Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/15/92MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING " OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Held ThurSday, October 15, 1992, 5:30 p.m., City Council Chamber, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California. 1. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: Present: Absent: DARREN POWERS, Acting Chairperson JEFF ANDREW JIM MARINO STEVE MESSNER KATE ROSENLIEB C. ROBERT FRAPWELL, Alternate DAVID COHN ADVISORY MEMBERS: Present: LAURA MARINO, Assistant City Attorney FRED KLOEPPER,.Assistant Public Works Director DENNIS FIDLER, Assistant Building Director STAFF: Present: 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 Thomas DeNatale submitted a speaker's card and addressed the commission saying he would like to speak on item #10.2 regarding U.R.M. buildings saying he -filled out a speaker's card because it was not indicated to be a public hearing on the agenda. Mr. Hardisty recommended that Mr. DeNatale's comments be taken at the time this item is heard on the agenda. Chairman read the notice of right to appeal as set forth on the agenda. Minutes, PC, 10/15/92 3. PRESENTATION TO COMMISSIONER ANDERSON Page 2 Chairman Powers presented a plaque to Commissioner Anderson in appreciation for his service as a commissioner. Commissioner Anderson stated his enjoyment of serving' on the Commission. Commissioner Rosenlieb thanked Commissioner Anderson for his dedicated service to the city, stating he had performed an extraordinary job, and she would miss him greatly. C°mmissioner MarinO stated he would miss Commissioner Anderson's insight into projects which came before the Commission. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS - PCD 4808 (OLIVE GARDEN RESTAURANT) Staff report was given. Richard Escalante represented the applicant. Responding to questions by Commissioner Rosenlieb, he stated in reading the new conditions, he would -rather not have a sidewalk from the corner and is hoping to extend the sidewalk on the corner onto the new access road which he pointed out on the map. Commissioner Rosenlieb was concerned about pedestrian access to this restaurant from the mall. CommissiOner Powers stated his support for staff's revised motion. Commissioner Andrew agreed with comments made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, saying he felt staff's revised recommendation would enhance the site. Mr. Hardisty said access may have to be in a switch-back form. Commissioner Marino was concerned about the possibility of creating_a larger problem with the requirement. Commissioner FraPwell said rather than giving staff the responsibility of approving pedestrian access possibly something could be recommended that would he would give the developer greater leeway he would be agreeable to it. Responding to a question by Commissioner Rosenlieb, Mr. Escalante was not agreeable to a continuance. Minutes, PC, 10/15/92 Page 3 Motion was made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded. by Commissioner Marino to make findings set forth in the staff report, and approve final development plans for the Olive Garden restaurant (building pad "C") of P.C.D. 4808, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit "A" of the staff report and add Condition No. 8 as written in the-Planning Director's memo, dated October 13, 1992 with the additional language added to the end of Condition #8 of the memo as .follows:- unless otherwise determined by staff. If determined by staff that this condition is not feasible, the applicant's proposal of .extending the sidewalk from New Market ,-Way around on Mall View and into the site's access Would be an ~ acceptable alternative. Mr. Hardisty said this language would work, however staff would be guided by state requirements for sidewalks. Commissioner Rosenlieb clarified for the applicant that the commission would prefer the sidewalk'be exactly the way it is written in the staff report, however if this is onerous staff has-some leeway to accept an alternative. Motion carried. 5.1) PUBLIC HEARING - EXTENSION OF TIME - TENTATIVE TRACT 5144 (REVISED) Staff report was given. Commissioner Marino abstained on this item due to a conflict of interest in that he is employed by the applicant. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition. Fred Alba was present representing the applicant and property owner. He stated his agreement with the staff report. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Motion Was made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner - Frapwell to approve'a one-year extension of time for Tentative Tract 5144 (Revised) subject to the Conditions set forth in the Exhibit "A". Motion carried. Commissioner Marino was absent due to an abstention. Minutes, PC, 10/15/92 Page 4 5.2) PUBLIC HEARING - EXTENSION OF TIME - TENTATIVE TRACT 5301 Staff report was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened. Robert Geringer spoke stating he represents the owners of the oil and gas lease on the 80 acre Portion adjacent to Morning Drive. Responding to comments in the staff report, he Stated~ the wells have not been abandoned and aggressive steaming operations are being undertaken to increase production on them. He said Currently litigation exists in the Federal District court to defend an attempt to terminate the oil and gas lease. He asked on behalf of the oil and gas operators that the extensi°n be denied. Andrew Haut, Attorney rePresenting the applicant, spoke citing litigation in federal 'court. The purpose being to determine whether the lease has been terminated.' : Frank Reina spoke saying the powerlines are not an easement. Negotiations are still being made to accommodate the request of the tentative tract apprOVal. He stated they have no opposition to a multi-use trail as requested by residents in the neighborhood, nor would he have a problem with being part of the assessment district. He cited copies of correspondence from Jaco oil who is an oil operator in the area, saying they agreed to abandon the property. He said there is no oil to be extracted from this property. He aSked. for time to prove that there is no oil._ He submitted copies of the correspondence. Wiley Hughes Said they are trying to connect Morning Drive to subject site. Responding to questions b~ Commissioner Marino, Mr. Reina said they have a will-serve letter with California Water Service Company and Public Works has approved their subdivision. Mr. Kloepper said it was determined there is adequate capacity on a temporary basis from the existing pumping system at Morning Drive and Panorama. Commissioner Marino said:he would be inclined to grant the appliCant's request for an extension of time. Responding to a question by Commissioner Andrew, Mr. Haut felt the lawsuit would be resolved in 8-9 months. Regarding the mineral lease aspect of the lawsuit if it is deemed that oil does not exist, the mineral interest lease would be terminated. He felt possibly because a lawsuit is still pending, this tract could be extended for another year in order to see the outcome of it. Minutes,?PC, 10/15/92 ' - -~- ~ Page 5 Commissioner. Messner asked questions of-Mr.-Geringer, to which he replied if Mr. Reina prevails-in the lawsuit it would not give them rights to the surface of the property, it wOuld .revert to the federal government. He felt the lawsuit could go beyond the 8-9 month period as cited by Mr. Haut. He also answered questions regarding wells saying a number exist, above and below the ground steam lines. Responding to questions iby Commissioner Messner, Mr. Hardisty said because of -the adopted oii'well ordinance, different types of conditions Of approval would be required for this subdivision. He said the same position would be taken with this tract When it was originally proposed which is to deny it because staff does not feel subdivisions should be developed in active oil fields. HOwever, if faced with the situation of having to make the two work together, he felt the proponent of develoPment should be burdened with the need to protect future residences from exposures to noise, disturbances and traffic on'local streets. Commissioner Messner felt potential impacts exist in this type of situation. He said he would follow staff's recommendation to deny this extension of time. Commissioner Rosenlieb ~said she voted for this subdivision with the idea that the wells would be abandoned immediately, however has regretted her decision. She ~oncurred with Commissioner Messner's statements. Mr. Hardisty responded fo a question by Commissioner Marino, saying this is a Class 3 oilfield. The oil well ordinance exempts the Kern Bluff, Kern River, a small portion Of Fruitval¢ and a small portion for a period of time of the Canfield Ranch .oilfield from restrictions normally associated with drilling in an urban setting. Robert Geringer resPonded to questions by Commissioner Marino saying there are 55 wells on subject property and the adjacent 360 acres and between 10-15 on the 80 acre parcel in addition to above ground steam lines and accessories. Three Wells are currently pumping with steaming operations to commence around November-December. Commissioner Marino felt the Kern Bluff oilfield is a barrier to development in the northeast. He said he would like to see development encouraged through this field. Mr. Reina said ther~ is no oil in this oilfield and asked for the chance to prove it. Commissioner Powers felt if this were brought before the commission' at this time as a new project it would not be approved. He felt this would be a key to development in the northeast saying he is willing to give the applicant a one-year extension. Minutes, PCi 10/15/92 6.1) Page 6 Commissioner Rosenliel5 said she was influenced on this development because she wanted to encourage growth in the northeast and still does, however she felt a responsibility to ensure the growth is adequately controlled in a safe environment. She felt it was irresponsible to extend this map. If the situation is cleared up in the future the applicant can reapply. The money he has spent has not been in vain. Commissioner Messner did not feel this project should be .pushed forward just because it was once approved. He did not feel this project was appropriate in the first place. He felt the commission should allow the applicant to resolve the litigation and the commission should get out of the middle of it. Commissioner Frapwell said he would be willing to extend this approval for one year, however at the endi of the time if the situation has not change a different action needs to be considered. Motion was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Frapwell to approve a one-year extension of time for Tentative Tract 5301. Motion carried. Commissioners Rosenlieb and Messner voted no. PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 9874 Commissioner Powers stated conflicts of interest on Agenda Item #'s 6.1 and 6.2, turning the chair over to Commissioner Messner. Staff report was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition. Carl Moreland represented the applicant, stating his agreement with the staff report. Responding to concerns about this tract being approved over an abandoned oil well, Commissioner Messner felt single well sites are generally not an issue. Motion was made by Commissioner Frapwell, seconded bY Commissioner Andrew to .approve Proposed Tentative Parcel Map 9874 subject to the conditions set forth in the Exhibit attached to the staff report. Motion carried. Commissioner Powers Was absent due to an abstention. Minutes, PC, t0/15/92 6.2) PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 9875 Staff report was given. public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition. Carl Moreland represented the applicant. Page 7 7.1)i Public' portion of the heating was closed. Motion was made bY commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Marino to make all findings set forth in the staff report, and to approve Proposed Tentative Parcel Map 9875 subject to the conditionS outlined in the Exhibit "A" attached-to the staff report. Motion carried. Commissioner Powers was absent due to an abstention. ~ PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT 5620 COmmissioner Marino abStained on this item due to a conflict of interest in that he is employed by the applicant. - COmmissioner Andrew abstained on item #'s 7.1 and 7.2 because he has received commissions from propertY owners within 300 feet during the last year. Staff report was waiVed. 7.2) Motion was made .by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by CommissiOner Messner to hear item #'s 7.1 and 7.2 concUrrently. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT 5621 Public portion of the hearings was opened; no one spoke in opposition or in favor. Fred Alba represented the applicant, asking for continuance. Motion was made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Messner to continue these items to the next regular meeting of November 5, 1992. Motion carried. CommiSsioners Marino and Andrew were absent due to abstentions. Minutes, PC~ 10/15/92 7.3) PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT 5552 Commissioner Powers abstained due to a conflict of interest. Staff report was given. Chairman Messner stated staff's recommendation to continue this item to the next regular meeting of November 5, 1992. Public portion of the 'hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition. Motion was made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner Frapwell to continue thi~ item to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting to allow staff the opportunity to review the map redesign and prepare a staff report. Motion carried. Commissioner Powers was absent due to an abstention. PUBLIC HEARING - CALLOWAY SPECIFIC PLAN LINE Page 8 Staff report was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened. Bill Cooper spoke representing the Kern River Parkway Committee and BESA Committee. 'He said they were not necessarily in opposition to this specific plan, however wish to d0wnplay the impact of this eventual 6-lane road. He asked the Commission to direct staff to look at a straight path under the bridge for the bike path. He also stated they do not want the bike path to go into the habitat area any further. He was not :agreeable to the comment regarding expense' of landscaping along the embankment, saying he felt it would have an extensive impact on the habitat, feeling anything that would mitigate the impact of the vehicle trips would help immensely. He said he had not seen any property purchased with HCP funds, even though they were assured some of this money would go into this Kern River Corridor. He asked the commission to direct staff to conduct a study of riparian areas in the immediate area of the project which could be purchased for mitigation. Responding to questions by Commissioner Rosenlieb, Mr. Cooper said they would like the angles and turns in the bike path to be eliminated. Mr. Hardisty said some tight kinks exist in the bike path approaching the east side of the Coffee Road bridge which staff is aware of and is working on an adjustment to the alignment in order to smooth this out. .Minutes, PC,-10/15/92. Page 9 Sherry 'Parker asked if this goes through behind their property, what will happen to Calloway as it exists. She asked about access to her property. Mr. Kloepper responded saYing the possible cul-de-sac on Calloway is not definite, however the property owners would have input into this. He said through traffic would not exist; however they would be provided access both to Calloway and Brimhall. She said the map shows that she would have to go through the subdivision with her horses. Mr. Kloepper said the city will have to work with the owner of the property and owners of other properties to come up with suitable access to her property. Responding to questions by Commissioner Rosenlieb, Mr.-Kloepper outlined the connection to the properties in the area. Roger McIntosh clarified Phase 2 of Tentative Tract 5386 allows for full and continued access from Ca~lloway into Brimhall. If this specific plan alignment is adopted Calloway would become a local street and they would have planned circulation through the su,bdivision back to Brimhall, with plans to extend local streets to Calloway to-allow for points of access on Brimhall and Calloway. _ Regarding a question by Ms. Parker regarding equestrian access, Commissioner Rosenlieb asked if there is any way they can get to the Kern River through' their properties. Mr; McIntosh said at this point the only access is back to Coffee or through Allen Road. Lorraine Unger represenfed the Sierra Club and submitted a letter regarding this project. She felt the Call0way bridge would have a great impact on the natural environment in the area. She said parking area is needed south of the canal, north of Stockdale Highway and felt a possibility of purchasing land exists. She also felt another mitigation measure may be to provide water to the major Cottonwood trees. She felt the idea of replacement trees was a good one and that possibility_ those which do not survive should be replanted. Commissioner Rosenlieb cited an added mitigation measure which addresses this issue. Ms. Unger stated she felt this adequately addresses the issue of replacement trees. She was also concerned about the reseeding of flowers and plants in the area, saying she felt the money could be better spent in other areas. She was also concerned about the lighting into the area and possibly muffiing~of it. David Gay spoke saying they are developing in the area, and because this project has been put off for many years he has noticed considerable impacts to the traffic. He said the residents in the area are looking forward to the implementation of this project and asked the Commission to allow it to go forward. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Minutes, PC, 10/15/92 Page 10 Responding to a question by Commissioner Powers, Mr. Gauthier said the only area which needs to be mitigated is where the pylons impact the river bottom. Commissioner poWers said! this crossing has been planned for quite some time. RespOnding to a question by Commissioner Rosenlieb, Mr. Kloepper said no lights are anticipated on this bridge, however provisions will be made for future lighting in the event of necessity due to development. However it may never be necessary because it crosses undevelopable area from the Cross Valley Canal to the bike path. Responding.to a question by Commissioner Rosenlieb regarding placement of concrete rip irap, Mr. Kloepper said this will be considered with the 2081 permit from the Department of Fish and Game. Commissioner Rosenlieb was concerned 'about the aesthetics of this. Commissioner Powers was agreeable to-these comments, saying:he felt the dumping of broken concrete along the banks of 'the Kern River Would be detrimental to its appeal. Mr. Kloepper said specific specifications wou,ld have to be met in order to use broken concrete. Commissioner Rosenlieb questioned the automatic irrigation asking if it is the intent that'it be temporary irrigation, which would either be abandoned or removed at the end of 5 years. Mr. Kloepper said it would be more practical just to stop using th~ system. Commissioner Rosenlieb asked regarding the maintenance of plants for a period of 5 years, who could request the early termination of maintenance, Mr. Gauthier replied the city could request this through the Department 'of Fish and Game. Commissioner Rosenlieb stated she felt staff had done a great job on this project, however wanted a. condition placed on it to prohibit broken cOncrete rip rap and that condition #17 be worded so that it is understood that water irrigation is temporary. She 'felt the following wording could be added to Condition #17: "Subject to the maintenance period as specified in Condition #20." COmmissioner Messner said the Department of Fish and Game's concern is that the Kit Fox have paths that they can wind through. They are comfortable with the Kit Fox'S ability to maneuver through concrete rip rap. He said he was uncomfortable precluding the use of it. ResPonding to questions.by Commissioner Marino, Mr. Kloepper said this will be a flat slab bridge supported similarly to the one on Stockdale Highway. The public will have ample opportunity to review plans before they are. sent out to bid. Discussion continued regarding the use of HCP funds. Minutes, PC, 10/15/92 ~- Page 11 Commissioner AndreTM thanked those speaking, saying he felt staff has made a great attempt at trying to appease everyone. Regarding the use of boulders as opposed to concrete rip rap he said in order to do this they would have to be taken from other' ar6as which would create more noise and pollution and possibly ruin another area. ' - - , Responding to a question :by-Commissioner Rosenlieb,'Mr. Cooper felt the use of rip rap is unsightly and unsafe. DiscussiOn continued regarding materials used in other areas. Mr. Kloepper felt the broken concrete is a waste product which could be used and would not affect another area, as it would if boulders were taken from it. Chairman Powers asked for some "either/or" language on the use of concrete rip rap or boulders. Commissioner Messner felt what is being proposed is a good compromise. ' Motion was made by Commissioner Mhrino, seconded by Commissioner Andrew -to adopt resolutiOn making findings approving the Negative Declaration with mitigation 'measures listed :in the amended Exhibit "A" dated October 15, 1992, and approving the Calloway Specific Plan Line with the following lchanges: Measure #17 shall read as follows: Automatic water irrligation shall be provided for all tree and shrub species, along the BESA reYegetation area, as shown in Figure 5, as specified in Measure #20. . ~ ? An additional Condition #20 to read as follows: When conceptual plans are developed .the Public Works Department shall call a meeting with' the Planning Commission Trails Committee and the Kern River Parkway Committee to review them and refer them back to the full'commission. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Andrew, Frapwell, Marino, Messner, Rosenlieb, Powers NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Cohn Minutes, PC, '10/15/92 Page 12 9. PUBLIC HEARING -- ZONE CHANGE #5365 -- APPLICATION BY CITY OF BAKERSFIELD TO AMEND THE ZONING BOUNDARIES FROM A C- 2 (COMMERCIAL) ZONE TO AN R~3 (LIMITED MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING) ZONE ON 4.63 ACRES AND R-3 (LIMITED MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING) TO C-2 (COMMERCIAL) OVER 1.7 ACRES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED.ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF STINE ROAD AND BELLE TERRACE. Commiss_ioner Andrew abstained due to a conflict of interesi in that he markets properties and receives commissions from property owners within 300 feet of subject property. Chairman Powers gave a committee report on this project. He said the committee recommendation is that the C-2 zoning be approved to R-3 leaving the area shown to be rezoned R-3 to C-2 at the same time requesting that staff place the GPA 3~92 on the next agenda for reconsideration. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opPosition or in favor. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Responding to a question by Mr: Hardisty, Commissioner Rosenlieb said the committee would!ike to withdraw the previous recommendation. Commissioner Marino' s~ted he would not support the committee report because the R-3 zoning is on top iof a canal and is unusual zoning which could be used for Commercial or used for apartments, however no construction of apartments could take place, Motion was made by cOmmissioner Rosenlieb to adopt resolution making findings approving the Negative Declaration and approving that portion of Zone Change #5365, consisting of an amendment to Chapter 17' of the Bakersfield Municipal Code for C-2 (Regional Commercial) to R-3 (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling) on 4.63 acres and recommend same to City Council. ReSponding to a question by Commissioner Messner regarding the possibility of this i~em being cleaned up when an applicant brings forth a project, Commissioner Rosenlieb said there is no appropriate way to handle this situation, hOwever some conditions in terms of setbacks and landscaping could be added to reduce impacts. Minutes, PC, 10/15/92 Page 13 Commissioner Messner said he was comfortable deferring cleanup on this issue and going with the committee's recommendation. He therefore seconded CommiSsioner Rosenlieb's motion. MotiOn carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: commissioners Frapwell, Messner, Rosenlieb, Powers NOES: Commissioner Marino ABSENT:~ Commissioners Andrew, Cohn SPECIAL COMMITI'EE AND STAFF REPORTS - AMENDMENT OF THE 10.2 CITY'S IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES OF CEQA Staff report was given. Responding to a questiorf~ by Commissioner Messner, Mr. Eggert stated with respect to economic impacts, additions were made referencing the State CEQA guidelines clarifying the issue in terms of when a decision-making body is reviewing an EIR that there is discretion in requiring economic studies if it is pertinent as part of the project review. Commissioner Rosenlieb !stated she is pleased with the final results of this recommendation. Motion was made by Commissioner Rosenlieb, seconded by Commissioner· Messner to forward the proposed CEQA implementation procedures to the City Council for adoption. Motion carried. SPECIAL COMMITTEE AND STAFF REPORTS - REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO GRANT NONCONFORMING STATUS TO REPLACEMENT OF U.R.M. BUILDINGS Commissioner Powers abstained due to a conflict of interest. He relinquished the chair to Commissioner Messner. Commissioner Andrew abstained due to a conflict of interest in that he owns property within 300 feet of buildings on the URM list. Minutes, PC, 10/15/92 Page 14 Mr. Hardisty gave staff report on this issue. He stated this matter was discussed and brought to a conclusion at the last hearing, normally he would prepare a fairly direct memorandum to the City Council expressing the Commission's recommendations, however he felt it may be important for the Commission to confirm their intent. He stated he brought back the report that he would have submitted to the Council.' Mr. DeNatale, having previously requested to speak, addressed the Commission. He stated he represented the Downtown Business and Property Owner's ASsociation. He stated he had read the report stating his concerns saying he did not feel the characterization of staff's recommended ordinance as the City Council's proposal is accurate. As a result of meetings he attended, staff was directed to propose ordinances on various other issues, subject ordinance being the first of those ordinances. He did not feel it is, therefore, accurate to say that staff's proposal is also the City Council's proposal. Responding to a question by Commissioner Messner, Mr. Hardisty said this was- the Council's referral to the Commission as a result of the Urban Development Committee's report and .recommendation, thereby changing the word "proposal" to "referral." Mr. DeNatale stated for the record that he still was in disagreement with this. Mr. DeNatale said in-the Second paragraph under the heading "issue" it is indicated the Downtown Business and Property Owner's Association's comments are specific to the downtown area, which he said is not necessarily the case. He said they also represent URM owners who are outside the downtown area. Their proposal was meant to take into account all URM buildings. This report indicates certain opinions held by the Commission, specifically the Commission's opinion that the City Council has already considered various options and reached a compromiSe when Seismic Ordinances were adopted. He said it is correct to say a compromise was reached on the due date for the seismic reports with the other, issues being referred to staff for preparation of appropriate ordinances. Regarding the indication that it was the intent of the Council to receive a basic city-wide ordinance, leaving negotiation for special consideration of the downtown area to the CDDA, he stated he was not sure this was Council's intent. He stated he also attended-the sub-committee meeting saying it appeared that the commission's theme throughout the meetings is that the issue came to the Commission cold. They felt after the first meeting that the commission was going fonvard with their intent to receive input from other sources and scheduling a joint meeting with the commission sub-committee and the Council's Urban Development committee which did not take place. He felt possibly a meeting with the other bodies to discuss this issue would be appropriate rather than sending this along to the Council without a recommendation. Minutes, PC, 10/15/92 page 15 Discussion continued regarding the procedure for this. Mr. Hardisty said a signal should be sent to the Council as to the Planning Commission's recommendation, stating he understood the Commission's confusion on what their purview would be~ Mr. Hardisty outlined the options which Council has regarding this issue. Commissioner Rosenlieb stated her feeling of staff manipulation on this issue. She said the proposed report to City Council does not mention the motion made at the last hearing or how it was arrived at. She felt it states what staff felt the Commission meant to say not what was really said. Commissioner Marino agreed with Commissioner Rosenlieb's comments, however stated he saw an advantage in staff saving the commission from their previous motion. Mr. DeNatale felt.this commission should obtain the information necessary in order to make a recommendation to the Council. Commissioner Marino asked if the Commission would be interested in sending the committee members along with the report and meeting with the downtown property owners to the meeting of October 29, 1992 with the Urban Development Committee along with a letter to the committee informing them it would be placed on their agenda. Commissioner Rosenlieb ~aid it appears this has already been acted upon and it was the recommendation ~his be sent back to the full council. Mr. Hardisty cited the mOtion and discussion from the minutes of the previous meeting. Commissioner Rosenlieb made the motion, seconded by Commissioner Marino that subject report be sent to the Council with the following changes: Page 2, between item #4 and item labelled "Issue" a sentence be added as follows: The Joint Council/Commission committee met on September 24, 1992 with only the Planning Commission portion of the committee present. She said in the conclusion' portion under the part which states "the Planning Commission has reviewed both the," she would like it to say "Urban Development Committee's referral," etc.~ She asked for a report back from staff at the next meeting regarding Council's response to the Commission's recommendation. Minutes, PC, 10/15/92 ' Page 16' Commissioner Messner stated he is comfortable with the suggested changes by Commissioner Rosenlieb and her agreement with the report. Motion carried. 11. 12. ELECTION OF INTERIM OFFICERS Motion was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Rosenlieb to appoint Commissioner Powers as interim Chairperson. Motion carried. Motion was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Frapwell to appoint_ Commissioner Messner as Vice-Chairperson. Motion carried. COMMUNICATIONS 13. A) Written B) Mr. Hardisty cited a request from Riverlakes to amend the requirements on their linear park along Coffee Road. He suggested this be referred to a con~mittee to be worked out. Responding to questions by Commissioner Rosenlieb, Mr. Hardisty said this item should be finished by the end of the year. Chairman'Powers-referred this item to the Parks and Environmental 'Quality Committee. Verbal Commissioner Anderson requested copies of the apProved maps when extensions of time fare placed on the agenda. Mr. Hardisty said procedurally a copy of minutes and staff report from the previous case would be placed in the staff report in the case of extensions of time. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Rosenlieb :cited a copy of correspondence to the Commission from Cou ncilmember Edward from League of California Cities. She also cited the schedule of funds available for park acquisition and development submitted to the Commission. Minutes, PC, 10/15/92 ~' '- Page 17 Commissioner Rosenlieb:~ asked if the Urban Development Committee has as a part of their meeting for :the-end of October changes to the subdivision ordinance. Mr. Hardisty said it is 0d the next council agenda for adoption. Responding to questions by Commissioner Rosenlieb, Mr. Hardisty said a provision was added for an additional degree Of latitude to be able to grant a 5% variance on 5% of the lots due to shape of parcels, good subdivision design, meeting the intent of the ordinance, 'etc. Commissioner. Rosenlieb said she would like to pick up a copy of the information sent to the Council, to which Mr. Hardisty agreed. Commissioner Marin° asked that a copy be sent to all Commissioners. 14.' Responding to a question; by Commissioner Marino, Mr. Kloepper gave status on the curb cut located at the center on the corner of White Lane and Gosford ROad. saying plans had been submitted for improvements of the median and they are proceeding with them'. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, meeting was adjOurned at 8:37 p.m. Laurie Davis Recording Secretary rang D~rec~/~