Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/02/95MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Held Thursday, November 2, 1995, 5:30 p.m., City Council Chamber, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California. 1. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: Present: JEFF ANDREW, Chairperson *STEPHEN BOYLE MATHEW BRADY KENNETH HERSH ROBERT ORTIZ WADE TAVORN MICHAEL DHANENS Alternate Absent: DOUG DELGADO, Vice-Chairperson ADVISORY MEMBERS: Present: CARL HERNANDEZ, Deputy City Attorney JACK LaROCHELLE, Engineer IV DENNIS FIDLER, Building Director STAFF: Present: STANLEY GRADY, Planning Director MARC GAUTHIER, Principal Planner LAURIE DAVIS, Recording Secretary 2. PUBLIC STATEMENTS Jill Kleiss submitted a speaker's card and made a public statement concerning the Marketplace; specifically the accelerated pace of the EIR and the issue of public review. She gave background history on this proposed development. She stated the concern of the Southwest Community Action Committee, which she represented, that no environmental impact report was prepared. She was also concerned about deadlines for preparation of the EIR. She asked that the date of public hearing on the EIR be placed on a meeting after the holidays. She asked for public review on all projects. She said this is not an issue of anti- growth. In response to questions by Commissioner Hersh, Chairman Andrew asked that questions be kept to clarification type questions, this issue, not being on the agenda and being under litigation should not be debated at this hearing. Minutes, PC, 11/2/95 Page 2 Responding to question by Commissioner Tavorn, Mr. Grady said moving hearing dates forward would be an issue which would need to be addressed by the City Council since it is part of a contractual agreement between them and Mr. Verlaan, the consultant. 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 Hersh, seconded by Commissioner Dhanens to approve minutes of the regular meetings held September 5, September 7, and September 18, 1995. 5. WORKSHOP - PROPOSED HILLSIDE ORDINANCE Presentation was given by Mr. Grady. Mr. Fidler gave a presentation of what is covered under the Uniform Building Code with respect to this proposed ordinance. Responding to question by Commissioner Hersh, Mr. Fidler felt the issue of cliff fronts could be taken into consideration. Barbara Don Carlos-Martin, Building Industry Association of Kern County addressed this draft ordinance. She questioned its implementation as it is directed by the 2010 General Plan saying she felt the ordinance is far in excess of what the 2010 plan's direction is. She asked by who's judgement overlooks and' ridgelines would be deemed as significant and necessary. She questioned language concerning a landscape plan being required showing existing and proposed trees and those planned to be removed. She did not understand the need for this provision because areas that this ordinance would cover are for the most part barren. She questioned the use of the word "registered civil engineer" and "professional civil engineer," asking by what categories these individuals would be decided. She also cited the indication that a geology report would be submitted by a certified engineering geologist and a hydrology report being prepared by a registered civil engineer who is experienced in the science of hydrology and hydrologic investigation saying various categories are used which are not defined or consistent. Regarding the requirement of a 3-dimensional scale model of the project site, to a scale as prescribed by the requesting body she felt this could become a nightmare. Minutes, PC, 11/2/95 Page 3 Mr. Grady stated this is simply review material and is not an ordinance before the Commission for adoption. Regarding the grading aspect, Letter III-D, Page 15 - (slope protection) she felt this needed to be defined. Regarding drainage, she stated their feeling that there is adequate regulation concerning drainage. Regarding driveways and the engineer's provision of verification to the city engineer that vehicles can traverse steep driveways she said this is extremely vague and broad with respect to who the engineer is. The entire ordinance is redundant. Regarding the bluffs setback she felt this provision defeats itself with the exceptions clause in Paragraph C, Page 13 allowing for an exception of it with construction of single family dwellings. She felt the goal should not be to create an overbearing, heavy-handed approach to hillside development, but an opportunity for property owners to be creative in their aPproach to developing their property. Any proposal should address only the basics in public health and safety, grading, the building code and overlook requirements and should allow maximum flexibility for development proposals. She stated that the BIA supports the position that existing ordinances address most every aspect of hillside development, the subdivision ordinance, overlook, grading ordinance, drainage requirements and uniform building codes will all apply when hillside development occurs. She requested this ordinance be dropped because it is over regulation and stated her feeling it would become the very tool that would stop development on hillsides. Considering the objectionable content of this ordinance the BIA would not support the continuation of this effort. Commissioner Hersh felt cross-sections, hydrology, trees and landscaping are all important to any type of slope building. Driveway parameters are important to slope development. He disagreed with the comment that the existing ordinances are adequate to address this hillside issue. Responding to question by Commissioner Hersh, Mr. Grady said a lot of research was done on this issue, a lot of reference material was obtained from other cities, documents were cut and pasted to try to modify it to address local concerns and it was internally reviewed. Commissioner Hersh felt a refinement of this ordinance is necessary. Commissioner Grady said a letter had been received from Wells Fargo Bank in which they are suggesting that adoption of a restrictive ordinance not be embraced and that local ordinances already on the books be used. They also asked that they be advised of any further meetings or hearings so that they can participate in the workshop and contribute to the discussion of adoption of a Hillside Ordinance. Minutes, PC, 11/2/95 Page 4 Commissioner Brady stated he was in favor of considering this Hillside Ordinance in a committee setting. Responding to question by Commissioner Andrew, Mr. Fidler said sinkage in the northeast was caused by the soil and probably grading. Discussion continued regarding soil conditions in the northeast. Mr. LaRochelle cited changes in licensing of engineers, saying the basic law is that a person should only practice what they are capable of practicing. Responding to question by Chairman Andrew, Mr. Fidler gave conditions under which soils reports would be required. Discussion continued regarding erosion. Responding to question by Chairman Andrew, Mr. Fidler said Chapter 70 of the ordinance is not required to be adopted by State law, however it is something the city has adopted and follows. Mr. Grady said any slope can be engineered, however hillsides are a unique feature for this community and protections placed in an ordinance would regulate aesthetics. The Commission should decide if this is a unique feature the city would like to preserve and develop in a certain way. Commissioner Boyle stated he lives in the northeast and would support some type of ordinance. This will allow the opportunity to plan for the future in the northeast before development occurs. He noted an absence of the issue of aesthetics being addressed in this draft ordinance. He felt the possibility of protection of ridgelines also needs to be addressed. He felt there was an overwhelming amount of complexity with respect to the number of departments which must review projects. He was in favor of sending this ordinance to committee. Commissioner Ortiz said he lives in the northeast area. He cited some of the problems which exist with homes built on slopes and felt some type of direction for development needs to be provided. Commissioner Dhanens cited issues of the 2010 Plan, stating his agreement that many of the technical issues are covered in the Uniform Building Code, however felt the ordinance would be of great benefit with regard to aesthetics. He also felt the issue of ridgelines should be addressed in this ordinance and felt some issues were redundantly addressed in this ordinance. He agreed this ordinance should be dealt with in a committee setting. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Hersh that the chairman appoint members to a committee to consider issues surrounding development of hillsides and possibly drafting a hillside ordinance which would not necessarily be centered on discussion of the proposal before the commission at this hearing. Motion carried. Minutes, PC, 11/2/95 Page 5 Chairman Andrew asked Mr. Grady to check into whether an alternate commissioner can be appointed to committees. Chairman Andrew said he would like to appoint these members at the next meeting. COMMUNICATIONS A) Written None B) Verbal None 7. COMMISSION COMMENTS Responding to question by Commissioner Hersh, Mr. LaRochelle said there was a contamination in the area of realignment of Coffee Road. Mr. Grady said the CEQA documents would be reviewed for contents of this issue of contamination. Commissioner Hersh said he would like to see some future discussion of vegetation on large projects.. Commissioner Hersh expressed concern about the scheduling of the hearing on the EIR for the Marketplace shopping center being so close to the holidays. He asked if it was essential that the hearing be scheduled at this time. Mr. Hernandez, representative of City Attorney's Office said this is a matter of contract entered into by all parties involved and is binding. Commissioner Hersh felt it should be fully reviewed by everyone concerned. He was concerned about the perception by the public if this hearing is held close to the holidays. A. Committees Commissioner Boyle gave report on sign committee saying it would be placed on a future agenda for hearing. Responding to question by Commissioner Brady, Mr. Grady said a subdivision committee meeting would be held on November 14th. Commissioner Boyle gave a report on this committee saying it previously met and a schedule was adopted for additional meetings. Minutes, PC, 11/2/95 Page 6 8. DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THE NEXT PRE-MEETING. Mr. Grady suggested this pre-meeting be held. Chairman Andrew said this meeting would therefore not be cancelled. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Laurie Davis Recording Secretary STANLEY GRAD STANLEY_GRAD'~ Planning Director