Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/19/94MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE · PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Held Thursday, May 19, 1994, 5:30 p.m., City Council Chamber' City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, BakerSfield, California. ~ 1. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: Present:* STEVE MESSNER, Chairperson JEFF ANDREW, Vice Chairperson ' STEPHEN BOYLE MATHEW BRADY DOUG DELGADO KENNETH HERSH JIM MARINO DARREN POWERS, Alternate 'ADVISORY MEMBERS: Present: LAURA MARINO, Assistant City Attorney FRED KLOEPPER, Assistant Public Works Director DENNIS FIDLER, Building Director STAFF: Present: JACK HARDISTY, Planning Director JIM MOVIUS, Principal Planner MARC GAUTHIER, Principal Planner JIM EGGERT, Principal 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. 3. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS None 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion was made by Commissioner Powers, seconded by Commissioner Hersh to approve minutes of the regular meetings of March 17, April 4, and April 18, 1994. Minutes, PC, 5/19/94 Page 2 Commissioner Marino made correction to end of Page 18 of March 17, 1994 minutes concerning committee appointments he clarified that he did not want commissioners with top seniority to be grouped together however wanted to split committees up according to seniority such that someone with top seniority would be followed by a commissioner with low seniority so that the experience levels could be mixed. Motion to approve minutes carried. *Commissioner Boyle was seated. 5. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS HANDBOOK Mr. Hardisty began the workshoP by introducing city staff which contributes to the Planning Commission process. George Gonzales, COmmunity Development Coordinator for the City introduced himself,' stating Jake Wager, Department Head could not be present. He explained their role in dealing with Federal Funds and development of programs to improve low and moderate income neighborhoods. He stated .they work with the Planning Department in developing the Housing Element of the General Plan as required by the State and prepare the comprehensive housing affordability strategy required by the Federal Government in order to continue to receive funds. *Commissioner Messner was seated. David Lyman introduced himself, saying he is responsible for directing the day-to- day operations of redevelopment by providing staff support to the Central District Development Agency, Historic Preservation in providing staffing to the Historic Preservation Commission and business attraction and business retention. He explained the concept of "Team Bakersfield" being that all departments work together with businesses interested in moving to Bakersfield. Lee Anderson, Community Services Department Head introduced himself. He introduced his staff which .interfaces with the Commission as follows: Rob Cramer, Park Technician who submits reports which outline park policies and concerns regarding landscaping of new subdivisions, attends commission meetings, answers questions regarding landscaping, assists in calculations of maintenance costs, is responsible for inspection of landscape projects within the city. *Commissioner Brady was seated. Minutes, PC, 5/19/94 Page 3 He introduced Ken Trone, Parks Supervisor who performs the same tasks as Mr. Cramer. He introduced Frank Fabbri, Parks Superintendent and Alan Abbe, Assistant Parks Superintendent who directly supervise the operations and maintenance of the city parks system and City landscaping, review and sign all landscaping plans, act upon recommendations of the park technician, make recommendations to Planning Department on future parks, responsible for answering questions by the City Council and public pertaining to parks, streetscape and maintenance assessments. Gene Bogart, Water and Sanitation Department Head introduced himself and his staff. He introduced Mike Sides, Sanitation Superintendent, saying he has extensive background on recycling, refuse operations and Bakersfield Landfill site. He introduced MaryBeth Garrison, Recycling Supervisor. He introduced Florn Core, Water Resources Director, responsible for both agricultural and domestic water operations :on a daily basis. Pat Hauptman, Water Supervisor III was introduced. Mr. Bogart said he is directly involved with all domestic water operations in the southwest and he handles a lot of activities regarding the budget. Mr. Hardisty introduced the new Public Works Director, Mr. Raul Rojas. Mr. Kloepper introduced Public Works staff, introducing Mr. Walker, Traffic Engineer, George Gilburg and Bruce Deeter, staff engineers, explaining the role each plays in the planning process. Mr. Kl°epper introduced Mr. LaRochelle, Design Engineer, Ted Wright, Subdivision Engineer, Jamie. Meskat-Starnes, Marion Shaw, Engineer in charge of special districts and design. Acting Fire Chief Kelly, introduced representatives from the Fire Department, Mr. Larry Toler, Fire Marshal, Ralph Huey, Hazardous Materials Coordinator, Mark Turk, Inspector in underground storage tank program and petroleum inspector, Greg Yates. . Mr. Fidler introduced Building Department team beginning with Steve Ewing, who prepares conditions for reports and makes sure State and local laws are complied with and Jack Leonard, Assistant Director. Mr. Grady introduced Planning staff, Jim Eggert, Principal Planner operating the permit center, Jim Movius, Principal Planner in charge of current planning handling zone changes and subdivisions, Marc Gauthier, Principal Planner in charge of adVance planning and environmental issues, Jennie Eng, Associate Planner. Mr. Hardisty introduced Mike Lee who makes Presentations just as Ms. Minutes, PC, 5/19/94 Page 4 Eng and Laurie Davis, Recording Secretary to the Commission. Mr. Hardisty also introduced Ms. Marino, Attorney representing the City Attorney's Office. I. Planning CommissiOners Role and Responsibilities II. Legal Framework and Authority for Conditions of Approval Mr. Grady began with. the topic of role and responsibilities of the commission. He cited State law and City Ordinance regarding how the Planning Commission was created, State law saying the City Council can by ordinance establish a Planning Commission or Can act as a Commission themselves. Bakersfield many years ago established the Planning Commission and adopted an ordinance which set forth the duties and responsibilities. The general authority of the Commission is governed by State and local law falling within the lines of the authority to review general plan amendments, consistency between the plan and zoning, consistency between the plan and any specific plans as well as consistency between the plan and any capital improvement program the city may be reviewing. He said the city adopted the State laws, on planning and zoning with our local codes. We are thereby rekquired to maintain consistency between zoning and general plan. Consistency means that the policies listed in the general plan regarding the governing of the long-range view of the city must be followed for development. State laW requires that within a reasonable period of time the zoning be made to conform with the general plan and that there be an opportunity to change both the general plan and zoning concurrently. Mr. Grady said the Commission has the responsibility granted through State law for the development of specific plans which must be consistent with the general plan. He cited current specific plans for the Riverlakes Ranch area, Casa Loma and Baker Street. Regarding relatiOnship to the City Council, Mr. Grady said the Commission is advisory to the Council and the Council is the legislative branch. The Council has appointed a member to act as a advisor to the Commission and the Commission has a committee to meet with the Council as the need arises to discuss policy issues. He highlighted points from the handbook regarding the relationship of Commission to Council, saying that while the Commission advises the Council it does not act with final jurisdiction. The final disposition does not rest with the Commission.but the Council. He said clearly defining an issue before sending a recommendation is the best way for the Commission to capture the legislator's attention. Minutes, PC, 5/19/94 Page 5 Concerning the relationship of Commission.to staff, Mr. Grady said staff are advisors to the Commission. He said that when the Commission is in doubt about how to proceed from a legal standpoint, the commission can continue a matter until an opinion can be rendered. He referenced Section 2-280150 which cites technical staff available such as the Director. of Public Works and Chief Building Official as technical advisors for the Commission. Responding to question by Commissioner Brady, Mr. Grady said questions can be handled by staff, however information provided to a commissioner should be provided to each commission member and the public and becomes part of the record. 'Mr. Grady responded to question by Commissioner Hersh, saying if a decision is made on a project based on an erroneous report it should be brought back to the Commission. Commissioner Hersh said this has happened during his tenure on the Commission and he felt this issue should go back to the Commission in this situation. Mr. Grady said unless new information is presented there would be no legal requirement to bring it back to the Commission for reconsideration: Ms. Marino said if new information is provided after the Commission's hearing, there is no requirement for the issue to be heard again by the Commission, it would be up to the Council. Mr. Grady referenced suggestions for skills to be acquired by Commissioners being the ability to definewhat an issue is on a matter requiring a decision, ability to assemble information 'from both written and oral testimony and apply it in making a meaningful recommendation. Rely more on adopted plans and policies rather than personal values. The Commission should look at the project in the context of the general plan policies, ordinances and development standards and apply these rather than personal values. They need to have the ability to take an initiative in policy issues and to keep the long view, developing a sense of how things that are done now will affect the future of the community. Mr. Grady said regarding the section dealing with making the Commission more effective the Commission may feel overwhelmed with an abundance of information. He said it is suggested that the Commission not try to become experts on the development, but delegate tasks to staff to review, digest information and bring back a set of recommendations. He said planning knowledge can be improved by attending the Commissioner's Institute to gain knowledge about how isSUes are handled in other cities. He said field trips can be made, prior decisions reviewed to see if the outcome was as the Commission felt it would be. He said the key person of the Commission is the chairperson who should synthesize the:various views into common agreement. It is suggested that pros and cons not be ;brought up on an issue before all testimony is taken. It is suggested that deliberations take place based on information presented~ The Minutes, PC, 5/19/94 Page 6 art of proPosing amended motions capturing common grounds should be learned. Action should be taken promptly enough to be considered decisive so that items are not held over and over to paralyze the action on new business. Mr. Grady-responded to question by Commissioner Boyle saying the Council receives the minutes and recommendation of the Commission. a. Local Ordinances 1. Subdivision - Title 16 Mr. Movius gave report on Subdivision Map Act, giving a history of it. He said the authority for the Commission to review subdivision of property is through police power to protect public health, safety and welfare. He cited the goals to encourage orderly community growth, ensure public improvements not become a burden to the community and protect public and individuals from fraud through land divisions. The Commission's role in reviewing subdivisions is final and does not go to Council unless it is appealed. Only policies, ordinances and standards in effect at the time in which the Planning Department deemed the application complete can be applied. Conditions of approval on subdivisions include local ' ordinance requirements, requirements placed on them through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), general plan policies, development standards from the Public Works Department. and other conditions through the Commission's use of police power. He outlined time requirements per the Map Act. Responding to question by Chairman Messner, Mr.. Movius said the commission has 6 months to act on a negative declaration and another 50 days after which the courts could look at whether it should be deemed automatically approved. Ms. Matin° said in the event the hearing has been conducted and there is an approved negative declaration a map could have automatic approval. He said findings are the backbone of decisions together with evidence in the record. The Map Act says that approval of a tentative map shall be denied if any finding for denial is made. Staff would add findings for unique features. The life of a tentative tract is two years at which time an extension can be applied for. Three years worth of extensionscan be obtained. Staff recommends that they be allowed in one year increments. A provision is available for automatic eXtension when a phased map exists. Recordation of a phase can extend a map for 36 months when there is $125,000 worth of off-site improvements outside the boundary of the map and not on a street adjacent to the map. Generally the life of a map cannot exceed 10 years. Limited authority exists with conditions in regard to the time extensions. Typically staff updates conditions on a request for' extension of time. These 'extensions can be denied if findings are made regarding Minutes, pC, 5/19/94 Page 7 public health, safety and general welfare. Vesting tentative maps Would not likely be subject to laws which are passed after the approval that freezes what is in effect at the time of approval. Requests for modification of standards (optional design subdivisions) require physical constraints on the project or amenities to be provided which benefit the community. This requires the concurrence of the City Engineer. If he does not agree with dropping of standards the Commission could not approve it. Regarding Planned Unit Developments Mr. Movius said these are projects in which basically all architectural features are approved and amenities are provided. Surface entry rights are protected in the City even more stringently than the State Map Act. The Map Act requires access to and along rivers which is something that may be seen occasionally. Regarding annexation, he said if a tentative map is approved in the County and final map has been filed, the rules of the County would apply even if the building permit has not been issued. If the tentative map was received, but a final map was not filed City rules would override. He said 101 tentative tracts are currently active in the city, with over 15,000 lots existing. Responding to question by Commissioner Hersh, Mr. Hardisty indicated if a negative declaration is not approved by .the Commission, the item would not be forwarded to the Council. Mr. Hardisty said an environmental document does not need to be adopted in order to deny a project. In this 'situation the project would go forward to the Council. " 2.- Zoning- Title 17 Jim Eggert addressed the Commission regarding the topic of zoning. He quoted a court case in which zoning was described to give a sense of its accomplishments. He quoted as follows: "A quiet place where yards are wide, people few and motor vehicles restriCted are legitimate guidelines in the land use project. The police power is not confined to the elimination of filth, stench and unhealthy places. It is ample to lay out zones where family values, youth values and the blessings of quiet seclusion and clean air make the area a sanctuary for people." He gave the difference between planning and zoning saying municipal planning might embrace zoning but the converse is not necessarily true. Planning is trying to articulate community values and goals. Zoning is in essence a tool with which to implement the overall plan. The legal authority for the city came originally from a supreme court decision and the State of California. The Council has been given authority to adopt ordinances to regulate the use of buildings, structures, conformity of uses, open space, agriculture, recreation, signs and billboards. The courts have described that: with regulation of signs cities can attempt to keep their own community identities. Through zoning, location, height, bulk, numbers of stories of buildings, size, use of lots, courts, open spaces, intensity of land use, number of dwellings and establishment and maintenance of building setback lines can be regulated. State law and the U.S. Supreme Court have given authority to Minutes, PC, 5/19/94 Page 8 the City to regulate civic districts, pUblic parks, public places through zoning. The city charter refers the. city to adhere to State regulations with resPect to zoning consistency. This is reiterated in the municipal code under the planning, zoning and development law. The city regulations follow traditional guidelines 'using zones to separate intense ,uses from less intense uses. Overlay districts also exist to deal with appropriate airport approach zones, churches, hospitals, senior citizen projects. Planned unit developments are available to deal with a mixture of commercial and residential as well as planned commercial developments. Travel trailer and mobilehome zones also exist. Within these zones uses are divided up into categories. The zoning ordinance contains uses that are permitted outright, uses which are permitted conditionally, and uses that can be granted administratively. The ordinance also has regulations pertaining to specific types of uses such as adult businesses, daycare facilities, petroleum drilling and exploration, home occupations and surface mining operations. Ordinances exist for density bonus to provide a way to use a property to provide dwelling units for lower income groups in return for additional density and second dwelling units. Each of these zones has certain standard requirements such as setbacks, building height, lot area and maximum coverage. Other standards which are not necessarilY listed within the zone category play a role in site plan review and development review such as parking, signs and landscape requirements. Exceptions also have been granted for zones which allow under certain circumstances encroachments into yard areas. Accessory buildings are also regulated such as tool sheds, swimming pools, spas, fences, walls and hedges. Antennas are regulated with regard to location and height. Animals are also regulated through the zoning process. State planning and zoning laws have adopted some provisions that can affect how the city handles zoning matters because some of their items preempt the city's ordinances or if the city does not have an ordinance it will utilize their regulations. He gave an example of the city using the State'.s regulations with respect to second dwelling units. The State has pUt together provisions for residential care facilities and family day care. Zoning controls and regulations als° exist which do not affect certain groups such as the Federal Government's Post Office and the city's zoning controls generally do not cover the State government unless local agency's guidelines. In some exempted publicly-owned utilities. the legislature will consent to following the instances the Public Utilities Commission has School districts are exempt under a two-thirds vote, however this exemption does not include their administrative offices. Cities and counties are mutually exempt from each other's zoning ordinances, however they typically work together to ensure conformance with an area. He stated there are items under the zoning ordinance which the Commission may not see such as site plan review projects, projects to be heard before the Board of Zoning Adjustment such as modifications and conditional use permits. He gave examples of situations in which a modification or conditional use permit may be necessary, stating the Board of Zoning Adjustment reviews the majority of these, however there are some uses which would go directly to the City Council if they are of Minutes, PC, 5/19/94 Page 9 city-wide significance. Regarding rezoning he stated the Commission is responsible for holding a hearing and making a recommendation to the Council. The Commission can approve the request as presented by staff or a more restrictive zone or rule. If the Commission desires to approve something less restrictive, it would requi~e renotification and placing the issue on a future agenda. Based on the ordinance if a request is denied and no appeal is filed the decision is final. If appealed, it is forwarded onto the Council. The Council does not hold hearings on rezoning unless appealed or if a decision is made to reverse an approval of the Commission or change conditions of Commission decision. If the Council wishes to approve a less restrictive zone staff would recommend it go back through the Commission process because it would constitute a new project. Responding to question by Chairman Messner, Mr. Hardisty said a more stringent text change to a zoning ordinance would not have to be readvertised. However, the Commission may wishl to advertise a revised environmental document. The strictest requirement is that a public hearing be held on the environmental document. ' - Mr. Eggert said the ordinance specifies it is the Building Director's responsibility to enforce, the zoning ordinance, however a lot of assistance is provided from Planning with regard to this. Responding to question by Commissioner Marino, Mr. Hardisty said on a zone change at Council level, it. is given first reading and if substantial opposition is not received it is proposed for second reading and adoption. If reaction is received by the Council in the interim they can choose not to adopt it or hold a public hearing for further evaluation, or send it back to Commission for another recommendation. Commissioner Hersh asked for comment regarding pyramid zoning. Mr. Hardisty gave a definition being that lesser uses are included within the more intense zoning districts. He gave example of R-1 and R-2, saying R-2 would allow single family (R-l) uses and low density multi-family uses, then R-3 which would allow R-2 and R-1 uses 'and so on with R-4 zoning. He then included commercial zoning districts which wou~'ld allow residential zoning and less restrictive commercial uses as the C zone becomes more intense. He then stated the M-1 zone would be the most flexible zoning district in the pyramid. He said at one time healings were begun to modify the pyramid aspect of zoning, however a number of people owning a large amount of M-1 zoned property were opposed to it and it subsequently died. Mr. Hardisty responded to question by CommissiOner Hersh indicating that this type of pyramid zoning will in the future be a hindrance to more sophisticated development in the city. 'Minutes, PC, 5/19/94 Page 10 b. :California Environmental Quality Act 'Mr. Gauthier gave history of CEQA, saying the city's adopted guidelines contain a compressed environmen!tal review and public hearings are held on draft EIR's. 'He stated the purposes for CEQA review being to identify and sOlve environmental problems, to require that decision-makers consider implications of their decision and explain:the reasons for them and to increase public participation in the environmental process. He said this process only applies on discretionary projects. He outlined the three categories which are exempt, possible significant effect in which an initial study is prepared and sent out for agency review then subsequently a negative declaration is prepared, projects which agencies feel a significant effect exists an recommend and EIR. He outlined the threShold for' significant effect, saying there are no standards for light and aesthetics. He said significant effect should be based on fact, evidence or reasonable assUmption. Mitigation should be added when the Commission feels a significant impact exists dUe to a physical change in the environment. When mitigation is added the reason for it should be stated and completion should be linked to an action such as issuance of a building permit for ease of monitoring. He said the final EIR would consist of the draft with the addition of answers back to comments received. The EIR cannot be recommended for approval if · significant effects exist unless the project is changed, conditions are imposed, an ordinance is adopted to take care of the identified problem, find alternative method for meeting impacts are found or find that changing the project is infeasible. After the decisions are made at Commission and Council a notice of determination must be filed with the County Clerk within 5 working days. This begins the 30-day statute of limitations for lawsuit. He summarized CEQA as providing forum for public review with the idea being reduction of environmental impacts. CEQA is subjective, however when the Commission is in doubt it should require an EIR, require staff or the applicant to study the project. Responding to questions by Commissioner Hersh, Mr. Gauthier said a decision must be made on a negative declaration within 6 months, however the average time for the city is about 30 days. A general plan amendment takes approximately 77 days. If the Commission requires an EIR the negatiVe declaration is suspended. Until the information requested is provided the time limit is stopped. Responding to questions by Chairman Messner, Ms. Marino clarified the time limitation for lawsuit is 30 days following the filing of a notice of determination. Mr. Hardisty said that.at a future meeting the City Attorney would speak on the subjects of conflict of interest and the Brown Act. Minutes, PC, 5/19/94 Page 11 COMMUNICATIONS A) Written None B) Verbal None 7. COMMISSION COMMENTS Ao Committees Chairman Messner'stated an ah hoc committee comprised of himself and CommiSsioners Marino and Delgado met with the Urban Development Committee on the issue of trails. Mr. Hardisty said the committee felt the focus of th'e trails system should be Mr. Nickel's property and Landtech property between Rancheria Road and the golf course as well as budgeting for completing the trails plan from Manor Street to the mouth of the Canyon within the City's jurisdiction and inviting the county to participate in the process within their jurisdiction. Responding to question by Chairman Messner, Mr. Hardisty said staff's position on the cogeneration plant site was not changed. 8. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, meeting was adjourned at 7:32 p.m. Laurie Davis Planing Director~