HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/05/90MINUTES OF-THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Held Thursday, July-5, 1990, 5:30 p.m., City Council Chamber,. City
Hall, 1501Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California.
1. ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS:
Present:
KATE ROSENLIEB, Chairperson
JIM MARINO, Vice Chairperson
*OSCAR ANTHONY
TERI BJORN
DAVID COHN
DARREN POWERS
C. ROBERT FRAPWELL, Alternate
Absent: STEVE ANDERSON
ADVISORY MEMBERS:
Present:
STAFF: Present:
LAURA MARINO, Deputy City Attorney
FRED KLOEPPER, Assistant Public Works
Director
CALVIN BIDWELL, Building Director
JACK HARDISTY, Planning Director
JIM MOVIUS, Principal Planner
ISABEL WILLIAMS, Recording Secretary
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD JUNE 7, 1990
Commissioner Rosenlieb referred to page 8 indicating that the motion
was made by Commissioner Rosenlieb and seconded by Commissioner Cohn
but failed to show whether this was a roll call vote or a group vote.
Motion was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Bjorn
to approve the Minutes of the regular meeting held June 7, 1990.
Motion carried.
3. PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PLAN (SIGN DESIGNS, INC.)
Applicant requested that this matter be continued to the August 2, 1990
meeting.
Publi~ hearing was opened.
*Commissioner Anthony was seated.
Motion was made by Commissioner pOwers to continue this hearing to the
August 2, 1990 meeting. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Bjorn, and
carried.
Minutes,~P1/C, 7/5/90
Page 2
~CHAIRPERSON ROSENLIEB INDICATED THAT A REQUEST BY STAFF WAS MADE TO
MOVE AGENDA ITEM 6.1 AHEAD OF AGENDA ITEM 5.1 & 5.2. CHAIRPERSON'
ROSENLIEB FURTHER-INDICATED THAT SHE HAD A CONFLICT OF INTEREST ON
AGENDA ITEMS ~6.1 AND 5.1. COMMISSIONER MARINO ALSO INDICATED THAT HE
HAD A CONFLICT OF INTEREST ON AGENDA ITEMS'6.1 and 5.1. MOTION WAS
MADE BY COMMISSIONER COHN TO APPOINT FORMER CHAIRPERSON BJORN TO ACT AS
CHAIRPERSON ON AGENDA ITEMS 6.1 and 6.5. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER POWERS, AND CARRIED.
Motion was made by Commissioner Cohn to move Agenda' Item 6.1 before
Agenda Item 5.1. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Powers, and
carried.
PROPERTY-LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PATTON WAY APPROXIMATELY 1100 FEET
SOUTH OF HAGEMAN ROAD -- AMENDING THE ZONING BOUNDARIES FROM ~AN R-1
(ONE FAMILY DWELLING) ZONE TO A "P" (PARKING), OR MORE- RESTRICTIVE
ZONE. (FILE 5036 - DeWALT-PORTER ENGINEERING)
Proposed zone. change is located on the east side of Patton Way
approximately 1100 feet south of Hageman Road.
Public hearing was-opened.
Mr. Steve DeBranch with DeWalt-Porter Engineering was present.
There being no others wishing to speak, public hearing was closed.
The preliminary plans submitted indicated the property will be devel-
oped with a parking lot and a drainage sump.
Commissioner Cohn asked about the employee parking.
Mr. Hardisty indicated that the "P" zone regulations limits the size of
the vehicles, therefore they are prohibited by the zoning ordinance
itself from equipment storage, outside storage and large vehicles..
Commissioner Cohn suggested that language be added that would clarify
employee parking only.
Mr. Hardisty replied that could be done.
Motion was' made by Commissioner Cohn to approve the Negative
Declaration and the "P,' Zoning as proposed and advertised subject to
the conditions of approval in Exhibit "A" of the staff report, with the
addition of Condition-6e, "That there is a prohibition against the out-
side storage of equipment and/or materials", make findings set forth on
page 3 of the staff rePort, and recommend adoption of same to t~e City
Couneil. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Powers, and carried by
the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Anthony, Bjorn, C0hn, Powers,
Frapwell
NOES: None
- ABSENT: Commissioner Anderson
ABSTAINED: Commissioners Marino, Rosenlieb
Min~utcs, P1/C, 7~5/90
5. puBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT 5144 REviSED (DeWALT-PORTER
Page 3
ENGINEERING)
Tentative tract is located at the southeast corner of Hageman Road and
Patton Way. and contains 173 lots~on 58.5 acres, zoned R-1.
This item was cont.inued from the June 7, 1990 meeting so that applicant
could address staff's concerns with circulation patterns and surface
drainage.
Applicant proposes two phases.
Staff recommended an 8 foot high wall be constructed along the southern
boundary of the tract between the single family lots and the 3.9 acre
"Not A Part" area sepa~atinlg the residential and industrial uses and
reduce land use conflicts.
Public hearing was'opened.
Mr. Steve DeBranch submitted amendments to the conditions prior to the
meeting and reviewed them with Commission; Condition 1, 2nd paragraph
of the Public Works Conditions delete Thames. Court. Mr. Kloepper,
Assistant Public Works Director was amenable; Condition 1, 3rd para-
graph, adding; "upon approval of the zone change (File 5036) for the
"Not A Part" area, the drainage run-off from the "Not A Part" area
shall be retained ~within the rezoned area. Mr. Kloepper was in
concurrence; Condition 4, 2nd paragraph delete "street construction
plans to be approved by the City Engineer, and add, "record drawings
prior to.acceptance of the improvements by the City". Mr. Kloepper was
amenable-; Condition 8-A-4 street paving on Krebs Road adjacent to the
subdivision be stricken. Mr. Kloepper commented that the city would
require one lane on the south side of the centerline plus all the p~v-
ing on the north side approximately 340 feet will prevent a dust prob-
lem, and recommended that the street paving be required for the gap of
about 340 feet.
Commissioner Powers stated his concern that the applicant has been
denied access to Krebs Road and asked Mr. DeBranch if he were willing
to put in the block wall, curb and gutter and leave it at that.
Mr. DeBranch commented that the developer is also intending to land-
scape the entire rear yard inside the wall along there as part of their
development to effectively market that property, but they felt that
improving an industrial roadway to the south was not a benefit to the
proposed~project. He further stated they are willing to improve the
entire north half with curb, gutter and wall along the entire length of
the street.
Mr. DeBranch addressed Condition 5 of the Planning Department
Conditions' and Stated they would like to add additional language to
incorporate the wall within Maintenance District 16 which would serve
this project.
Mr. Hardisty was in concurrence to the request.
Minhtes, PI~C, 7/5/90
5. PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT 5144 REVISED (DeWALT-PORTER
Page 4
ENGINEERING) (Continued)
There being no others wishing to speak, public hearing was closed.
Motion was made by Commissioner Cohn to approve and adopt the Negative
Declaration, to make all findings set forth in the staff report and to
approve proposed Tentative Tract 5144 Revised subject to the conditions
-out. lined in Exhibit A of the staff report with addition of the appli-
cant!s amendments .to Tentative Tract 5144 Revised, and also delete the
applicant's language under Condition #8-A-4 where they strike street
paving. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Anthony, and carried.
Commissioners Bj'orn and Powers voted no.
6. PUBLIC HEARING -- TENTATIVE TRACT 5068 REVISED (RICKETT, WARD, DELMARTER
AND DEIFEL)
This matter was continued from'the June 21, 1990 meeting.
Commissioner Marino disqualified himself, his employer owns property
within 300 feet of the site.
Tentative tract consists of 123 lots on 40.25 acres to be developed in
two phases, Units B and C and is located at the southwest corner of
Calloway Drive and Hageman Road.
Public hearing was opened.
Mr. Jim Delmarter represented Renfrow, Inc., and indicated this tract
was-approved at one time, the basic difference with this tract as
opposed to the original was the fact they have made one of the R-2 lots
into lots~that could be constructed to single family residential lots.
He fUrther stated that bis client requested that the city initiate the
staff request for a zone change to R-1. He also indicated that the
first phase has' been recorded many of the conditions that are in
the staff report have already been complied with.
Mr. Kloepper stated that if the conditions have already been satisfied,
they are rather a moot question.
Mr. Delmarter pointed out that they did show the portion in the north-
west as-"not a rpa~rt" with the intention that the potential buyer for
that was going to develop that and since that has not happened, the
staff report has indicated that the street improvements for Phase C
should include the street improvements for that parcel and requested
that when and if the property surrounding that parcel is subdivided
they would put in the improvements, however they would like to defer the
sidewalk to let that go with the parcel itself.
Mr.. Kloepper commented that Public Works would not have a problem with
deferral'of the sidewalk if Mr. Delmarter is only referring to the
large .lot. ~
Mr. Delmarter clarified that he was referring to the large lot as well
as the'commercial site also.
Mr. Kloepper Was amenable.
Minutes, PI/C, 7/5/9'0
Page 5
6. PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT 5068 REVISED (RICKETT, WARD, DELMARTER
AND DEIFEL) (continued)
Mr. Delmarter referred to Condition 9, Traffic, second paragraph and
asked that the paragraph be stricken since the developer is paying for
traffic signal installation and they should not have to pay for instal-
-- lation of the conduits and pull boxes.
Mr. Kloepper agreed with Mr. Delmarter to delete the second paragraph
'of Condition 9.
Mr. Delmarter requested that Condition 11E. be stricken in that the
condition pertains to tentative maps and not final maps.
Mr. Kloepper was in concurrence.
Mr. Delmarter asked for clarification of Planning Department-Condition
13.
Mr. Hardisty replied this condition has become a regular condition on
subdivisions so that the landscaping is truly established landscaping
before it is .accepted by the city.
Mr. Delmarter requested discussion for removal of the condition.
There being no others wishing to speak, public hearing was closed.
Mr. Hardisty made comment regarding Mr. Delmarter's request for initia-
t'ion by the city' for the zone change indicating that the city has made
it a'practice to require the subdivider initiate and pay for the rezon-
lng of property which is to be subdivided for a different purpose than
the zoning that is on the property.
.Mr'. Delmarter requested the the rezoning be deferred until the actual
use is determined prior to the recording of the map that that phase is
in.
Mr. Hardisty referring to Mr. Delmarter's request for deletion of
Condition 13 indicating that it is a matter of policy and is now being
imposed on all tentative maps.
Commissioner Rosenlieb commented she was in.favor of leaving Condition
15 exactly the way it is. It was her opinion that the applicant is
trying to avoid paying the zone change fee from an R-2 to an R-1 know-
ing they fully intend to develop it that way.
Discussion took place regarding a wall dividing the residential zoned
property from the commercial ~property.
Commissioner Bjorn asked Mr. Delmarter if he would be amenable to
-'deferring =the rezoning requirement until development of phase 3.
Mr. De!marter replied that was his request.
CommisSioner Rosenlieb Stated her concern with regard to'the how the
· Commercial property might develop in relation to phase 3. She was also
concerned with the. deferral,of the zone change. ·
Minutes, P1/C, 7/5/90 '
Page 6
PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE 'TRACT 5068 REVISED' (RICKETT, WARD, DELMARTER
AND DEIFEL) (continued)
Mr. Hardi~ty commented that he did not have any problem with the
deferral of the zone change~prior to recordation of that phase adjacent
to the commercial because at that point the adjacency between the com-
mercial and residential could be addressed.
Mr~ D~lmarter suggested that Condition 7 be revised to read, "the block
wall shall be constructed on~ the commercial side on th~ south line
rather than the east line."
Motion was made by Commissioner Powers to approve and adopt the
Negative Declaration, to make all findings set forth in the staff
report and to approve proposed Tentative .Tract 5068 Revised subject to
the conditions outlined in Exhibit "A" of the staff report with the
following exceptions.:
Public Works Condition 8B revised to add sentence,
,Sidewalks may be deferred along the "Not A Part" and
Commercial parcels until the parcel is developed.
Public Works Condition 9, paragraph 2 shall be deleted
Public Works Condition liE shall be deleted.
Planning Department Condition 15 revised to read, "deferred
to development of phase 3."
Commissioner Rosenlieb asked Commissioner Powers if he would amend the~
last part of his motion tO prior to recordation of the final map of
Phase-3.
Commissioner Powers was amenable.
Motion was seconded by Commissioner Bjorn, and carried.
~Minutes, P1/C,-7/5/90 Page 7
7.THOSE CERTAIN PROPERTIES IN THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD LOCATED AT 4900
THROUGH 5224 (EVEN ONLY) AND 4901 GAYLENE AVENUE -- CORRECTING A
DRAFTING ERROR BY CHANGING THE ZONING FROM AN R-2 (LIMITED MULTIPLE
FAMILY DWELLING), R-2-D (LIMITED MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING-DESIGN
OVERLAY) AND MH (MOBILEHOME) ZONES TO AN R-1 (ONE FAMILY DWELLING) ZONE
AND R-2-D (LIMITED MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING) ZONE. (FILE 5044 - CITY
OF BAKERSFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION)
Subject property was previously zoned by two separate ordinances prior
to the adoption.of official zone maps by the City Council. This area
was incorrectly depicted on the Official Zone Maps that were adopted.
Public hearing was opened.
There being no one present wishing to speak either in favor or-
opposition, public hearing was closed.
Motion was made by Commissioner Bjornto approve the proposed Negative
Declaration and-zoning as proposed and advertised. Find the proposed
zoning consistent with the Bakersfield Metropolitan-Area General Plan,
and recommend' adoption of same to the City Council. Motion was sec-
onded by .Commission Anthony, and carried by thefollowing roll call
vote:
AYES: Commissioners Marino, Anthony, Bjorn, Cohn,
Powers, Rosenlieb
NOES: None
.ABSENT: Commissioner Anderson
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS AND ZONE CHANGES (2-90) (Continued from the
June 21, 1990 meeting)
SEGMENT I: JOHN SARAD, JTM JUDKINS (JOINT VENTURE)
Subject property is located at the northeast corner of Ashe and Harris
Roads.
Appli~cant proposes commercial development of a 5 acre parcel.
This hearing was continued from the June 21st meeting so that applicant
could meet with the General Plan Committee. Applicant, Mr. Sarad, rep-
resenting JTM'Company made a presentation showing the proposed design
related to the neighborhood and the adjacent park east of the site.
Chairperson Rosenlieb~stated that.at the committee meeting she voiced
opposition because of the 5 acre commercial site immediately to the
east, and noted there was an amended agenda where that site will be
considered later on.
Public~ hearing was opened.
MinUtes, P1/C, -7/5/90,
8. GPA 2-790, SEGMENT I & .ZONE CHANGE 5031:
Page 8
JOHN SARAD, JTM JUDKINS (JOINT
VENTURE) (continued)
Mr. John Sarad with JTM Company of JTM Judkins Joint Venture stated
that the proposed project is consistent with the 2010 General Plan, and
indicated their willingness to make a neighborhood commercial center
that will be consistent with the design of the surrounding
neighborhood.
There being no others wishing to speak, public ~earing was closed.
Motion was made by Commissioner BJorn to adopt resolution making
findings, approving the Negative Declaration, and approving GPA 2-90,
Segment I consisting of an amendment to the Land Use Element from Low
Density Residential to General Commercial and recommend same to the
City Council with the additional findings in Attachment A of the staff
report and the conditions of approval in Attachment B of the staff
report and the Public Works memorandum dated May 25, 1990. Motion was
seconded by Commissioner Powers, and carried by the following roll call
vote:
AYES': Commissioners Marino, Anthony, Bjorn, Cohn,
Powers,-Rosenlieb
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Anderson
Motion was made by Commissioner Bjorn to adopt resolution making find-
ings app~oving the Negative Declaration, and approving concurrent zone
change request #5031 consisting a change from an R-1 (Single Family
Dwelling) to a C-1 (Commercial) Zone, with the findings in Attachment A
and conditions of approval in Attachment B, and the Public Works
Memorandum dated May 25, 1990 and recommend same to the City Council.
Motion was seconded by Commissioner Marino, and carried by the follow-
ing roll cal'l vote:
AYES: Commissioners Marino, Anthony, Bjorn, Cohn,
Powers, Rosenlieb
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Anderson
Minutes, P1/C, 7/.5/90
9. GPA 2-90, SEGMENT III & ZONE CHANGE #5027:
Page 9
BRYAN T. HAUPT, COLEMAN
COMPANY,'AGENT FOR-LUTHERN CHURCH OF PRAYER
This matter was continued from the June 21, 1990 meeting at request of
applicant so they could meet with the General Plan Committee.
Subject property is located at the northeast corner of Mt. Vernon
Avenue and Bernard Street and contains 3.88 +/ acres.
Applicant 'proposes to use the site for retail purposes.
Mr. Bryan Haupt~, 'Coleman Company representing the Lutheran Church of
Prayer submitted correspondence supporting the proposal and presented
it to the committee.
Public hearing was opened.
Mr. Bryan Haupt with Coleman Company spoke in favor of the project.
There being no others wishing to speak, public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Marino commented he did not see any reason not to approve
a C-2 zoning on subject site.
Commissioner Rosenlieb commented she was opposed to the commercial
designation. She~ felt there was an over abundance of existing commer-
cial already in the area and a multi-family would work on this site.
She als0 indicated that during the 2010 hearings, this same request'
came before them, and it was turned down.
Commissioner Powers commented he was in favor of the C-2 zoning.
Commissioner Bjorn commented that this is a difficultlsite, since it is
in a~major intersection. There is abundance of commercial in the area
but it is commercial for different uses or with barriers to get .to the
commercial.
CommissiOner Cohn stated his concern in that the site is in close prox-
imity to a church with a pre-school as well as a grammar school and the
additional traffic this project would create.
Commissioner Anthony commented he was in favor of the C-2 zoning.
Commissfoner Marino asked Mr. Haupt about the traffic study.
Mr. Haupt stated that the Traffic Division asked them to have their own
traffic engineer complete the study on exactly how much of Mt. Vernon
and how much of Bernard would have to be widened. The issue of adding
the median, changing the intersection of Mt. Vernon and Bernard to
allow for two left turn lanes has been discussed.
Minutes~ P1/C~ 7/5/90 ~
GPA 2-90, SEGMENT~III & ZONE CHANGE #5027:
Page 10
BRYAN T. HAUPT, COLEMAN.
COMPANY, AGENT FOR LUTHERN CHURCH OF PRAYER (continued)
'Motion was made by Commissioner Marino to adopt a resolution making
findings, approving the Negative Declaration, and appr6ving the General
Plan Amendment 2-90, Segment III consisting of an amendment to. the
Land use Element from High Medium Density Residential to General
Commercial and recommend same to the City Council. Motion was seconded
by Commissioner Powers.
CommissionerMarino amended his-motion to include the Conditions of
approval noted as Exhibit A with the deletion of Condition #1, and made
the findings on page 10 of~ the staff report with the fourth finding
that the General Plan Amendment is consistent with the Metropolitan
Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. Amended motion was seconded by
.Commissioner Powers, and carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Marino, Anthony, Bjorn, Cohn, Powers,
Frapwell
NOES: Commissioner Rosenlieb
ABSENT: Commissioner Anderson
Motion was made by Commissioner Marino to adopt a resolution making
findings approving the Negative Declaration and approving the concur-
rent zone 'change request #5027 consisting of a change from R-l-CH (One
Family Dwelling-Church) Zone to a C-2 (Commercial) Zone and recommend
same'to the City Council, and apply conditions to the zone change con-
sistent with the conditions the Council sets on the General Plan
Amendment. Motion was seconded by commissioner Powers, and carried' by
the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Marino, Anthony, Bjor~, Cohn, Powers,
Frapwell
NOES: Commissioner Rosenlieb
ABSENT: Commissioner Anderson
A FIVE-MINUTE RECESS WAS TAKEN.
Minutes, PI~C, 7/5/90
Page 11
10. PUBLIC HEARING - DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT & NEGATIVE DECLARATION BETWEEN
THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD AND SANWA BANK AS TRUSTEE FOR A PROPOSED
800,000 TO 1,200,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE PROJECT ON 60+/- ACRES LOCATED
AT THE ~NORTHEAST CORNER OF OLD RIVER ROAD AND CAMINO MEDIA
Assistant Planning Director, Stan Grady gave the staff report indicat-
ing that the proposed project will cover approximately 60 plus or minus
acres to be comprised of a four story office commercial building.
Public hearing was opened.
Ms. Donna Cazacus resident in the Oaks development indicated she was
not in opp°sition~but was interested in what the negative declaration
means to this project.
Mr. Grady clarified for Ms. Cazacus that in making the finding on this
-proposed project', it-was determined that an environmental impact report
was not required, therefore a negative declaration was filed on this
project.
Mr. Paul Klumb with Harrington, Foxx, Dubrow and Canter-representative
of the applicant presented some conceptual sketches supporting the
development of a 800,000 to 1,200,000 square foot facility.
Ms. Diane Rotondo with the Chamber of commerce spoke in favor of the
proposed project.
Mr..Don Murfin, 'representing Project Clean Air stated they are not a
no-growth organization but. impacts should be identified and plans for
mitigating those impacts should be developed early in the project.
Mr. Peter Lacques, Director of the Kern EconomiC Development '
Corporation represented Mr. Jerry Stanners, Chairman of KEDC who spoke
~n favor of the proposed project.
Mr. Mike DePetro, Vice president of Mercy Hospital expressed their sup-
port for the proposed office project.
Mr. Ken Secor, Administrative Vice President at Cal State University,
Bakersfield spoke in favor of the proposal.
Mr. Pat Collins, commercial real estate broker with Coldwell Banker and
also current Chairman of the Commercial Industrial Council for the BIA
spoke in favor of the proposed project.
Mr. Mike Carroll, Dean of Business and Public Administration at Cal
State Bakersfield gave a visual report on the economic impact analysis
for this project.
Mr. Roger McIntosh with Martin-McIntosh Engineering addressed the con-
cerns raised by the General Plan Committee with respect to the proposed
deWelopment agreement and the inconsistency with the circulation
element of~the 2010 General plan.
Mi~nutes, P1/C, ~/5/90 Page 12
10.PUBLIC HEARING -- DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT & NEGATIVE DECLARATION BETWEEN
THE CI~TY OF BAKERSFIELD AND SANWA BANK AS TRUSTEE FOR A PROPOSED
800,000 TO 1,200,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE PROJECT ON 60+/- ACRES LOCATED
AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF OLD RIVER ROAD AND CAMINO MEDIA. (continued)
Mr. David Milazzo of Milazzo & Associates stated that this project has
lived up to all its off-site costs and street developments, therefore
they did not feel it would be n~cessary for the developer to provide an
area-wide fee in that there is no area of contribution as yet
established.
Commissioners Bjorn and Marino stated their concerns that the devel-
oper be restricted on subdividing the land and passing all of the
entitlements onto smaller parcels.
commissioner Powers'wished to go on record as being in support of the
project_in concept; however he had .the same concern as Commissioners
Bjorn and Marino.
Considerable discussion took place regarding fees to be paid by the
developer and whether the development agreement would become void if
the agreement with Sanwa Bank as Trustee for the applicant should fall
through.
Commission stated their concern regarding air pollution.
Staff assured Commission that the~developer would be subject to those
items that are on the books at the time and those rules and
regulations, including the 2010 policy at the time the agreement would
become effective.
Commissioner Marino asked the applicant, Mr. Dubrow if they would
object'to Changing the language of the agreement to void the agreement
should the proposed project not be built or if the land is subdivided
or should.buildings less than 800,000 square feet be constructed on the
property.
Mr. Dubrow replied they would not guarantee that.
commissioner Powers referring to Page 12, paragraph 10 of the agreement,
stated for the record that the agreement may be amended from time to
time ~by mutual consent o'f the parties in accordance with the provisions
of Government Code Section 65868.
Commissioner Marin0 stated that by implementing this development agree-
ment'the way it now stands is that the applicant is tOtally being
exempted from the. 2010 Plan and further stated that he would like a
provision put i~to the agreement that would somehow move the develop-
ment agreement ~nder the umbrella of the 2010 Plan and require it to
paY a proportionate share both regional and city-wide as everybody else
would pay at the time~
Chairperson Rosenlieb ~agreed with Commissioner Marino's comments in~di-
eating that by implementing the development agreement the way it now
stands., the applicant would, totally'be exgmpted from the 2010 Plan or
any other~Ordinances~such ~as a regional t~affic impact fee
Minutes, P1/C, 7/5/90
Page i3
PUBLIC .HEARING - DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT & NEGATIVE DECLARATION BETWEEN
THE CITY OFBAKERSFIELD AND SANWA BANK AS TRUSTEE FOR A PROPOSED
800,000 TO 1,200,000 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE PROJECT ON 60+/- ACRES LocATED
AT THE'NORTHEAST CORNER OF OLD RIVER ROAD AND CAMINO MEDIA (continued)
Commissioner Bjorn commended the applicant for the project and the
presentations and for considering Bakersfield as' the location for the
project. She commented that the issue ~of assignability had given her
some problems, but in listening to staff and the City Attorney she felt
comfortable with that issue. She also commented she was struggling
with the conceptual-issue as to the length of the term of the agreement
and being locked into various fees and waiving the potential of cor-
recting future fees that may be adopted by the City Council. In
summ'ation, she indicated she would support this Development Agreement
and the ultimate'project.
Commissioner Marino commented that he was having a real problem with
waiving the right to implement the General Plan, and would like a con-
tinuance-to send ibis back to committee.
Commissioner Bjorn made the motion to adopt the resolution making find-
ings and approving the Negative Declaration and approving the
Development Agreement and recommend same to the City Council with the
following changes. Those changes referenced in the letter dated'June
29, 1990, from the Law Offices of Harrington, Foxx, Dubrow and Canter
would be included in the Development Agreement and, in addition, on
Page 6 of the Development Agreement, Paragraph 2, 2-D, 3, Subparagraph
A, little 2, starting with-subject to intermittent interruptions, the
following language should be added at the end of that subparagraph: At
the cost of the developer at rates then applicable throughout the
Ash Water service area. That's referring to the clarification
that water would be provided at the develdper's cost. Motion was
seconded by Commissioner Frapwell, and carried by the following roll
call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Anthony, Bjorn, Powers, Frapwell
NOES: Commissioners Marino, Cohn, Rosenlieb.
Minutes, P1/C, 7/5/90
1l. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Page 14
Report on survey of City Ordinances relating to undergroundin~ utilities.
Assistant ~Planning Director, Stan Grady gave the report indicating that
'a matrix was prepared identifying the 50 cities within California that
responded to.the City's survey. Fifty one percent of those cities who
underground utilities have provisions for undergrounding existing util-
ities adjacent to proposed development.
Mr. Grady suggested sending this to the Subdivision and Underground
Utilities Committee if the Commission wish to address some type of
ordinance for underground utilities adjacent to subdivisions.
Chairperson Rosenlieb indicated that the Subdivision Committee will be
meeting on July llth and asked for a motion to. put this issue on the
lagenda. Motion was made by Commissioner Powers, seconded by
Commissioner Bjorn 'to add the issue of undergrounding utilities on the
agenda of July llth. Motion carried.
12. VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS
Presentation on California Clean Air Act Land Use/ Transportation
Impacts
Mr. Grady gave a brief review on the California Clean Air Act and its
requirements for land use considerations that emissions from indirect
sources be reduced. The Air Pollution Control District is required to
attain the state ambient air quality standard and adopt and implement
regulations to reduce emissiOns'of these sources.
Ms. Linda Chester with the Kern County Air Pollution Control District
indidated that in the 1991 attainment plan, specific ordinances or
regulations would-not have to be laid out. The language must be in
there as to what will be developed.
Mr. Grady commented that the intent of the California Clean Air Act is
to go after pollutants that have not been attacked as heavily as they
have gone after industry. The districts have had just about as much
success as they are going to have in reducing emissions from large
generators.
13 COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commission discussed the elimination of the Housing & Community
Development Act Committee.
Mr. Hardistylcommented that the Housing & Community Development Act was
administered through the Planning Department and what is now Economic
Development and Community Development were parts of the Planning
Department.- The idea was that this committee would work with the
Housing and Community Development Block Grant monies and set priorities
for their expenditure and make recommendations to the Planning
commission and then to the City Council.
Commissioner Anthony asked if in there may beta need for this committee
in the future.
Minutes, P1/C, 7/5/90
Page 15
13. COMMISSION COMMENTS (continued)
Mr. ~Hardisty indicated that he did not feel that this committee would
meet'in that those issues are handled by the Economic and Community
Development Department.
Motion was made by Commissioner Marino to eliminate, the Housing &
Community Development Act Committee. Motion was seconded by.
Commissioner Powers, and carried. Commissioner Anthony voted in
opposition. _ _
PROPOSAL TO ELIMINATE THE PARAGRAPH REGARDING ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING BY
14
9 P.M.
Chairperson Rosenlieb indicated that this paragraph is misleading and
the Commission usually goes on with the meeting until all the business
is completed.
Motion was made by Commissioner Powers to delete the paragraph.
Motion was seconded by Commissioner Bjorn, and carried.
COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS AND TITLES OF COMMITTEES
Chairperson Rosenlieb asked the Commission to list their preferences
-and submit them to~her.
Commissioner Marino requested that the General Plan Committee meet to
discuss regional traffic impact fees.
Commissioner Bjorn requested a follow-up meeting on setting an agenda
for various implementation of the general plan.
Commissioner-Anthony asked about the Parks Ordinance.
Mr. Hardisty informed Commission that the ordinances are being split up
and the City now has the authority under the Quimby Act to require the
2 1/2 acres per ~housand population dedication of land upon the subdi-
vision of land'or fees in lieu of that. In addition to the land dedi-
cations an ordinance will be proposed which levees a development fee at
the time of building permit-for improvement of the parks and acquisi-
tion of the park land for those areas that are ~ot being subdivided.
ADDENDUM - INITIATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE TO
CHANGE A GENERAL COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION TO A LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
DESIGNATION ON 5 +/- ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED ONE-HALF MILE WEST OF
STINE ROAD AND SOUTH OF HARRIS ROAD IN SECTION 22 OF TOWNSHIP 30 80UTH,
-RANGE 27 EAST. ALSO A CONCURRENT ZONE CHANGE FROM A C-1 (LIMITED
COMMERCIAL) ZONE TO AN R-1 (ONE FAMILY DWELLING) ZONE ON SAID 5 ACRES.
Motion was made by Commissioner Powers for the Commission to'initiate
the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. Motion was seconded by
Commission~er Anthony,~ and carried.
Minutes, P1/C, 7/5/90
Page 16
15. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further businessto com~~j~_~e Co. is'si no, meeting':'
was adjourned at 11 p.m. ~ j~z f ~ j z~'~_~-~
Isabel Williams,
Recording Secretary