The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03/16/00 AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD · Council Chamber, City Hall Thursday, March 16, 2000 5:30 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL JEFFREY TKAC, Chairman MICHAEL DHANENS, Vice-Chairman STEPHEN BOYLE MA THEW BRAD Y MARTI MUNIS-KEMPER TOM MCGINNIS 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 OUT A 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, c/o Office of the City Clerk, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301. A $334 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 $334 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 If all appeals are withdrawn prior to the City Council hearing, it will not be conducted and the decision of the Planning Commission will stand. If no appeal is received within the specified time period or if all appeals filed are withdrawn, the action of the Planning Commission shall become final.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 - March 16, 2000 Page 2 CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS - (marked by asterisk (*) These items will be acted on as a group without individual staff presentations 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. 3.1) Agenda Item 5) - Extension of Time for Tentative Tract 5656 3.2) Agenda Item 6) - Tract 5426 Phase F - Vestim:l Ri_clhts (Ward 3) (Ward 4) 5. 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of February 3, 2000. PUBLIC HEARING - Extension of Time for Tentative Tract 5656 (Porter-Robertson) Consisting of 184 lots on 193.68 acres that include 180 lots for purposes of single family residential development, and for four of more than 21 acres in size, zoned R-1 (One Family Dwelling), located on the southwest corner of Highway 178 and Miramonte Drive. (Negative Declaration on file) RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE Group Vote. EXTENSION OF TIME '- VESTING RIGHTS for Tract 5426 Phase F (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.) Consisting of 30 single family residential lots on 8.6 acres, located south of Stockdale Highway and west of Old River Road. RECOMMENDATION: Group Vote. PUBLIC HEARINGS '- VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS 7.1) Revised Vesting Tentative Tract 5951 (Phase C) (SmithTech USA, Inc.) Containing 124 single family residential lots, 1 commercial lot, 1 park and 1 sump on 52.29 acres, zoned R-1 (One Family Dwelling) and proposed PCD (Planned Commercial Development; and a request for landscape medians on local streets, and lot design modification, located on the southwest corner of Stockdale Highway and Buena Vista Road. (Negative Declaration on file) Agenda, PC, Thursday - March 16, 2000 Page 3 (Ward 4) RECOMMENDATION: Group Vote. APPROVE (Ward 4) 7.2) Vesting Tentative Tract 5978 Phased (Porter-Robertson) Containing 135 lots of 40.84 acres for single family residential purposes, zoned R-1 (One Family Dwelling); a request to deviate from city street improvement standards, located on the northwest corner of Calloway Drive and Norris Road. (Negative Declaration on file) RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE Group Vote. 10. COMMUNICATIONS A) Written B) Verbal COMMISSION COMMENTS A) Committees DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THE 11. March 1,2000 NEXT PRE-MEETING. ADJOURNMENT Planning Director Held MarCh 16, 2000 5:30 p.m. City Council Chamber, City Hall 1501 Truxtun Avenue BakerSfield, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: Present; JEFFREY TKAC, Chairperson MICHAEL DHANENS, Vice Chairperson TOM MCGINNIS MARTI MUNIS-KEMPER RON SPRAGUE Absent: MATHEW BRADY STEPHEN BOYLE ADVISORY MEMBERS: Present: CARL HERNANDEZ, Deputy City Attorney DENNIS FIDLER, Building Director MARIAN SHAW, Engineer IV STAFF: Present: STANLEY GRADY, Planning Director JIM MOVIUS, Principal Planner PAM TOWNSEND, Recording Secretary PUBLIC STATEMENTS None Chairman Tkac read the Notice of the Right to Appeal CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS · 3.1) Agenda Item 5) - Extension of Time for Tentative Tract 5656 3.2) Agenda Item 6) - Tract 5426 Phase F - Vesting Rights A motion was made by Commissioner Kemper, seconded by Commissioner Sprague to approve the Consent Agenda items. Motion carried. Minutes, PC, March 16, 2000 Page 2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion was made by Commissioner Sprague, secOnded by Commissioner Kemper, to approve the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of February 3, 2000. g PUBLIC HEARING - Extension of Time for Tentative Tract 5656. (Porter-Robertson) (Ward 3) See consent agenda. o EXTENSION OF TIME - VESTING RIGHTS for Tract 5426 Phase F (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.) (ward4) See consent agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS - VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS 7.1) Revised Vesting Tentative Tract 5951 (Phase C) (SmithTech USA, Inc.) (Ward 4) Staff report given recommending approval with conditions attached to resolution. Public portion of the meeting was opened. No one spoke in opposition. Bob Smith, of SmithTech USA, representing Coleman Homes, stated that he had read the staff report, agreed to the conditions and would be willing to answer any questions the Commission might have. Public portion of the meeting was closed. Commissioner Sprague asked staff if when the landsCaping was done along the east side of River Parkway if the Commission made allocation for larger trees and landscape? Commissioner Sprague said that he would like to see some continuity on the other side so that it will look the same. Mr. Grady said that the wall and landscape plan had already been approved for this subdivision. Commissioner Sprague then asked if the sump was a temporary one? Bob Smith said that it is a permanent sump that serves the commercial, this subdivision, and also the subdivision to the south (5934). Motion was made by Commissioner Sprague, seconded by Commissioner Kemper, to approve and adopt the negative declaration and to approve the Revised Vesting Tentative Tract 5951 with the findings and conditions set forth in attached resolution Exhibit "^". Motion carried. Minutes, PC, March t6, 2000 Page 3 7.2) Vesting Tentative Tract 5978 Phased (Porter-RobertSon) (Ward Staff report given recommending approval with conditions attached to resolution. Public portion of the meeting was opened. No one spoke in opposition. Harold Robertson, with Porter Robertson Engineering, representing the applicant, said that they had reviewed the staff report and the addendums from Steve Walker to Marian Shaw and agree with the conditions of approval. Public portion of the meeting was closed. Commissioner Dhanens asked staff a question about Page 1 of the staff report under Background in the second sentence it refers to a City Council action in April of 1999 that increased the density from 3.27 to 3.95 dwelling units per net acre and compared to a figure in the fifth paragraph of the second page under Analysis says it is 4.75 dwelling units per net acre and then goes on to make the conclusion that the gross density is 3.31 dwelling units per gross acre which is consistent with the approval of the general plan amendment that the City Council approved in 1999. Commissioner Dhanens wanted to know if Page 1 is in error? Should it be gross acres or is their a discrepancy between the two statements? Mr. Grady said that he would check. Commissioner Dhanens then asked Ms. Shaw about the memorandum dated March 15, 2000. The memo explains why conditions 2 and 3 were deleted but no mention was made of number 1 which was also deleted. Commissioner Dhanens asked why condition number 1 was deleted. Ms. Shaw said that she met with the Engineering Services Manager on his interpretation of radial lot lines and a misunderstanding with him earlier had caused the condition to be in there in the first place. So she took it out. Commissioner Dhanens said that the staff report talks about staff not having an objection to the paddle cul-de-sac with the parking and landscaping but staff -does have an objection about landscaping in a "normal". cul-de-sac. Should there be a condition relating to that or will that be handled during the subdivision improvement? Ms. Shaw said that it could be handled during the improvement plan check stage but she would like to ask Mr. Grady if it needs to be in the motion. Commissioner Dhanens asked Ms. Shaw if just the one cul-de-sac had the substandard radii? Ms. Shaw said yes. Mr. Grady, in answer to Commissioner Dhanens first question, said the number on the first page of the staff report is the gross number from the general plan amendment (3.95) and regarding the numbers on the back page - 4.75 is the net for the map but the gross is 3.31 which falls below the 3.95. Minutes, PC, March 16, 2000 · Page 4 Ms. Shaw said that she talked to Carl Hernandez and he felt that it would be best if the Commission add a condition that said that the modified paddle-de- sac was approved but the modified cul-de-sac was not. Motion was made by Commissioner Dhanens, seconded by Commissioner McGinnis, to approve and adopt the negative declaration and approve Tentative Tract Map 5978 with the findings and conditions set forth in attached resolution Exhibit "A" with the provision that the modified cul-de-sac design with only landscaping in the center that was recommended by staff not to be approved, be disallowed and the memorandum to the Planning Commission from Steve Walker dated March 15, 2000, be incorporated regarding the 300 foot radaii design on the cul-de-sac in the accompanying sketch and furthermore the memorandum to the Planning Commission from Marian Shaw dated March 15, 2000, be incorporated into the approval as well. Motion carried. = COMMUNICATIONS There was no written or verbal communications. COMMISSION COMMENTS Chairman Tkac welcomed the students from one of Bakersfield College's classes. Commissioner Sprague said that while he was at the conference in Monterey he had some interesting comments from an Assistant Attorney General with the State of California regarding conflicts of interest and the Brown Act. One of them could be solved if staff could establish who the legal owners, or members of the partnership, corporation or applicant are so that the Commissioners could make appropriate decisions. Commissioner Sprague asked if this was possible? Mr. Hernandez said they would take that question under consideration. They would have to research it. He is not sure if we can require an applicant to disclose all of the principals as long as they are making the presentation that they are the subdivider of the property. That is usually all the law requires. 10. DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THE NEXT PRE-MEETING· Motion was made by Commissioner Dhanens, seconded by Commissioner Sprague, to cancel the pre-meeting of April 3, 2000. Commissioner Kemper said she will be out of town on this day. Minutes, PC, March 16, 2000 Page 5 1t. ADJOURNMENT' There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 6:03 p.m. Pam Townsend, Recording Secretary March 22, 2000