. A motion Was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Ortiz, to adopt the resolution making findings and recommending certification of the final' EIR for the Northeast Bakersfield Bike Path and Water Facilities Project and General Plan Use Element Amendment to the City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: Minutes, PC, Thursday, September 17, 1998 Page 6 AYES: Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Dhanens, Kemper, Ortiz, Tavorn, Tkac NOES: None PUBLIC HEARINGS - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS, AssoCIATED REZONINGS, ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS, KERN RIVER PLAN ELEMENT, RIVERLAKES RANCH, SPECIFIC PLAN AND CIRCULATION ELEMENT AMENDMENTS 6.6) RiverLakes Ranch - Specific Plan Amendment File P98-0493. Fruitvale prOperties L.L.C. to amend the. Specific Plan to allow vehicular/pedestrian access to two HMR/R-2 lots to Coffee Road on property located west of Coffee Road between Olive Drive and Hageman Road, specifically along lots 4 and 8 of TraCt 4263 Phase I. Negative declaration on file.- Commissioner Dhanens declared a conflict of interest on this item. A staff report was given; staff recommends denial. The public hearing portion of this item was Opened.. Mr. Mike Callagy, Cornerstone Engineering, representing RiverLakes Master Association, expressed opposition to denial of this item. He gave a brief history of the proposed amendment and using visual aids, outlined the surrounding residential areas and commercial facilities, explaining how he believed allowing this amendment would benefit those residents. Mr. Dave Stanton, President of the RiverLakes Ranch Master Association, stated that the association board has unanimously supported access through Coffee Roa~d. Mr. Mar. k Turner, homeowner, expressed support of access to Coffee Road. He stated that the present road is only a two-lane street and is used by both public and private transportation, and that it woUld suffer serious congestion from a high-density apartment complex if access to Coffee Road was denied. Mr. Paul Kay, Fruitvale Properties, also supported approval of this item. Homeowners John Kobal and Nicole Stratigus expressed support of permitting access to Coffee Road. Mr. Este Songer commended staffs decision, stating that the traffic on Coffee Road was already congested both with cars and increasingly with heavy trucks. He pointed out that stop lights were already in place at both Olive Drive and Hagemen, .and suggested that traffic should be routed through those locations. Mr. Henry Braun expressed opposition to the proposed amendment and submitted signatures in support of his position.. He referred to a number of new developments currently underway that would eventually feed traffic into Coffee Road, stating that any new access would increase an already congested roadWay where the speed limits are as high as 65 mph. He also pointed out that Minutes, PC, ThUrsday, September 17, 1998 Page 7 -~access~c~u~d;n~t~be`acc~mp~ished-with~ut~destr~ying~`a~¢ertain~p~ti~n~ef~the greenbelt. Mr. Dallas Moore, a resident of Peanut Avenue, described the present congestion of traffic trying to get onto Coffee Road, stating that approval of the amendment Would only worsen a situation which was already dangerous. Mr. Rennie Carlton, a resident of RiverLakes, pointed out that no change in the traffic fl°w Would be made at Peanut. He acknowledged that traffic on Coffee was both thick and fast, suggesting that perhaps it could be controlled by implementing a lower speed limit. Mr. Carlton pointed out that without access to Coffee Road, the additional traffic generated by the apartment complex would be dumped into residential streets which represented the greater hazard. Ms.: Rosemary Ryan, Ms. Debbie Osborne, and Mr. Patrick Ring, homeowners, supPorted access to Coffee Road. Mr. Mike Callagy asked that access to Coffee Road be approved with conditions WhiCh will implement the provisions and policies as outlined. He also asked that this item be continued and the proponent amend the application to restrict interior access except for pedestrian, bicycle, handicap and emergency traffic, and that language be added to the RiverLakes Specific Plan to implement these changes. Ms: Bonnie Godfrey, Sales and Marketing Director, Fruitvale Properties, stated ~that her firm did not support Mr. Callagy's proposal that the specific plan be amended to deny access to Northshore and Southshore since the residents of the;proposed apartment complex will have children who will also need access to those street to get to school. Didi Collier, Mark Munnaly, Linda Ford, Mike Woods, Bob Gergen, Shirley Sanchez, Vickie Moore, and Doug Blankenship, homeowners, expressed support of the proposed amendment allowing access to Coffee Road. The public hearing portion of this item was closed; commissioner Sprague referred to the alternate plan suggested by Mr. Callagy, and asked staff if it would be possible to put a traffic signal at Peanut in an effort to slowing traffic on Coffee Road and mitigating the problems on both sides of the street. Mr. Walker, traffic engineer, stated that requiring a traffic signal at Peanut and Coffee Road was anticipated at some time in the future. Mr. sprague asked if the deceleration lanes would severely impact access from thOse outlets onto Coffee Road; Mr. Walker stated that it would be mandatory to haVe deceleration lanes as a safety mitigation measure. Commissioner Sprague asked if installation of the traffic signal could be accelerated; Mr. Walker replied that since the City budget allowed for installation of three or four signals a year and there were a number of existing locations Minutes, PC, ThUrsday, September 17, 1998 Page 8 alreadytargeted, it-could.beten-years-before-a-traffic-light-coutd ~be installed, at-~ Peanut and Coffee Road. Mr. Sprague also asked that if interior access was denied or restricted, would crash gates be erected for secondary access by emergency vehicles. Staff replied that it would not necessarily be a issue solely of secondary access, since under the amendment as submitted, access to Coffee and the interior both would be possible. Mr. Sprague pointed out that it appeared that traffic denied direct access to Coffee Road would ultimately end up there anyway, except that it would be forced through a residential area in order to arrive at the same destination. He asked if there were some way that the two properties could be arranged differently for residential use that would mitigate this problem. Ms. Bonnie Godfrey, Fruitvale Properties, stated that the only alternative would be if the parcels were rezoned to Single-Family Residential, which would require another specific plan amendment and a general plan amendment. Commissioner Kemper stated than an increase in traffic would be inevitable as the area grows and continued to build out, and indicated her approval of some sort of access to Coffee such as suggested by Mr. Callagy that would not have a great deal of impact on the green belt yet would give pedestrian and bicycle access to the schools. Commissioner Brady felt that he did not have sufficient information to make a deciSion on this matter, but did point out that the present zoning did not preclude the building of small-lot single-family houses as opPosed to apartments. He also felt that the issue of access beneath high-tension power lines had not been adequately addressed, and was concerned about interface between pedestrian and ~bicycle traffic with the proposed access point, that it appeared driver reactiOn time would be insufficient on that route. Mr. Brady recommended that the item be continued to allow the parties to meet and gather additional information as to how the matter might be resolved. _ Commissioner Boyle supported a continuance of this item since the original proposal had grown from one to three alternatives, each of which requires a completely different set of conditions than those currently before the Commission. Mr. Boyle also pointed out that the General Plan criteria included limited access to arterial streets, and that two of the proposed alternatives directly contradict that criteria. He also discussed the density proposed for both proPerties and whether or not the number of units would justify allowing direct or dual access to Coffee Road. Ms. Shaw stated that both Northshore and Southshore were designed as collectors to move traffic to RiverLakes. Mr. Grady also noted that there were onlYtwo alternative access plans, either dual or none, and that a third alternative would require a new notice for a hearing to sever access from that street. Minutes, PC, ThUrsday, September 17, 1998 Page 9 -Ms.--Judy-Gollier-referred to the-high-voltage-towers,-and-askedif.there-was a potential danger why residential dwellings had been proposed for that area. She also asked if futurecommercial enterprises built at the corner of Hageman and Olive would have access, and questioned what affect traffic generated from thoSe projects might have. Commissioner Boyle stated that if this item were continued, he would request information regarding traffic, specifically the difference between what the street was designed for, what it presently carries, and an estimate of how many vehicle trips would be added by the proposed apartment complex. Commissioner Tavorn indicated that he supported a continuanCe of this item, stated that he had large concerns, especially with traffic in the area. Commissioner Brady stated that it appeared the property at issue, which is closer to Olive, seemed to be too close to Olive to have any meaningful entrance and exit, and suggested that Mr. Callagy consult with Public Works to see if the problem could be worked out. Mr. Brady asked staff what direction was needed from the Commission to have this item returned with some idea of how to deal with: the issues that have been raised. Staff replied that the solution to the problems would involve more than simply refinements to access points or specific questions regarding circulation, and may require a lengthy process. Mr. Brady asked the applicant if remaining within the present cycle was critical; Ms. :Godfrey replied that an extension would effectively prohibit the sale of the proPerty. She expressed the hope that the item could be continued for two weeks only until the next meeting. commissione~ Sprague suggested that if a continuance were granted, a compromise might be reached between the applicant, RiverLakes residents and Planning, and expressed the hope that they could discuss the matter and come up with a plan that would be agreeable to all parties. Commissioner TaVorn suggested that if this item is continued, it be the first item open for discussion on October 1 following the consent agenda. Commissioner Boyle also asked staff to report back the possibility of the third alternative. Mr. Stanton pointed out that the language of the amendment stated that both parcels be granted access to Coffee Road, not Coffee Road and access through the subdivision. Mr. Boyle stated that unless there was a condition on the property specifically preventing access, then access exists, and that position is before the Commission that would prevent access from the property onto local streets. Ms. Godfrey stated that at the time the applicant submitted their application to change the zoning, a mitigation agreement with the Homeowners Association was reached and recorded CC and R's on the two parcels, one of which was that access to Southshore and Northshore Drive be gated. Minutes, PC, Thursday, September 17, 1998 Page 10 A motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Boyle, ..... ~_..~_4. t~`centinue~this`item~t~"the`meeting-~f-~ct~ber`-1~J`998~and-thaLit`be~aced first on the agenda after the consent calendar. Motion carried. At 9:10 p.~. a 30 minute break was called and the meeting reconvened at 9:40 p.m. 6.1) General Plan Amendment File No. P98-0039 - City of Bakersfield Water ReSources Department has proposed an amendment to the Land Use Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan from Low Density Residential to Public Facilities on 40 acres located about .5 miles east of Morning Drive and .5 mile north of Paladino Drive. The project also includes a complex of related water storage and distribution facilities and a 3.7 mile bike path. (EIR) Mr. Bogart, Water Resources Manager, gave a brief presentation on this project. Staff recommends approval with conditions. The pUblic hearing portion of this item was opened; no one spoke in opposition. The public hearing portion of this item was closed. Commissioner Brady indicated there was sufficient evidence for a finding that the potential interface of the proposed bike path and Alfred Harrell Highway posed a significant hazard requiring special handling. Mr. Brady proposed a condition that the issue of which option to interface the bike path with Alfred Harrell HighWay return to the Planning Commission for approval. A motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Ortiz, to adopt a resolution approving the requested General Plan Amendment with findings as presented in said resolution Exhibit C, and recommend same to the City Council subject to the approval of mitigation measures as shown on Exhibit A With the additional condition that the issues related to the interface between the bike path and Alfred Harrell Highway be returned to the Planning Commission for final approval as to how that interface will be effected. Motion carried by the follOwing roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Dhanens, Kemper, Ortiz, Tavorn, Tkac NOES: 6.2a) None General plan Amendment File No. P98-0490 - Martin-Mclntosh requesting a change to several conditions of approval related to traffic and landscaping; and revisions to the site plan related to building square footage, height and Orientation, location of the detention sump, and parking. Generally located between SR-99, the Arvin-Edison Canal, South "H" Street and Berkshire Road. (Negative Declaration on file) A staff report was given; staff recommends approval With conditions. The pUblic hearing portion of this item was opened; no one spoke in opposition. Minutes, PC, ThUrsday, September 17,' 1998 Page 11 Mr:-Roger,Mcl ntosh ;~Martin. Melntosh-Engineering~epresenting-Baystar -- DeVelopment, asked for the Commission's approval of this item and explained- that this request fora second revision to the site plan was made to accommodate tenant requirements. He indicated that a number of factors had to be recOnfigured, explaining the changes in square footage, traffic, parking, and landscaping, adding that the revisions resulted in no change to the original mitigation measures. Mr. Yehuda Natanel, Baystar Development, submitted an artist's rendering of the prOject. The~ public hearing portion of this item was closed. commissioner Dhanens asked for clarification regarding the elimination of a colonnade in frontof the building. Mr. Natanel explained that with the redesign the Colonnade was deemed out' of context with the rest of the project. Mr. Dhanens also asked staff to comment on the methodology of Mr. Mclntosh's traffic figures; staff replied that the standard practice is to analyze the center as a uniti which is the second option that Mr. Mclntosh chOse to use. Mr. Dhanens expressed his approval of the project. Commissioner Boyle asked if there were any difference in traffic flow between having two right-hand turn lanes as opposed to having one right-hand turn lane with a green arrow. Mr. Steve Walker, traffic engineer, explained that an overlap on the left turn simply allows more cars through per cycle because there is no oppOsing traffic, permitting a continuous flow. Mr. Boyle indicated his support of the project. Commissioner Brady referred to the removal of the berm and installation of a three-foot wall, and asked if any provisions had been made to prevent the wall from becoming a temptation for graffiti. Mr. Natanel indicated that the berm perhaps wOuld suffice if the Commission decided the three-foot wall was unnecessary. Mr. Mclntosh indicated that the applicant had concerns as well that the wall might pose a problem with graffiti, suggested that a hedge might accommodate the problem and added that landscaping was proposed for that area, with or without the wall. Staff noted that the mitigation was included to eliminate headlight glare, which a hedge did not accomplish. Mr. Natanel stated that he did not believe the graffiti problems, if they did occur, would last long; that historically graffiti artists tended to tire of one specific location. Mr. Brady indicated his support of staff's position on this item as amended. Commissioner Sprague nOted that the north and south truck docks had a 25-foot. turn~ radius, which was minimal at best for large semis and doubles, and that the south dock backs straight in from the west to the east. He stated that it seemed to pbse a.potential hazard should t~affic come through when a truck is backing Minutes, PC, Thursday, September 17, 1998 Page 12 AYES: NOES: b) AYES: NOES: 6.3) straight'into;'the'dock; 'and~askedifiit-could-be angled-slightly~--Mr~.Natanel · indicated that there were indeed refinements to be made in that area which he had not planned to address until specific tenant criteria could be incorporated into the design. A motion was made by Commissioner Boyle, seconded by Commissioner Kemper, to approve and adopt the negative declaration and approve the General Plan Amendment P98-0490 as recommended in the staff report with findings and conditions set forth in the attached resolution Exhibit A, including the changes stated in the Planning Director's memo dated September 14, 1998 and the memo from.Ms. Shaw dated September 16, 1998 and recommend same to the City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Dhanens, Kemper, Ortiz, Tavorn, Tkac : None Zone Chang® File No. P98-0490 - Marfin-Mclntosh requesting a change to sevbral conditions of approval related to traffic and landscaping; and revisions to thesite plan related to building square footage, height and orientation, location of thedetention sump, and parking. Generally located between SR-99, the Arvin- Edison Canal, South "H" Street and Berkshire Road. (Negative Declaration on file) A motion was made by Commissioner Boyle, seconded by CommiSsioner Kemper, to approve and adopt the negative declaration and approve the zone change P98-0490 as recommended in the staff report with findings and conditions set forth in the attaChed resolution Exhibit B, including the changes stated in the Planning Director's memo dated September 14, 1998 and the memo from Ms. Shaw dated September 18, 1.998 and recommend same to the City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Dhanens, Kemper, Ortiz, Tavorn, Tkac None General Plan Amendment File No. P98-0475 - Martin-Mclntosh requesting an amendment to the Land Use Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan to change the designation from OS-P (Parks) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 2.38 acres and from LR (Low Density Residential) to OS-P (Parks) on 2.44 acres located south of Chamber Boulevard between Buena Vista Road and Grand Lakes Avenue, north of Stockdale High School. (Negative Declaration on file) A staff report was given; staff recommends denial. The public hearing portion of this item was opened; no one spoke in opposition. - Minutes, PC, Thursday, September 17, 1998 Page 13 Mr~Roger'Mclntosh ;-Martin-Mclntosh-Engineering~epresenting-the.,applicant, Castle and Cooke California, gave a brief history of this item. He stated the applicant did not agree with staff recommendation for denial, and asked that this item be approved. The public hearing portion of this item was closed. commissioner Sprague noted that the area in question appeared to have more parks as compared to other sections of the city, and felt that another park was not needed. He also felt that 2.3 acres was not large enough for an effective park site, and that it appeared to be a high-maintenance area that would be exPensive to maintain. Commissioner Boyle asked for the lot sizes the applicant Will be proposing. Mr._- Mclntosh replied that the proposed lots would be a minimum 100x~135, or approximately 13,500 square feet. Mr. Boyle commented that people who have lot sizes that large tend not to use parks nearly as much as those with smaller lot sizes, and that moving the park to Grand Lakes Avenue would make it more accessible to a greater number of people. Mr. Boyle concurred with Mr. Sprague that the rose-garden type of park would seem to be expensive to maintain, and asked the applicant to respond. Mr. Mclntosh replied that they were more expensive, such as the streetscapes in SeVen Oaks. He stated there is a maintenance district set up, and the homeowners who buy into that neighborhood know that the maintenance costs are:there, and that they will be paying for it. Mr.!Grady suggested that the park in question could be moved to a more advantageous location; Mr. Mclntosh replied that to do so would require further reqbests for approval and amendments which he was not authorized to accept as alternatives. Commissioner Kemper agreed with Mr. Boyle that the park should be located in the corner behind the ball park, making it accessible to more people, and would be in favor of the item as requested by the applicant. Commissioner Tavorn referred to a letter from a Seven Oaks resident who felt the Park would create littering and become a place for drug and alcohol use. Mr. TavOrn noted that placing the park inside the gated community surrounded by homes would discourage students from congregating there. He indicated his approval of Mr. Grady's plan, and expressed his belief that a corner park would create a number of problems in the future. Commissioner Sprague suggested that the developer might pay into a park fund, eliminate the park at this particular subdivision, and put the money into a larger park at a later date, and asked staff if such an alternative was possible. Staff replied that it was an option, but one that would basically involve park planning, which would require a considerable amount of time and information. Minutes, PC, ThUrsday, September 17, 1998 Page14 6.4.a) b) 6.5.a) Mr.-Mclntosh pointed~out-that-the~park-includedan.-eig ht-feet-wall-which effectively separated the high school from the park and would discourage students from gathering there since it would require them to walk nearly a half- mile to reach it: Mr. Tavorn noted that many students have cars, and that historically parks close to high schools tend to have drug and alcohol problems. Commissioner Dhanens stated that after listening to the various input from the applicant, staff and Commissioners, he would tend to support the staff's position on this item. Commissioner Brady stated that he disliked the trend to smaller parks that no oneseemed to use but required maintenance, even though the maintenance was paid for by the residents of the maintenance district. He also noted that the parking seemed inadequate, and would prefer to see it as a private park if it is to remain in its present location. Mr. Grady stated that to convert the park from public to private would entail a new process of approval. Mr. Brady suggested that~this item be continued to allow further discussion. commissioner Dhanens disagreed that residents do not frequent small parks, and that because the neighborhood happens to be affluent or include a country club doesn't mean that it shouldn't have parks, even small ones. A motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Ortiz, to continue this item until the meeting of October 1, 1998. Motion carried. General Plan Amendment File No. P98-0480 - Martin,Mclntosh changing the land use designation of the Land Use Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan from GC (General Commercial) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 16 acres, from HMR (High Medium Density Residential) to GC on 10.64 acres, from LMR (Low Medium Density Residential) to GC on 5,36 acres and from I_MR to HMR on 10.65 acreslocated along the northwest and southwest corners of Buena Vista Road and Ming Avenue (extended). (Negative. Declaration on file) This item has been withdrawn at the request of the applicant. Zone Change No. P98-0480 changing the zoning from C-2 (Regional Commercial) to R-1 (One-family Dwelling) on 16 acres and from R-2 (Limited Multiple-family Dwelling) to C-2 on 16 acres located along the northwest and' southwest corners of Buena Vista Road and Ming Avenue (extended). (Negative Declaration on file) Thislitem has been withdrawn at the request of the applicant. General Plan Amendment File No. P98-0506 - Jim Marino changing the land use designation from LR (Low Density Residential) to GC (General Commercial) on 9.08 acres, from OS (Open Space) to GC on 0.925 acres and from OS to LR on 2.46 acres generally located between Stockdale Highway, Cross Valley Canal and Allen Road. (Negative Declaration on file) Minutes, PC, Thursday, September 17, 1998 Page15 ........... 6.-5~'b) ............ Zone=E~hanqe-P98-0506"changing*-the-zenin§.***from .R-~l~(©ne-Family Dwelling) to PCD (Planned Commercial Development) on 9.08 acres, from OS (Open Space) to PCD on .925 acres and from OS to I:{-1 on 2.46 acres located between Stockdale Highway, Cross Valley Canal and Allen ~ Road. (Negative Declaration on file) A staff report was given; staff recommends approval with conditions. The public hearing portion of this item was opened. Mr..Steve DeBranch, Castle and Cooke, expressed opposition to this project. The proposed mini-storage targeted for this site is in the center of an area included in Castle and Cooke's master plan. Castle and Cooke feels the project's industrial appearance deviates drastically from the standards set within the area, with minimal architectural style and landscaping. If the Commission chOOses to approve the project, Castle and Cooke requests conditions of approval including: limiting or screening the project from view from the elevated portion of Stockdale Highway; implementing the standards set by Castle and Cooke for adjacent and surrounding areas, including a Georgian architectural style and heavier landscaping; that no two-story structures be allowed; that monuments and signage be in concert with the existing commercial centers in the area. Mr. Brian Hapt, Grubb and Ellis, representing the applicant stated that Castle and Cooke had been willing for a mini-storage facility to be built on a larger parcel which was 1/4 mile from the site of the proposed project. Mr. Kevin Findlay, representative of the Christian school which owns the property on which the project will be built, stated that a positive response had been received from the surrounding community regarding the project and found it attractive. Mr. Findlay requested that the project beapproved. Mr. ~lim Marino, Darryl's Mini-Storage, gave a brief history of the project and the communication between the applicant and the community. He explained the layout, general design, and the landscaping planned for the project, and asked that it be approved as recommended by staff. He also requested that the requirement for a sidewalk down one side of the private access drive be deleted from the conditions of approval, and indicated that signage for the project had been reduced from two signs to one slightly larger. Darryl Reitnouer, owner, also objected to the requirement for a sidewalk, since it seemed to lead nowhere. He also stated that studies have shown that property values in a given area are not automatically lowered by the addition of a mini- storage. He felt out the fountain and architectural design of the project were attractive, and indicated that no negative feedback had been received from the surrounding .residents.. The )ublic hearing portion of this item was closed. Minutes, PC, Thursday, September 17, 1998 Page 16 Commissioner--Tavern ~expressed-cencem~over-what-seem-te-be..reutine. cha nges -. the General Plan, and advised the Commission not to allow the parcel to be rezoned. commissioner Boyle indicated for the record that he had met with Mr. Jim Marino to review the plan. He stated that he appreciated Mr. Tavorn's concern but felt the project would incorporate well into the area, which as a whole seemed to be changing. He indicated that he understood Castle and Cooke's concerns and asked if the applicant was willing to upgrade the landscaping with larger trees and. plants. Mr. Marino replied that outside of a certain 30-foot strip, the applicant had no objection to going to larger boxed trees; however, the Christian school which owned the property, had assumed the responsibility for streets and landscaping for the 30-foot strip. Mr. Kevin Findlay indicated that going to a 24" boxtree would involve a considerable expense. ' Commissioner Brady asked staff why the sidewalk would be needed, since the applicant had made a sensible argument for its deletion. Using visual aids, staff described the layout of the surrounding buildings which included a school and some apartments and explained the route these residents might take, adding that a signal would be placed at a certain T-shape intersection. Staff indicated that if the roadway in question was not private, a sidewalk would be required under those conditions. Mr. Brady expressed his support for the project. Commissioner Dhanens stated that while the applicant's previous projects were well;designec~ and attractive, he was uncomfortable with putting a mini-storage along the road that served as the entrance to the city from I-5. He felt that no matter how it was disguised, it still remained basically an industrial use which would be more appropriate at another site. Commissioner.Sprague stated he would support the project, including the applicant's request that the sideWalk requirement be eliminated. Commiss oner Kemper referred to a letter from Castle and Cooke regarding their concerns over the appearance of the proposed project and their request for additional landscaping on three sides of the project. Ms. Kemper suggested that landscaping be placed on the canal side and on the Stockdale side, and asked that it be added as a condition of approval. Corr{missioner'Boyle asked staff to confirm that the project did not allow R¥ storage; staff replied that it did not. Mr. Boyle also asked if the 30-foot strip under the control of the school would be landscaped at the same time as the mini-storage. Staff replied that it would research the matter and provide that information. Mr. Boyle indicated he would support the requirement for a sidewalk and asked if landscaping on the canal side was possible. Mr. Marino replied that it was possible but would be difficult. Commissioner Tavorn asked if the traffic analysis would be altered 'with.the land use change. Staff replied that no significant change would result from the rezoning. Minutes, PC, Thursday, September 17, 1998 Page 17 = .A--motion-was-made-by Cemmissioner-Beyler.secended-by-Cemmissioner Brady, to approve and adopt the resolution recommending approval of the proposed General Plan amendment and zone change with the findings and conditions contained in Exhibit A and in the memorandum from the Planning Director dated September 16, 1998 excepting approval of the monument sign which Will be 64 square feet and 10 feet in height as requested by the applicant; and be supplemented by the memorandum from the Public Works Director dated Se 3tember 17, 1998; and the following additional conditions: 1) 'The 30-foot landscaping strip along the Stockdale frontage of the applicant's property will be constructed at the same time as the other .improvements. That the applicant will put in approximately 150' of landscaping on the southeast portion of the property between Stockdale Highway and the canal. 2) Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Kemper, Ortiz, Tkac Commissioners Dhanens, Tavorn 6.6) ' RiverLakes Ranch Specific Plan Amendment File No. P98-0493 - Fruitvale Properties L.L.C. This item was moved to follow Agenda Item 4. PUBLIC HEARING -Zone Change File No. P98-0615 - Martin-Mclntosh consisting of a change in the zone from a P.C.D. (Planned Commercial Development) to a C-2 (Regional Commercial) zone on 5.27 acres located at 5700 Stockdale Highway (on the north side of Stockda e Highway, approximately 1,000 feet west of California Avenue. (Negative Declaration on file) 'Commissioner Dhanens left the meeting at this time - 12:28 a.m. A staff report was given; staff recommends approval with conditions. The public hearing portion of this item was opened; no one spoke in opposition. Mr. Roger Mclntosh,_ Martin Mclntosh Engineering, representing the applicant, stated that the apPlicant agreed with the conditions of approval. The public hearing portion of this item was closed. Commissioner Brady asked if this change could be so conditioned that if something other than the propoSed Say-Mart was targeted for this site the developer would have to resubmit to the Planning Commission. Minutes,~ PC, Thursday, September 17, 1998 page18 o --Staff-replied~that-it.was-the-function-of.the -P:O:D:r-that-once-it-is-zoned C-2-thedeveloper is granted the rights associated with that zone. Conditions of the zone change would pass to a subsequent project as well, but a use change would have to come back to the Commission for approval. Commissioner sprague referred to section of block wall fencing the north side of the property and recommended it be extended to provide additional security to the adjacent high school. He also suggested that a condition be added that required some shielding of the light standards to the east away from the residential housing. Mr. Mclntosh indicated that shielding the lights was an existing condition of approval. A motion Was made by Commissioner Boyle, seconded by Commissioner Kemper, to approve and adopt the negative declaration and approve the zone change P98-0615 with findings set forth in the attached resolution Exhibit A and conditions attached to the Planning Director's memorandum dated September 16, 1998 and recommend same to the City Council. Motion carried. AYES: Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Kemper, Sprague, Ortiz, Tavorn, Tkac NOES: None PUBLIC HEARINGS - ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS 1) This item was moved to follow Agenda Item 4. 2) An ordinance adding and amending sections of Chapters 17.14 and 17.16 of Title 17 (Zoning Ordinance) of the Bakersfield Municipal Code related to minimum lot size and on-site park like amenities in Limited Multiple-Family Dwelling zones for projects with four units or less located city-wide. (Categorically exempt) A staff report was given; staff recommends approval with conditions. The public hearing portion of this item was opened; no one spoke in opposition. The public hearing portion of this item was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Kemper, seconded by Commissioner Tavorn, to adopt resolution approving the proposed text revisions to Title 17 of the ~Bakersfield Municipal Code as contained in the attached Exhibit A. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Kemper, Sprague, Ortiz, Tavorn, Tkac NOES: None GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDINGS -Continued from September 3, 1998 General plan 'consistency finding pursuant to Section 65402 of the Government Code for vacation of' pedestrian walkway easement extending between El Toro Drive to Wayside Alley, in Tract 1470, requested by the Public Works Department. (Categorically exempt). Minutes, PC, Thursday, SePtember 17, 1998 Page 19 10. A staff report was given; staff recommends approval with conditions. A motion was made by Commissioner Brady, Seconded by Commissioner Ortiz, to make a finding pursuant to Government Code Section 65402 that the proposed vacation of the pedestrian walk easement extending from El Toro Drive to Wayside Alley in Tract 1470 is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. Motion carried. COMMUNICATIONS, There were no written or verbal communications. 11. COMMISSION COMMENTS None - 12. DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THE NEXT PRE;MEETING. The next pre-meeting was not canceled. 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 12:46 a.m. pjt October 21 1998 Pam Townsend Recording Secretary Planning Director'