Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/19/92MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION- OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Held Thursday, March 19, 1992, 5:30 p.m., 'City Council Chamber, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California. 1. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: Present: ADVISORY MEMBERS: Present: JIM MARINO, Chairperson STEVE ANDERSON, Vice Chairperson TERI BJORN DAVID COHN STEVE MESSNER DARREN POWERS KATE ROSENLIEB C. ROBERT FRAPWELL, Alternate ROBERT-SHERFY, Deputy City Attorney FRED'KLOEPPER, Assistant Public Works Director CALVIN BIDWELL, Building Director STAFF: Present: STANLEY GRADY, Assistant Planning Director JIM MOVIUS, Principal Planner MARC GAUTHIER, Principal Planner MIKE LEE, Associate Planner -LAURIE DAVIS, Recording Secretary 2. PUBLIC STATEMENTS No one made any public statements at this time. Chairman read the notice of right to appeal as set forth on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion was made by COmmissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Powers to approve minutes of the regular meetings held February 6, and February -20, 1992. Motion carried. Minutes, PC, 3/19/92 Page 2 4.1 'PUBLIC'HEARING - CONDITION CHANGE - TENTATIVE TRACT 5581 Commissioner Anderson abstained from hearing this item due to ~ 'possible .conflict of interest in that his company is presently providing services to the applicant. Commissioner Powers abstained from hearing this item due to a possible conflict of interest in that his employer owns property in the vicinity. Commissioner Marino abstained due to a possible conflict of interest in.that-his employer is providing services to the applicant. Motion was made by Commissioner Bjorn, seconded by Commissioner Cohn to appoint. Commissioner Rosenlieb temporary chair. Motion carried. Commissioner Marino abstained. Staff report was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition. David Russell, DeWalt CorporatiOn represented the applicant. are in agreement with conditions of approval. Public portion of the hearing was closed. He stated they Responding to questions by Commissioner Cohn, Mr. Grady stated the ordinance provides two methods for determining what level of credit will be given for on-site improvement, which are 7/10 of an acre credit for improvements to a park site - and the other is to allow 100% if it is determined that the park improvements are COmparable. to the list of improvements being used for development of city parks. In this situation it was found that the large open space and amenities' Would be enhancements beyond a standard city park and that 100% credit was warranted. The-applicant may provide acreage or pay an in-lieu fee. Commissioner Messner stated the applicant is providing 1-1/2 acres of open space in the development and some nice facilities and he encourages this feeling it is an enhancement. MOtion was made by Commissioner Messner, seconded by Commissioner Bjorn to make findings set forth in staff report and approve 100% credit toward park land requirements'for Lot 1 of Tentative Tract 5581 pursuant to Section 15.80.120 (B) of the Bakersfield Municipal Code, subject to the conditions of approval listed in the'staff report. Motion carried. Commissioners Anderson, Powers and Marino were absent. Minutes, PC, 3/19/92 Page 3 PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 9784 Staff report was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition. RandyBergquist was present representing the applicant. He stated he is in . agreement with the conditions of approval, however asked that Condition #1, Page-3 of 5 regarding submittal of soils report be allowed to be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. Mr. Bidwell stated his agreement with this request. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Responding to questions by Commissioner Rosenlieb, regarding Item B of conditions of approval under Sewers, Mr. Kloepper said each unit has a septic tank and effluent'is collected to a central disposal system. The system is in place and what will be extended will be suited to connect to the municipal system. The reason for deleting the verbiage on minimum street widths is that future subdivisions will be before the Commission in which paving can be obtained. It is in the city's interest not to require paving until it is necessary because of deterioration. Commissioner Rosenlieb asked about individual soils reports being required. Mr. Bidwell said the requested change is appropriate. Motion was made by Commissioner Messner, seconded 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 Parcel Map 9784, subject to the conditions outlined in the Exhibit "A" attached to the staff report, incorporating the changes of the Public Works Department memo of March 19, 1992, with the following additional change: Page 3 of 5, Building Department Condition #1: The first sentence to read as follows: A preliminary soils report and grading plan shall be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. Motion carried. MinUtes, PC, 3/19/92 6.1 PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT 5544 o Page 4 FILE 5259 -- TIME SET FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON AN APPLICATION BY MARTIN-MCINTOSH TO AMEND THE ZONING BOUNDARIES FROM A- ' 6.2 20-A (AGRICULTURE-20 ACRE MINIMUM LOT SIZE) TO AN R-1 (ONE FAMILY. DWELLING) OR MORE RESTRICTIVE ZONE FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED SOUTH OF BRIMHALL ROAD, EAST OF JEWETTA AVENUE, WEST OF CALLOWAY DRIVE, NORTH OF THE CROSS VALLEY CANAL. Commissioner Anderson abstained due to a possible conflict of interest in that his firm is providing services to the applicant. Motion ~vas made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Cohn to hear related Item #7 to be heard concurrently. Staff report was waived for both items. Letter was received requesting continuance to the next regular meeting. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition. Motion was made by CommisSioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Cohn to continue agenda items 6.1 and 7 to the next regular meeting of April 2, 1992. -Motion carried. Commissioner Anderson was absent. PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT 5276 Staff'report was waived. Request was received from the applicant for continuance to the April 2nd meeting. 'Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one' spoke on this item.. Motion was made by Commissioner Powers, seconded by Commissioner Anderson to continue this item to the next regular meeting of April 2, 1992. Motion carried. Minutes~ PC, 3/19/92 Page 5 6.3 8.1 PUBLIC HEARING TENTATIVE TRACT 5605 Staff report was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition or in favor. Greg Gibbons represented the applicant. He stated he was in concurrence with all conditions of approval. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Motion was made-.by Commissioner Powers, seconded by Commissioner Messner to approve and adopt the Negative Declaration, t° make all findings set forth in the staff report, and to approve Proposed Tentative Tract 5605, subject to the conditions outlinedin the 'Exhibit "A" attached to the staff report, with the inclusion of the-March 18, 1992 memo from the Parks Division. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1-92, SEGMENT I Commissioner Anderson abstained from hearing this item due to a possible Conflict of interest in that his firm has provided services to an adjoining land- owner. Staff report was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke on this item. Public Portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner. Rosenlieb stated she was glad to see this clean up. Regarding the existing zoning map.Mr: Grady said staff would initiate a change of zoning for the lower right hand corner for the M-2 zoning. Motion was made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Powers to adopt resolution making findings approving the Negative Declaration and approving GPA LUE 1-92, Segment I, consisting of an amendment to the Land Use-Element-from LR (Low Density Residential) to HR (High Density Residential) on 10.51 +/- acres, subject to the condition of approval'listed below, and recommend same to City Council. Minutes, PC, 3/19/92 Page 6 The maximum number of dwelling units allowed on site-#2 (R-3 zoned proper_ty at the southeast_corner of Mondavi Way and Brimhall Road) shall not exceed 114 units: 8.2 Motion carried by' the following roll call vote: AYES: NoEs: ABSTAINED: Commissioners Bjorn, Cohn, Messner, Powers, Rosenlieb, Marino None Commissioner Anderson PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1-92, SEGMENT III AND ZONE CHANGE #5282 Commissioner Bjorn abstained due to a conflict of interest in that the applicants are clients of her law firm. Commissioner Rosenlieb abstained from hearing this item because the applicants are personal friends, therefore she chose not to participate. Staff report was given. Chairman Marino explained the hearing process for those present. Public portion of the hearing was opened. Robert Norwood, 2803 Loyola spoke saying he is concerned about the potential for more vacant buildings which seem to be in over abundance, because vacant buildings attract graffiti, indigents and homeless. He was concerned about another theater 'being constructed since business is marginal at the existing one.- He felt increased traffic, noise and vehicle pollution was a. given. This development will invite property devaluation. He said he is waiting for a residential development to be proposed. He said the proposal is not welcome and does-not fit in w/th the neighborhood. *Commissioner Frapwell was seated at this time. Minutes, PC, 3/19/92 Page 7 Mrs. Margaret Rowe stated she has owned property in the area for 23 years. She' felt the residential zoning should be retained. The proposal would cause traffic problems and noise pollu.tion. The quality of'life of the neighborhood would be threatened. - Kenneth Garber represented the Parkhill Homeowners Association, 3301 Columbus Street. He stated he had the same comments to make of Mr. Norwood. He submitted a petition in opposition to this request. John Caragosian spoke saying he lives one block north of Columbus. He questioned the need for this proposal because there is cuRrentlY a large amount of empty building space at the southeast corner of Columbu~ and Mt. Vernon_and other vacancies. There is no justification for a theater, more retail buildings or more restaurants in the area either now or in the foreseeable future. Geneice Nordahl stated she has lived in the neighborhood for 30 years owning 2 parcels, 2610 Clemson Court and 2624 Gill Avenue. She felt her comments were previously covered by speakers and stated she would like to add her opposition to theirs. Due to the increased congestion and more crime more police and fire protection would be necessary, which would place a strain on already heavily' strained-services. Dennis Valdez spoke saying he owns property at 2818, 3001 and 3201 Wenatchee, stating he is.in opposition to this proposed shopping center. He Was concerned about access to this project. He felt single family homes could be constructed on subject site.· Elaine Nimberg spoke stating her opposition to this project saying she feels there is~enough blight in the area. - Mary Ann Buechler, 3013 Roanoke Court, stated her residence is across the street from :subject site' land she has lived there 30 years. She was also concerned about the aesthetic-affect on the neighborhood, crime, safety, security and element of people attracted to this use. She stated she would support something that would fit in and be beneficial with the residential neighborhood. She asked that the commission not vote to change the general plan or zoning. Alex Buechler, 30!3 Roanoke Court, spoke saying the theater proposed will be 60 feet away from the JLJ apartments with no-gates. If anything imaginable can go wrong it will happen in this situation. Minutes, PC, 3/19/92 Page 8 'T~inidad Valdez, 3017 Roanoke Court stated he has lived in. the area over 20 years also owning a parcel at 2919 Dwight Street stating his opposition .to this zone change and development because the uses are not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. There is no need for these types of uses in the area. Pat Dunn stated h'e and his wife are the owners of the property. He stated a few years earlier they had proposed a mini-storage that would not haVe caused the problems stated by the previous speakers, however it was defeated. They had 2 subsequent proposals whiCh were also defeated. He has spent a large sum of money trying to 'develop this property. David Milazzo represented the property owners. He cited a handout he submitted to staff and the Commission which he outlined. He gave a history of the site and previously denied projects for this site. He cited planning policies which wOUld govern a project of the type proposed and reasons they felt it is reasonably designed project which is compatible with the general plan and- neighborhood. He commented on land use policy 17 of the general plan which requires all new 'commercial designations of no less than 5 acres to be approved. Regarding the comment that there is an existing supply of commercial retail space he stated there is no .vacancy at the theater. Theaters are in growing demand. Responding to a_question by Mr. Milazzo, Mr. Grady said there have been other - projects which have had market vacancy studies imposed on them as a determinant for findings of approval of a project, however it is not a typical process. Mr. Milazzo stated he felt this project is compatible with goals and policies of the generalp!an. He said because they have used the P.C.D. process theY have shown exactly what will be constructed. He said they have tried to provide variety of uses in order to try to eliminate vacancies and they will allow for pedestrian link to the retirement community. Regarding traffic he-stated the report prepared indicates there will not be a significant impact as a result of this project. Regarding the comment that increased traffic on Columbus would lead to higher noise levels, he said any project whether residential or commercial will create increased noise levels. He said he has not noticed gang activity as it relates to .movie-going. Shopping centers do not create crime. Regarding the lowering of surrounding land values he felt this project would do the contrary and appreciate property around the project. This project may act as a redevelopment for other vacant shopping centers in the area. Landscaping for this project will be dense. A comprehensive sign plan which has been submitted as part of the project has been designed with low monumentation signage with no pylon sign. Regarding loss of view he said most of it has been lost to other developments, however the profiles of buildings in this development are reasonably low. He submitted Minutes, PC, 3/19/92 page 9 photos depicting the fact that some of the homeowners have obstructed their own views with fencing. He felt the general plan supports this project. ~ Responding to a question by Chairman Marino, Mr. Grady stated because the recOmmendation is to deny this project there are no conditions of approval. If it is the Commission's intent to take a position other than staff's recommendation it would take time for staff to evaluate the P.C.D. to bring back a set of conditions. Mr. Milazzo responded to a question by Commissioner Marino saying the parking can be staggered for the theater use because of different times of use. Discussion continued regarding environmental impacts from providing parking facilities. Responding.to a question by Chairman Marino, Mr. Grady said if this project is approved at this hearing the parking is also approved. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Chairman Marino stated for the record that he had spoken with several people about this project and had in his possession 11 letters in opposition and a' petition with 8 signatures. He recognized those wishing to rebut. Mary Ann Buechler Clarified when the applicants apPlied for parcelling in the past it was granted. Roger McIntosh represen,ted the applicant. He said he had worked on this property since approximately 1976 and the property has always been designated R-1. The parcel map was to create 4 parcels for residential purposes which was opposed by residents in the neighborhood. Mr. Norwood was concerned about noise and vehicle pollution and the quality of 'the neighborhood and daily life. He asked why Policy 19 is referred to in the staff report if it is readily violated. He felt noise would be especially debilitating to the elderly in the neighborhood and may tend to be amplified for some of the older houses without proper insulation. They would like to include something in their neighborhood that they can support and feel good about. Mr. ~Milazz0 said the residential aspect that prohibits residential development in the 65 dB area does not have anY affect on the wall insulation but talks about outside activity. In order to mitigate residential property tall walls would have to be constructed. Minutes, PC, 3/19/92 Page 10 Commissioner Powers questioned whether this property could be considered part of the residential neighborhood. He felt mid-block developments such as this typically are not successfu 1. Commissioner Messner thanked those speaking for their civility and brevity in giving-testimony. 'Responding to a question, Mr. Milazzo said the theater would have precluded the general commercial designation. Mr. Grady responded to .a question by Commissioner Messner saying there are measures that can be applied to reduce noise levels to below a level of significance. Commissioner Messner said he was satisfied that the property could be developed with something other than commercial. He noted for the record that the city did support .residential use in the past. He felt residential uses should be promoted, stating he was not inclined to go with the commercial designation. Chairman Marin° said hecould not support straight residential in the area because of the noise contours. He felt the way the property slopes from the freeway there is no way to bring the exterior decibel levels down. He said he would support the highway commercial general plan amendment but would like to separate it from the zone change. RespOnding to questions by Commissioner Anderson, Mr. Milazzo said he would not have a Problem changing his application for C-2 zoning to allow the theater. Mr. Keithley, leasing agent for the proposed project, responded to a question by Commissioner Anderson-saying they have a major tenant for the project who will occupy approximately 43-44 percent. Regarding traffic counts, Mr. Milazzo said existing average daily traffic is 10,625 cars. The project represents peak hour p.m. traffic counts of 1,710. Commissioner Anderson felt the Commission should not decide the viability of a project in terms of the vacancy rate of the area. Regarding buffering residential by this project-he felt it does a better job of it than residential development would. He felt it is compatible with other uses in the area. In terms of the P.C.D. it allows for a large amount of control on the part of the adjoining neighbors in terms of influencing the decision-making body. He felt in terms of the problems with the JLJ apartments the fact that there would be security for the development would add to security in the area in general. He said he could support the project. Commissioner Powers said he would support staff's recommendation. He felt a high density, multi-family project would be appropriate for this site. MinUtes, PC, 3/19/92 Page 11 · Motion was made by Commissioner Cohn, seconded by CommiSsioner Powers to adopt resolution making findings as set forth in staff report approving the NegatiVe Declaration and disapproving the requested HC (HighwaY Commercial) land use designation. Motion carried by the following roll Call vote: AYES: NOES:' Commissioners Cobh, Frapwell, Messner, Powers Commissioners Anderson, Marino 'ABSENT: Commissioners Bjorn, Rosenlieb Motion was made bY Commissioner Cobh, seconded by Commissioner Powers to adopt reSolution. making findings as set forth in staff report approving the Negative Declaration and disapproving the requested PCD (Planned Commercial Development) zoning district~ Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: .Commissioners Cobh, Frapwell, Messner, Powers, Marino NOES: Commissioners Anderson ABSENT: Commissioners Bjorn, Rosenlieb *A 20-minute break was taken at this time. Commissioner Powers-made the motion, seconded by Commissioner Anderson to move agenda item #9 next on the agenda. Motion carried. 9. PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 16 - SUBDIVISIONS Staff report was given. Public pOrtion of the hearing was opened. Roger McInt°Sh said his main concerns are in regard t° the non-conformance with State laws as to obtaining waivers of mineral rights holders. The local ordinance has been more restrictive than State law and is still so. The reduction of minimum standards as it applies to lot frontage and sizes is very restrictive 'because three criteria must be met in order to allow for approval of a .deVelopment with l°ts less than 55 feet wide or less than 6,000 square feet. He stated he would like to see a continuance on this item so that he and others may meet with staff to' diSCuss their concerns. Minutes, PC, ~3/19/92 Page' 12 Barbara Don Carlos, represented the Building Industry Association of Kern County.' The industry requests' that this item be delayed for a period of time adequate to give them and others the opportunity to meet with the appropriate sub-committee to discuss the revisions. The areas of concern included the statements regarding having a record title interest and lot size, dimensions and specific criteria outlined. They findit extremely difficult to deal with the wording regarding mineral rights as it exists. They would prefer it be a-reference to State law only, however they would be happy to work with the committee to work this out. They are concerned that the ordinance as written would cause inflexibility, add to cost and be more prohibitive in allowing for affordable housing. She- asked that this item be continued and that they have the opportunity to meet with the subcommittee to review concerns to come back to the next meeting with revised wording and better clarification as to how the conditions will apply. Responding to questions by Commissioner Rosenlieb, Mr. McIntosh said the way the ordinance reads the findings must be made as well as a P.U.D. optional design subdivision and application for density bonus to allow for lots of lesser Width and square footage. Chairman Marino left, therefore Commissioner Anderson chaired the rest of this hearing: Commissioner Powers asktd if continuance to the next meeting would allow' enough time for those wishing a continuance to work out concerns with staff. Ms. Don Carlos felt those questions could be answered by the next meeting. Jim' Vaughan, represented Bakersfield Association of Realtors, saying they would like to request a 30-day continuance on this item in ord6r to discuss their concerns. Adrian Herd represented the Housing Authority of Kern County. She said they are faced with pursuing creative partnerships to meet the need for affordable housing because of dwindling State and Federal resources. They particularly are concerned about restrictive land use policies preventing low income families from realiZing the dream of home ownership. She requested this item be continued in order for concerns of organizations to be allowed to have an influence on the process. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Minutes, PC, 3/19/92 Page 13 Concerning the mineral rights section, Commissioner Cohn said the sub- committee had a problem with the language, however it was felt that rather than try to deal with it, it was more important to try to pass the ordinance as a whole at this time with the intention of coming back at a later date to try to rework this section and to allow mineral rights owners the opportunitY to be part of the process. He stated his concern that the citY will end up with something that is so dilutedthat there will practically be no standard. Commissioner Rosenlieb felt the mineral rights issue is Very complicated. It was staff's opinion that a task force be formed to examine this issue. She stated she would like to see this issue visited separately. She said she wOUld agree with a two-week delay to clean up the language, however did not feel the committee should meet again -if this is all that needed to be done. She .felt sufficient time has been given to allow for input and that what is being proposed is more flexible than what is allowed at the present time. Commissioner Powers said a workshop was held with the consensus being 6,000 square foot lots as the standard. Responding to a questitn by Commissioner Powers, Mr. Grady said the optional design standards would not be changing much. He said affordable housing was something that was discussed, however the problem is-whose definition of affordable hOusing to use. The affordable housing section was left out, but was left in the densitY bonus section. Commissioner Powers stated he would like to see those who spoke have an opportunity tO discuss the option of placing something in the ordinance to allow for affordable housing. Motion was made by cOmmissioner Powers to continue this item to the regular meeting of April 16, 1992 with a meeting to be held with the subdivision committee and interested representatives. Motion died for lack of second. Commissioner Bjorn agreed with the summary by Commissioner Rosenlieb of what is going on with' the mineral rights and hoped this could be made the subject of a workshop. She said she is in favor of meeting with the members of the community in order to work out a more acceptable situation. She said she did not object to either a two-week or 30-day continuance. Commissioner Rosenlieb asked Mr. McIntosh to meet with staff as soon as possible with his proposed changes. Minutes, PC, 3/19/92 Page 14 Motion was made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Bjorn to continue this item tothe next regular meeting of April 2,_ 1992, with the committee to meet with participants and clarification being given to staff previous to the committee meeting.- Responding to question by Mr. Grady, Commissioner Roseniieb stated she did not want to spend time in the committee meeting on clarification issues. She stated she would like those who spoke previously invited to the committee'meeting. Commissioner Bjorn said she would like to see everyone who spoke invited to the committee meeting, keeping the mineral rights issue out of it because she was concerned that the mineral rights community may not be as organized or vocal. She would like to give them the opportunity to evaluate the situation. 8.3 Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1-92, SEGMENT IV, KERN RIVER PLAN ELEMENT AMENDMENT 1-92, SEGMENT II AND ZONE CHANGE #5275 Chairman Marino returned to his seat. staff report was given. Commissioner Rosenlieb stated she had explained to people in oppOsition that staffs current recommendation for zoning is M-1. She said they had submitted letter in opposition. When she explained the new recommendation their concerns seemed to be alleviated. Public portion of the hearing was opened. Rich O'Neil, 6600 Desmond Court, spoke on behalf of the Kern River Parkway Committee. He stated their opposition to the proposed zone change to SI. He said previously they came before the Commission regarding the freeway alignment asking the Commission to study an alternate route outside the river north of the CrOss Valley Canal, which has not been decided. Chairman Marino clarified the zone is what allows the use. Regardless of the general plan designation the applicant'would be allowed to proceed with an industrial use. Mr. Gauthier stated this general plan amendment is simply an acknowledgement of the existing zoning. Minutes, PC, 3/19/92 Page 115 Mr. O'Neil asked that the Commission deny this general plan amendment on the basis that it would block the study .of the alternate freeway route as proposed. Mr. Kloepper said the portion of the alignment under consideration at this time is under the jurisdiction of the County and he is not aware of what is being done. Mr. O'Neil did not want to jeopardize the future freeway alignment but would like' it to be directed outside the environmentally sensitive areas of the Kern River Parkway. Responding to a question by Commissioner Rosenlieb, Mr. O'Neil said their concern is regarding the segment of freeway between Gosford Road easterly to Mohawk. The site proposed and accepted April, 1992 follows the north side of the river fairly close to the primary flood line. What they are proposing is the building of the freeway-between the Texaco refinery and Cross Valley Canal which they presented to the County and received agreement from them that this would .be the most logical place-for it. Arthur Unger, 2815 La Cresta Drive, spoke representing the Kern-Kaweah Chapter of the Sierra Club. He said they would like the lands along the Kern River to be left as natural as possible. He hoped the freeway could be placed without damaging the natural lands along the River. Dennis Fox said he is in favor of a freeway, however would like to keep the wetlands and parkway area. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Rosenlieb said some dramatic changes are being made without the alignment being known. Responding to a question by Commissioner Rosenlieb, Mr. Gauthier said the finding that this will not generate additional vehicular traffic was due to the fact it was not considered significant from the viewpoint it would create 1,000 acres of industrial. Commissioner Rosenlieb said it was difficult to believe in light of the situation that this would not create additional significant vehicular traffic. Motion was made by Commissioner Powers, seconded by Commlssioner Anderson to continue this item to the next regular meeting of April 2, 1992, sending it to the General Plan Committee with a report back from staff on the. other alignment being studied. Motion carried. Chairman Marino asked that Mr. O'Neit be contacted regarding this meeting. Minutes, PC, 3/19/92 Page 16 8.4 PUBLIC HEARING - KERN RIVER PLAN ELEMENT AMENDMENT 1-92, SEGMENT I AND ZONE CHANGE #5286 Commissioner Anderson abstained from participating on this item due to a possible conflict of interest in that his firm is presently performing services for an adjoining land owner. Commissioner Powers stated due to a potential conflict of interest he would abstain from voting; however would remain seated. Staff report was given. Public portion of th'e hearing was opened; no one spoke in oppOsition or favor. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Messner, seconded by Commissioner Frapwell to adopt resolution making findings approving the Negative Declaration and approving GPA KRPE 1-92, Segment I .consisting of an amendment to the Kern River Plan Element removing 156 +/- acres of Service Industrial from the Plan's bOUndaries. Commissioner Rosenlieb thanked staff for making this change stating it is long overdue. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Bjorn, Cohn, Frapwell, Messner, Rosenlieb, Marino NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Anderson, Powers Motion was made by Commissioner Messner, seconded by Commissioner Frapwell to adopt resolution making findings approving the Negative Declaration, and approving concurrent Zone Change request #5286 consisting of a change from M-1 (Light Industrial) and A (Agriculture) Zones to a C-2 (Commercial) Zone, and recommend same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Bjorn, Cohn, Frapwell, Messner, Rosenlieb, Marino None Commissioners Anderson, Powers Minutes, PC, 3/19/92 Page 17 10. 11. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDING - LOT 3,. TRACT 4542 Staff report was given. Jerry Dickey, Alta Engineering/Hughes Surveying was present. He stated his appreciation for staff's help on this project. Motion was made'by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Powers pursuant to Government Code Section 65402 to find the summary vacation of City easement rights in the private access - Public Utility easement in Lot 3 of Tract No. 4542 consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. Motion carried. AMENDMENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION BY-LAWS - CONDUCT OF MEETINGS - Staff report was waived on this item. Motion was made by Commissioner Powers, seconded by Commissioner Anderson to continue this .item to the next regular meeting of April 2, 1992, to be the first item of that agenda. Responding to a question by Commissioner Rosenlieb regarding questions of the public during public hearing, Chairman Marino said he has come under much criticism for 'meetings being out-of order and losing track of what is being done. The reason he felt-he had lost track is because people are being questioned during the public hearing. Commissioner Rosenlieb said the proposal as it stands allows for this. Chairman Marino reminded that the Commission is not functioning under this proposal. Commissioner Rosenlieb said she would like the ability to ask someone at the podium a question. Previous motion carried. Minutes;-PC, 3/19/92 Page i8 12: COMMUNICATIONS 13. A) Written B) Verbal Mr. Grady stated'there were no communications. Meeting. was therefore adjourned. Commissioner Messner stated he had questions regarding an issue. It was discussed With legal counsel and determined that the meeting could be reconvened.to allow for questions. Motion was made by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner M~ssner to reconvene the meeting. Motion' carried. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner MeSsner 'stated he had been approached by members of the community regarding trails in the Rosedale area possibly in response to seeing trails in the Polo Grounds. He .stated he wanted to hold a meeting of the trails committee on Tuesday, March 24, 1992 at noon. Commissioners Powers and Marino stated their acceptance of'this. Mr. Grady pOinted out a memo placed in the Commissioner's packets regarding a previous question on an entry monument at Hageman Road and Patton Way. Commissioner. Rosenlieb thanked staff for preparing this memo and stated she wished to go on record as saying the wall clearly violates the specific plan which was approved for this area, and hoped staff would not make a decision like this again. - · Minutes, PC, 3/1-9/92 Page 19 14. She stated for the City Attorney representative for Consistency that-it was explained to the.Commission that if any portion of a public hearing is missed a commissioner cannot Participate on that item. She referred to Commissioner Frapwell missing a portion of a hearing on Segment III, of which she was told that he did not miss very much. She stated she would like to know at what t/me it would become.a problem. She asked that an answer be prepared for the next meeting. Attorney Sherfy stated what had transpired before Mr. Frapwell took his seat, in his opinion, would not constitute a hard and fast rule which says if a few moments are missed in such an extended hearing it would prevent someone from voting. Commissioner Rosenlieb stated the Commission has been told that if they are not present at a hearing which is continued, . even if they listen to the tape, they are not to participate on that item unless it is necessary. CommisSioner Powers stated in checking with Fair Political Practices he discovered a commissioner may listen to the recorded tape, read transcripts and participate on the issue. ADJOURNMENT ;lqhere being no'further business to come before the Commission, meeting was adjourned at i0:37p.m._ Laurie Davis Recording Secretary ~cretary Assistaht Planning Director