Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 15, 2002 Pre-MeetingCouncil Chambers, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue 1. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Commissioners Blockley, Ellison, None Gay, McGinnis, Tkac, Tragish, Sprague Advisory Members: Ginny Gennaro, Stanley Grady, Marian Shaw, Dennis Fidler Staff: Jim Movius, Marc Gauthier, Pam Townsend PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PUBLIC STATEMENTS None CONSENT CALENDAR 4.1 Non-Public Hearing Items: 4.1a Approval of minutes from Planning Commission meetings of June 4 and 6, 2002. There were no Commissioner comments. Item will be voted on Thursday night. 4.2 Public Hearing Items 4.2a Approval of Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 5989 (Porter-Robertson) located south of Cesar Chavez School, at the northeast corner of Chase Avenue and Mesa Marin Drive. (Ward 3) 4.2b Approval of Street Name Change for a Portion of Georgia Drive to Peacock Park Lane (City of Bakersfield) located on a portion of Georgia Lane west of Fallgatter Street to Denise Avenue. (Ward 3) Staff reports given recommending approval. There were no Commission comments. Items will be voted on Thursday night. Minutes, PC, July 15, 2002 Page 2 Approval of Master Wall and Landscape Concept Plan P02-0534 (Porter- Robertson) Applicant has requested a continuance of this item until August 1,2002, so that some details can be worked out with the Parks Department. PUBLIC HEARINGS - Tentative Tract Maps 6.1) Vestinq Tentative Tract Map 6108 (Porter-Robertson) Staff report given recommending approval subject to the conditions contained in the staff report. Commissioner Tragish asked if this project is in a position to be approved on Thursday night? Mr. Movius said yes that the Commission will be hearing from several property owners in the area that they are in agreement with the applicant in the redesign of the subdivision. Commissioner Tragish asked if the applicant has agreed to alter the flag lots? Mr. Movius said they have not but they have increased the width of the opening to the flag lots and that the applicant is hoping to show staff some sketches before Thursday night on how the lots could be developed to staff's satisfaction. Right now staff is recommending denial. Commissioner Tragish asked if the applicant has gotten some type of agreement with the homeowners regarding the six foot block wall? Commissioner Tragish remembered that at the previous meeting, some of the homeowners asked for an eight foot block wall. Mr. Movius said that perhaps some of the homeowners have possibly not been involved with negotiations but from a lot of different perspectives the applicant has redesigned the subdivision to take access off of Allen Road, has succumbed to the County's severing access on the south side which they could have fought, so as far as the "package deal" the six foot wall is it. Chairman Sprague asked about lots 12, 13 and 14. Mr. Movius said that lots 13 and 14 causes the major problems that the applicant will be showing the redesign of. Number 14 specifically because staff doesn't know how it could be developed without clear view shed to the road. Mr. Movius said that by Thursday night, staff will have reviewed the whole package including the Fire Department, and recommend approval of it or there will still be a denial of it where they would have to make radial lot lines out of them. There were no other Commissioner comments. Item was continued until Thursday night. 6.2) Tentative Tract Map 6112 (Smith & Associates Engineering) Staff report given recommending approval subject to the conditions contained in the staff report. Applicant has requested this item be placed on the Consent Calendar for Thursday night. Commissioner Gay asked if staff had any concern about the cul-de-sac on the east side of the property with the contiguous property to the east? Mr. Movius said the applicant Minutes, PC, July 15, 2002 Page 3 tried to work with the adjacent property owner but he wasn't willing to get involved with the project. Public Works met with them for a long time on different ways to access these parcels and did finally come up with this being the best way to access the property. Commissioner Tragish had some questions about the canal that is within a quarter mile of the subdivision and expressed concern about the safety factor in not having any kind of fence or barrier between the subdivision and the canal. The canal fence is only four feet high and seems relatively easy to climb over. Mr. Movius said that staff took into consideration not only the barrier at the canal but the fact that this particular project is completely enclosed by a contractor's wood fence which staff feels is adequate. Commissioner Tragish said that the report does not make it a condition that they have to put up a wood fence on the south boundary. Mr. Movius said that it may be cheaper for the applicant if the Commission would require a chainlink fence around the subdivision rather than fencing the canal. There were no other Commissioner comments. Item was continued until Thursday night. 6.3) Revised Vestinq Tentative Tract Map 6018 (Porter-Robertson) Staff report given recommending approval subject to the conditions contained in the staff report. This item had been continued until October 2002 but because of the permit streamlining act, the project had to be heard sooner than that. Chairman Sprague stated that he has reviewed some of the old studies and the project is acceptable to him the way it is. He ascertained that there was probably a two to three percent variation in the initial traffic study done in 1998 as to one that would be performed between now and September by the City's Traffic Engineer and he doesn't feel that is a significant enough change. He feels that it should be approved as it is set forth. Commissioner Tragish asked Ms. Gennaro if they can consider comments from the public regarding the issues or rather like Mr. Rosenlieb stated at the last hearing they should not consider them? Ms. Gennaro said that the Commission should certainly give consideration to the comments made by the public but the issue is what types of facts and findings do you need from that testimony to actually deny the map. Commissioner Tragish said he has a concern regarding the traffic and whether or not the street works the way it should with the way the traffic has been accelerating along the curve of the street. The residents indicated it is a dangerous street and he has a concern with more traffic emptying out into that street as well. Chairman Sprague said that it is his feeling with the way the roads are engineered throughout the tract with North Shore and South Shore, that it is a much safer situation existing now than cutting through to Coffee Road at a later date. Commissioner Tragish said he would appreciate hearing some comments from Mr. Walker regarding the disadvantages of opening up - if any - or the advantages of opening up Coffee Road and not allowing access to that project through the tract itself. Mr. Walker said that there are advantages and disadvantages, there will be potential conflicts and a reduction of potential conflicts, with access onto Coffee Road. If it is Minutes, PC, July 15, 2002 Page 4 connected to South Shore, you will be increasing the volume of traffic on South Shore. If South Shore is closed off from access to Coffee Road, you might reduce the amount of accidents on South Shore but then you still have the potential accidents on Coffee Road. Mr. Walker said that all of the accidents or anything that may be referred to on South Shore and North Shore right now, are controllable by additional traffic controls. It doesn't matter if there is additional traffic from this development or not, the people that live in the area now are causing the traffic right now which can be mitigated by other traffic controls if necessary. Mr. Walker said there really isn't a true answer. It is an unknown. Chairman Sprague asked Mr. Walker if in his opinion, they should or should not allow an access easement to Coffee Road for something that could happen in the future for connection to Coffee Road? Mr. Walker said that for this particular subdivision map having an easement reserved for possible future connection is a good one. Commissioner Tragish asked Mr. Walker if it would be advantageous that if the easement on Coffee Road were approved it be conditioned so that if the easement were to be utilized there could be no access from South Shore to the project? Mr. Walker said he doesn't have a firm answer on that right now. There are too many variables. Commissioner Gay said that he thinks South Shore is an adequate street. He feels that an addition of a stop sign to slow traffic down would be a help. Commissioner Blockley asked if access is cut into Allen Road and connects to South Shore, does that make the street a collector? Mr. Walker said that from an operational standard you could term it a local collector but it would not be a collector in the terms that would set into play Planning requirements for landscaping, etc. It would have housing fronting on the street, so it still retains a residential character. Mr. Movius stated that regarding the two entrances on South Shore, the Planning Commission cannot discuss opening the Coffee Road access and closing off the South Shore points. It would be inconsistent with the RiverLakes Specific Plan. Also, the access on the east side is only a very small portion between the cul-de-sac bulb and the eastern property line, that the applicant would be giving us irrevocable dedication. If the Specific Plan Amendment is approved in September to connect it to Coffee Road, the City would have to use other means to go back through and get access through the open space strip which is between this subdivision and Coffee Road. Chairman Sprague asked if the easement were granted and this project is approved by the Planning Commission and City Council and at a later date it was determined that access was needed onto Coffee Road, would the developer be assessed for any improvement on that street? Mr. Movius said the City of Bakersfield would have to pick up the cost of making the improvements across the open space area and on to the developer's tract. The only thing the applicant is giving us is the offer of dedication of the easement for the road. There were no other Commissioner comments. Item was continued until Thursday night. PUBLIC HEARING - Street Name Chanqe from Lakeview Avenue to Dr. Martin Luther Kinq Jr. Blvd. (Isaiah Crompton) Staff report given recommending approval. There has been overwhelming support for this Minutes, PC, July 15, 2002 Page 5 request from the community. Commissioner Gay asked if there has been any discussion about taking this further south? Mr. Movius said they have looked at it but since it involves both city and county areas, the applicant just wanted it limited to Cottonwood Road at this time. There were no other Commissioner comments. Item was continued until Thursday night. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT P01-0734 HOUSING ELEMENT. (City-wide) Mr. Gauthier gave a brief overview of the project. The consultant will give a more detailed report on Thursday. There were no Commissioner comments. Item was continued until Thursday night. 9. AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT REGARDING PROJECT NOTICE TO RENTERS. (All Wards) This will be presented at Thursday night's meeting. 10. WORKSHOP - PROCEDURES WORKSHOP BY STANLEY GRADY AND GINNY GENNARO. Mr. Grady and Ms. Gennaro presented information regarding operational and functional issues with respect to the Planning Commission. This workshop gave information regarding adding conditions to projects, how to address certain issues and what authority the Commission has to review certain items. Commissioner Blockley was unable to stay for the entire workshop and requested a tape of the meeting. 11. COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Grady told the Commission they should have received a memo from him regarding a joint City/County Planning Commission meeting on August 12, 2002, at 6:30 p.m. to discuss the Metro General Plan Update and the EIR. 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS Chairman Sprague welcomed ex-Commissioner Tavorn who was present in the audience. 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 1:53 p.m. Pam Townsend, Recording Secretary Minutes, PC, July 15, 2002 Page 6 August 27, 2002 STANLEY GRADY, Secretary Planning Director