Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/15/93MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Held Thursday, April 15, 1993, :5:30 p.m., City Council Chamber, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California. 1. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: Present: DARREN POWERS, Chairperson JEFF ANDREW DAVID COHN KENNETH HERSH JIM MARINO KATE ROSENLIEB C. ROBERT FRAPWELL, Alternate Absent: STEVE MESSNER, Vice Chairperson ADVISORY MEMBERS: Present: STAFF: Present: LAURA MARINO, Assistant City Attorney FRED KLOEPPER, Assistant Public Works Director DENNIS FIDLER, Building Director JACK HARDISTY, Planning Director JIM MOVIUS, Principal Planner MARC GAUTHIER, Principal Planner JIM EGGERT, Principal Planner MIKE LEE, Associate Planner LAURIE DAVIS, Recording Secretary 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. Chairman Powers stated :a new procedure would be followed, whereby items could be considered under a consent calendar procedure, stating agenda item #5.4 would be heard at this time. Minutes, PC, 4/15/93 CONSENT CALENDAR Page 2 5.4 PUBLIC HEARING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 5669 Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition or in favor. Motion was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Frapwell to approve the. consent calendar. 3. WALL AND LANDSCAPE PLAN Chairman Powers abstained from voting on this item due to the fact he is a resident in the area. Staff report was given. Roger McIntosh represented the property owner. He agreed with the conditions of approval. He stated in response to a previous question concerning pilasters . that there are none on the existing wall, and the plan would not provide them, however they will match the existing wall with angle points. Motion was-made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Marino to approve wall and landscape plans for Tentative Tract 5464, subject to conditions outlined in Exhibit "A", with the following amendments: Condition #4 be deleted Conditions of the memo from the Parks Department to be made part of the approval Motion carried. Commissioner Powers was absent due to a conflict of interest. 4. PUBLIC HEARING - EXTENSION OF TIME - TENTATIVE TRACT 5446 Staff report was given. Public portion of 'the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition or in favor. ~ Brian Jenson represented the applicant and he agreed with the conditions of approval. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Minutes; PC, 4/15/93 .5.1 Page 3 MotiOn Was. made by'Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Hersh to.approve a oneffear extension of time for Tentative Tract 5446, to expire April 17, 1994, subject to the conditions of approval attached to the staff report, and the additional condition of the Planning Department memo dated April 15, 1993. Motion carried. '~ PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT 5290 Staff' report was given. Public portion of-the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition. Roger McInt°sh represented the property owner. He requested that Public Works Condition #5 be deleted, since the median would be constructed when road improvements are constructed. Mr. Kloepper said Public Works concurred with this request. -Regarding Condition #1, requirement to provide a disk compatible with the. City's format, he stated concerns that this condition is not requiredof eve/y developer and is discriminatory. He said the State Map Act _requires a hard copy which must be signed. It would be impossible to sign a disk copy. He felt the-commission would become involved in a number of issues including copyright laws, licensing laws regarding the software vendor, liability b~cause of the ease of changing information on the disk. He felt the city needs to take a.closer look'at what is being asked because of the possibility of viruses being transferred-through the disks, proprietary information which cannot be released per 'the' utility company because of safety reasons. He stated they have a specific agreement with the city which entitles them to this information which the city cannot be releasedwithout their consent. He stated his opinion if this condition is approved they would be eligible for attorney's fees. Responding tO a question by Chairman Powers, Ms. Marino said since this requirement isnot a.part.of an adopted standard she recommended it be deleted. Responding to questions by 'Commissioner Hersh, Mr. Kloepper said what the city wants is a .computerized compatible document which would give the map and lot -boUndaries. Discussion continued regarding the duplication of this information. Mr. Kloepper stated his agreement with deleting this condition due to the fact the attorney has recommended it, however he stated he would be coming to the commission with an ordinance or standard revision to require the information in -electronic form or that the developer pay the cost for.the city to digitize it. Mr. McIntosh suggested that if such an ordinance is proposed that those engineering -firms which have the capability be allowed special treatment in processing their ~ projects. He felt'there should be a trade off for this information. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Minutes, PCi~4/15/93 - Page 4 Commissioner ~Rosenlieb requested that this condition not be Placed on any map until an ordinance or condition is approved. Motion was 'made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Marino to approve and adopt the Negative Declaration, to make all findings set forth in the staff report, and to approve Proposed Tentative Tract 5290, subject to the conditions outlined in the Exhibit "A", with the following changes: Deletion-of Public Works Department Conditions # 1 and #5 Of Exhibit 5.2 o Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 5666 continuance was. requested on this .item and the following agenda item. Commissioner Rosenlieb stated in reviewing paperwork she overlooked a memo with an amended motion and the addition of a condition regarding Agenda Item #4, Tentative Tract 5446, Extension of time. She stated the applicant was still present and a~ked staff for a suggestion on correcting the oversight. Mr. Hardisty stated a motion to reconsider would be necessary. Commissioner Cohn made a motion, seconded by Coinmissioner Rosenlieb to reconsider Agenda Item #4. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING - EXTENSION OF TIME - TENTATIVE TRACT 5446 5.2 Responding to a question by Commissioner Rosenlieb regarding the memo dated April 15th containing an 'additional condition regarding a park land requirement, Mr. Jenson stated he had no objection. Motion was-made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Hersh to approve a one-year extension of time for Tentative Tract 5446 with conditions . outlined in the Exhibit "A" and an additional condition outlined in the Planning Department memorandum dated April 15, 1993. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING - VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 5666 Staff report was given-. Public ~ortion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in oPposition or in favor. Minutes, .PC, 4/15/93 - · Michelle LaMoine represented the developer. She stated the developer was concerned he .has not had sufficient time to meet with staff_ regarding conditions, therefore they requested continuance. Page 5 Motion was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Andrew to continue-this item to the next regular meeting of May 6, 1993. Commissioner Rosenlieb stated in response to concerns by her regarding lot configurations the applicant agreed to look into this issue. Responding to a question by her, Ms. LaMoine said due to current conditions the developer wishes to continue with the block wall on the south boundary line of Tract 5666. Commissioner Rosenlieb asked staff to look into the feasibility of requiring the applicant to construct a block wall on the east side in terms of available space, possible hardship and permission. She asked the other commissioners to view this site, stating she felt this would be an issue at the subsequent hearing. Chairman pOwers asked for information from the parks division for the future hearing on this item regarding verification of whether plant material will provide screening for the canal. Motion carried. 5.3 PUBLIC-HEARING - VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 5667 Commissioner Rosenlieb abstained due to a conflict of interest in that her employer owns property within 300 feet. Staff report was given. 'Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition or in favor. Michelle LaM°ine represented the developer asking for continuance on this item ~to the next regularly scheduled meeting. Motion-was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Hersh to continue this item to the next regular meeting of May 6, 1993. Motion carried. 5.5 PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT 5649 Chairman Powers stated this item would be heard concurrently with Agenda Item #6. Minutes, PC, 4/15/93 puBLIC HEARING ZONE CHANGE #5446 -- APPLICATION BY Page 6 MARTIN-MCINTOSH TO AMEND THE ZONING BOUNDARIES FROM AN R-1 (ONE FAMILY DWELLING) TO A PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) OR MORE RESTRICTIVE ZONE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN SPRING CREEK LOOP AND THE STINE CANAL, APPROXIMATELY 1/4 MILE EAST OF CLEAR MIST WAY. Staff report was-given. Public Portion of the hearing was opened. Dennis Scott, Kern High School District spoke regarding item #6 stating they have had-insufficient information to assess the possible environmental effects of this project. He felt additional residential units in excess of what is currently authorized by the zoning would cause a significant effect upon the school facilities. He said if the city can present evidence that there is no increase in the number of residences, they would withdraw their letter on this project. Roger McIntosh-spoke in favor requesting that Public Works Condition #1 be deleted. He asked for clarification of their condition #12. Mr. Kloepper said this condition is one which has been placed on maps over the past several months. He said it solves the problem of property ownership in the event of cessation of use of the striP for landscape purposes. Mr. Kloepper suggested additional language added to Condition #12 as follows: "unless alternative treatment satisfactory to the Director 'of Public Works is provided." -Regarding Condition #18 Mr. McIntosh said it is alrbady a requirement, therefore he requested that the requirement for 24 feet of paving be deleted. Mr. Kloepper said the purpose is to complement the circulation in the area, adding another ingress/egress while these lots are being developed along with the lots in the neighboring tract. He recommended that the commission not honor this request. Mr. McIntosh said secondary access is being provided at this time. As part of the P.U.D. zone change he stated they are proposing a reduction in front yard setback to 18 feet which he felt was enough room to accommodate the majority of american made cars and most' foreign cars. Jim Meadows, Castle and Cooke DevelOpment Corporation spoke saying they have mitigated the smaller setbacks with roll-up doors and the provision of allowable space in the garage and driveway for the parking of 4 cars. He shared data on car lengths with the Commission. He said they feel the garage to be the primary parking area. He did not feel they could plan this subdivision to be compatible with 100 percent of any theoretical needs. He suggested they would be willing to_ mitigate this by amending C.C.&R.'s regarding overhang. He felt if possible .bUyers have RV. type needs they would be more likely to buy larger lots Minutes, PC; 4/15/93 Page 7 that would accommodate these uses. He requested the Commission approve the tS-foot setbacks for this subdivision and requested although it was not before the Commission at this time,~ that they be allowed to continue this 18-foot setback through the future 4 phases. Mr. McIntosh addressed the school issue, stating this is the same project which was proposed in Phase 1. He said the only reason they are asking for a PUD zoning is to change the setback .requirements and lot sizes. Densities are not increasing any higher than What is allowed by the general plan. He asked that the school's request not be considered. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Regarding the request for deletion of condition #18, Mr. Kloepper said there is a park under constrfiction and the extension of this street will provide direct access for those purchasing in the tract. 'He stated under this circumstance an error exists in the condition, and asked that the 24-foot requirement be increased to 32 feet to provide space for bicyclists. Commissioner Rosenlieb stated her Concern regarding the setback request, saying it has caused the Commission to look at minimum setback requirements. She said she would not be inclined to approve an 18-foot setback again. She also felt a 20-foot setback is not large enough, however there are extenuating circumstances with this project being the requirement for roll-up doors and that the tract has been approved with 18-foot setbacks. Commissioner Hersh said he had a problem with an 18-foot setback feeling it looks cramped, stating he ~leans more toward a 25-foot setback requirement. Commissioner Andrew felt due to the amenities the applicant is willing to provide and possibly the amendment to the C.C.&R.'s he would be in agreement with approving this tract based on the fact it has been approved for phase 1. Commissioner Powers stated he would probably be in favor of approving the future phases of this subdivision as they have been approved in the past, however felt a standard needs to be set. He said he would continue, however, to look at possible deviations. Commissioner Cohn felt the issue of affordable housing is not going to be contingent on the size of the setback. He felt simply because the first phase was allowed with 18-foot setbacks, it does not mean that subsequent phases should be approved as such. He did not feel an adequate argument exists for an 18-foot setback. He felt it makes more sense to have 2 feet more area for the driveway than for the-back yard. He stated he would not support 18 feet. Minutes, PC, 4/i5/93 ~: Page 8 - CommisSioner Marino 'said considering the amoUnt of traffic to be on the property he could not see requiring widening the street from 24 feet to 32 feet for a bike lane. He felt 20 feet would be reasonable for a setback. Commissioner--Frapwell was concerned that what is being requested is not what is reflected in the drawings~ Discussion continued regarding parking spaces. CommiSsioner Andrew felt smaller lots were necessary for affordable housing, however did not feel cars shOuld be encroaching. Regarding the ordinance concerning setbacks, he felt if the commission is thinking of proceeding with the 20-foot setbacks, possibly they should be allowed to have the same setbacks as approved in the first phase, since the issue has not been resolved. Commissioner-Rosenlieb felt the Commission should be looking at the greater need of the community, stating she felt just because the 18-foot setback has been allowed once is no reason to allow it again; thereby continuing to make the same mistake of the past. She. commented to the applicant that she was not in favor of the design of Lots' 9!, 92, 107 and 108 stating they face into side yards with the back yards being parking lots. She' said even though she did not care for 20-foot setbacl~s she would-support it on this item because of the roll-up doors and because of the hlstory of this project. Motion was made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded 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 5649 (Optional Design) subject to tlie conditions' outlined in the Exhibit "A", with the following changes: Public Works condition #1 shall be deleted. Public Works condition #12, the following additional language to be added: unless alternate treatment satisfactory to the Director of Public Works is provided. Public Works condition #18 shall be changed to reflect 32 feet of paving rather than 24 feet. The addition of Condition #9 to Planning Department conditions as follows: This tract is conditioned upon obtaining P.U.D. zoning. Minutes, pC, 4~15/93 Page 9 The addition of Planning Department Condition #10 as follows: The developer shal! incorporate into the C.C.&R.'s language to the effect that it would .be a violation of the C.C.&R.'s to have any ~.vehicles overhanging into the sidewalk area. The addition of the memo dated April 15, 1993 from the Fire Department adding the additional condition as follows: Fire hydrant location and placement to be determined by the Bakersfield. Fire Department per Uniform Fire Code, at the time development plans have been approved. Motion carried. COmmissioner Andrew voted no. . Motion'.was made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Cohn to make-findings set forth in the staff report, and approve the zone change as proposed and advertised and recommend adoption of the same to the City Council with the conditions in the Exhibit "A" attached to the staff report. Motion Carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Andrew, Cohn, Frapwell, Hersh, Marino, Rosenlieb, Powers None --Commissioner Messner PUBLIC HEARING - PREZONING #5451 -- REQUEST BY THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD TO CHANGE THE ZONE FROM COUNTY E-l/4 (ESTATE- 1/4 ACRE MINIMUM) ZONE TO CITY E (ESTATE-ONE FAMILY DWELLING) OR MORE RESTRICTIVE ZONE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED WEST OF JEWETTA AVENUE APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET SOUTH OF HAGEMAN' ROAD. Staff report was. given. Public portion of the hearing was opened. Bill Elliott spoke saying he is a resident in the Jewetta area stating he would like to.stay in the county.. Public .Portion of the hearing was closed. Minutes, o PC, 4/15/93 Page 10 Commissioner Cohn stated for all intents and purposes these county residents are in the city. and enjoy the use of the infrastructure. He also stated taxes would not increase, however payment of a refuse fee may be required. He also felt that these residents may have better contact within the City because of the smaller areas which they service, as opposed to the large areas served by the Board of Supervisors. He' said annexation is a way of preventing duplication of services. Commissioner-Marino. ag~ree with Commissioner Cohn's comments, giving an explanation of the proposed action of the commission, stating it is simply a change of zone. Motion was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Hersh to adopt resolution-making findings as set forth in staff report, approving the Negative Declaration and approving Prezoning No. 5451 to the zoning of E (Estate-One Family Dwelling) and recommend same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES': Commissioners Andrew, Cohn, Frapwell, Hersh, Marino, Rosenlieb, Powers NOES: ABSENT: None Commissioner Messner 1993-1998 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM BUDGET - DETERMINATION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL AND SPECIFIC PLANS. Melanie Dunwoodie gave the report on this item. Mr. Kloepper cited the Coffee Road grade-separation project as being one of the most notable projects for the next fiscal year. She alsO pointed out that this budget includes a rebudgeting of 1.1 million dollais in gas .tax projects that were deferred as part of the 92-93 budget. Responding to question by Commissioner Marino, Mr. Kloepper said the'traffic impact fees would be used to provide matching state and railroad funds. Commissioner Rosenlieb said she would abstain because she has not had a chance to thoroughly read the document. Mr. Kloepper clarified there is nothing within the CIP that is not in conformance with the general plan. Minutes, PC,.-4/15/93 Page 11 Motion was' made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by cOmmissioner Cohn to find that the 1'993-1998 Capital Improvements Budget is consistent with the General Plan based on the analysis and recommendation of the Public Works Director. Motion carried. Commissioners Hersh and Rosenlieb abstained. Chairman Powers stated at the Planning Director's request he would move to Agenda Item #!l, then going back to Agenda Item #9. 11. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDING FOR ACQUISITION OF A FIRE STATION SITE LOCATED ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF BUENA VISTA ROAD' APPROXIMATELY HALF-WAY BETWEEN STOCKDALE HIGHWAY AND DEER PEAK DRIVE. Staff 'repOrt was given. Michael Kelly, Deputy Fire Chief of the Fire Department~ responded to a questiOn by Commissioner Rosenlieb stating there is no set standard for placing fire stations on arterials or collectors. Discussion continued regarding problems .associated with placing a station on a major street such as on Stockdale Highway. He said the way in which this station would be situated it would lead to a controlled intersection. Mr. Hardisty said the design of the fire-station would be to take advantage of a local street that would pass through the south side of the site. Mr.-Hardisty said there is about 800 feet of separation between Buena Vista and Stockdale Highway' Intersection and this potential intersection. Steve Walker addressed questions regarding traffic stating the site was chosen to try tO relieve some ~of the-existing problems on Stockdale Highway. He said there would be a local street between the fire station site and the Water Department tO be about 800 feet from Stockdale and Buena Vista. Motion Was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Hersh to make a finding pursuant to Government code 65402, that the proposed -acquisition of real-property for the proposed water well site is consistent with the general plan. Motion carried. AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT PERTAINING TO FRONT AND SIDE YARD SETBACKS IN R ZONES. Staff report was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened. ' Minutes, PC, 4/15/93 page 12 CommissionerRosenlieb~' was of the opinion that at the committee meeting two committee members felt.strongly that 20 feet from back of.sidewalk was -appropriate,. however she felt very strongly this was not 'adequate. She did not feel' driveways should have to accommodate every vehicle, howeyer in this · situation there-is not a requirement for roll-up 'doors. Vehicles would be encroaching into the sidewalk area under this proposal. She said she would like 'to see the commission sUpport staff's original recommendation. Commissioner Marino stated his agreement with sending this issue back to committee. · He said the setback issue was basically resolved, however the rear yard setback issue was not resolved because staff needed more time to research because of the various issues which arose because of the apartments on Brimhall. He stated he would support the 20-foot setback, feeling it could be looked at in the future if it is not feasible. Commissioner Cohn stated he was in favor of nothing less than 25 foot setbacks. Commissioner Rosenlieb felt going back to committee would not result in a change of opinion on the part of committee members, stating she felt there is no Consistency in dealing with R-1 and R-2 setbacks. Commissioner Cohn was in favor- of the setback being the same for R-2 as it is for R-1. Commissioner Andrew felt the committee settled on the setback issue, with the attitude being that if 20-foot 'setbacks are not feasible, the commission can revisit this issue. Commissioner Hersh 'felt the setback standard should be set at 25 feet with a provision for variation. Commissioner Rosenlieb said she did not see that the recommendation Commissioner Andrew was making was a change from what has been done in the past and is basically the same driveway length. It has been discovered this is a problem. Motion was made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Cohn to recommend to City Council to adopt the findings in the staff report and approve .the ordinance amendments as originally proposed. Commissioner Marino clarified the intent of the motion that the proposal before the committee was 20 feet from property line. He said he would support the committee's recommendation. Discussion continued. -Minutes, PC, 4/15/93 Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Cobh, Frapwell, Hersh, Rosenlieb NOES: Commissioners Andrew, Marino, Powers ABSENT: Commissioner Messner 10. DISCUSSION AND'RECOMMENDATION TO INITIATE A ZONING Page 13 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO INCREASE REAR YARDS ADJACENT 12. TO COLLECTOR AND ARTERIAL STREETS. Staff gave. informatiOn regarding committee meeting on this issue. Motion was made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Andrew to refer this item back to committee with the intent that it be back before the Commission within one month. Motion carried. COMMUNICATIONs A) Written Mr.. Hardisty distributed resumes of Planning Commissioners Delgado and Slocumb who were' appointed tO the commission at the previous City Council meeting. COrrespondence regarding Drive-through Restaurants in the C-1 Zone District. Mr. Hardisty stated the commission had been given copies of a draft letter back to the City Council advising them of the outcome of the hearings regarding this issue. B) Verbal None Minutes, PC; 4/15/93 3. COMMISSION COMMENTS Page 14 A. Committees 1) General Plan Commissioner Rosenlieb stated a meeting would be held on the following Tuesday. She asked that it be changed from 12:00 noon to 11:30 a.m. 2) Zoni~g Ordinance No new information. _._ 3) Sign 'Ordinance 'Commissioner Hersh stated a meeting would be held on April 22,. 1993 at noon. Commissioner Rosenlieb questioned signage in landscape strips, asking if they are legal, asking for the criteria on this issue. Mr. Fidler said the public right-of-way may not continue to the fencing. As long as the signage is outside the right-of-way it would be legal, however it cannot have the nameof the company on it. Commissioner Rosenlieb asked the sign committee to look closely at this issue~ 4) Subdivision and Public Services Commissioner Andrew stated this committee recently met and another meeting would be held in the future with the Planning Director looking into the apartment situation on Brimhall Road. He also asked that consistency of setbacks be looked into as it relates to the separation of R-1 and C-2 properties and the setbacks of railroads and freeways. 5) Trails and Ways Commissioner Marino stated a meeting had been held with the equestrian groups concerned about the bike path on Manor Street, who felt the commission had possibly lost momentum on this issue, stating they are continuing to look at possible trail alignments in the northeast. He said monthly or bi-monthly meetings may be held in the future. Another Minutesl PC; _4/i5/93 Page 15 meeting is scheduled for May 13, 1993 at noon. He asked for a briefing from Public Works regarding the Quailwood Truxtun underpass contained in the capital improvement program. Mr. Kloepper said this issue is currently being analyzed by the City Attorney relating to possible litigation by Kern Delta Water District. 7) Chairman Powers asked for updates .on the bike path issue as new information is available. Parks and Environmental Quality Act No new information. Joint Council/Planning Commission No new information. Chairman Powers stated his pleasure at serving on the Commission with Commissioner COhn, stating he appreciated his input and addition to the planning process. Commissioner Ros6nlieb: thanked Commissioners Cohn and Frapwell for their input and service to the Community. She stated she looked forward to meeting and working with-the new commissioners. Chairman Powers welcomed Mr. Delgado to the Commission. Chairman Powers stated it was a pleasure to serve with Commissioner Frapwell, 'stating his eXPertise has been an asset to the commission. Chairman Powers welcomed Mr. Slocumb to the Commission. 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Laurie Davis ~~retary ?lanning D~