HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/21/95MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Held Thursday, September 21, 1995, 5:30 p.m., City Council Chamber, City Hall, 1501
Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California.
At the request of Commissioner Andrew, Commissioner Delgado chaired this meeting.
1. ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS:
Present:-
JEFF ANDREW, Chairperson
DOUG DELGADO, Vice-Chairperson
STEPHEN BOYLE
MATHEW BRADY
KENNETH HERSH
WADE TAVORN
MICHAEL DHANENS Alternate
Absent:
ROBERT ORTIZ
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
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
Minutes, PC, 9/21/95
Page 2
4.1
a&b GPA 3-95, SEGMENT II AND ASSOCIATED REZONING #5655
Staff report recommending approval was given.
Commissioner Boyle stated that although he was not present at the Monday pre-
meeting he had listened to a copy of the tape and would participate at this
meeting.
Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition or in favor.
Public portion of the hearing was closed.
Responding to question by Commissioner Hersh, Mr. Grady said this application
was initiated because the Baker Street Plan has been rescinded. The property
was zoned commercial and there has been no commercial activity on it, therefore
it was felt it would be 'more appropriate to zone it for the current use. Under
current ordinance the non-owner occupied structures could not be rebuilt if they
were damaged beyond 50%. This proposed amendment would protect the
residential units.
Motion was made by Commissioner Boyle, seconded by Commissioner Hersh to
adopt resolution making findings, as set forth in the staff report, approving the
Negative Declaration and approving the proposed High Medium Density
Residential land use designation, and recommend same to City Council. Motion
carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Dhanens, Hersh, Tavorn,
Andrew, Delgado
NOES: None
Motion was made by Commissioner Boyle, seconded by Commissioner Hersh to
adopt resolution making findings, as set forth in the staff report, approving the
Negative Declaration and approving the proposed Limited Multiple Family
Dwelling zoning, and recommend same to City Council. Motion carried by the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Dhanens, Hersh, Tavorn,
Andrew, Delgado
NOES: None
Minutes, PC, 9/21/95
Page 3
4.2
a&b GPA 3-95, SEGMENT IV
Staff report recommending approval was given.
Public portion of the hearing was opened.
Rich O'Neil represented the Kern River Parkway Committee. He requested that
this request for amendment to the Kern River Plan and Parkway Plan be denied.
He cited their opposition to staging areas within the secondary floodplain because
of flooding, safety and security and negative environmental reasons. They wished
to evaluate sites immediately adjacent to and outside of the river which are under
the jurisdiction of the County. He stated their favor for linking the equestrian
trail system from the Rosedale Specific Plan to the Parkway and the River.
Marcy Cunningham represented Kern Equestrians for the Preservation of Trails.
She said she worked with the Planning Commission sub-committee to establish
trail sites. She said her organization is opposed to the use of the secondary
floodplain because of potential disturbance of the riparian habitat, inability of use
during flood years and expenses involved in repair, lack of safety due to it being
less visible, inconsistency with the intent of the Kern River Plan Element. She
felt the two sites recommended are ideal if they were outside the secondary
floodplain. She stated their agreement with the Enos Lane location for a future
staging area.
Public portion of the hearing was closed.
Responding to question by Commissioner Boyle, Mr. Grady gave an estimate of
6,000 acres of secondary floodplain throughout the length of the Kern River
Parkway. He said the water resources manager feels the site chosen for staging
area and parking is a good site even though it is in the secondary floodplain. At
Commissioner Boyle's request, Mr. LaRochelle explained the primary and
secondary floodplains to the Commission.
Commissioner Boyle said he understood concerns about building in the secondary
floodplain, however he has seen no evidence that the Mohawk location has ever
been flooded. This will encompass 1-2 acres out of roughly 6,000 acres therefore
he did not feel it was a degradation of the integrity of the Kern River Element.
Mohawk seems to be an appropriate place for the staging area since no others
will be on the north side of the river. He stated his support for the Mohawk and
Enos Lane locations.
Minutes, PC, 9/21/95
Page 4
Commissioner Hersh felt once something is placed in the floodplain the
precedence is broken and it will be done again and again. He said he would not
support this proposal until other viable areas are taken into consideration. He
asked if the open space along the river could be used for parking areas. Mr.
Grady said if these areas were annexed and were included in the Kern River Plan
Element they could be.
Mr. Grady responded to questions by Commissioner Brady indicating the city
could acquire land in 'the county for parking. Other parking exists in the
secondary floodplain such as the park along Truxtun, rest area north of what is
referred to as Lake Truxtun and portions of the bike path. Discussion continued
regarding sites in the secondary floodplain.
Responding to questions by Commissioner Brady, Mr. O'Neil said site #5 on
Enos Lane is least opposed by their organization because it is immediately
adjacent to Enos Lane and sits high in the floodplain. The opposition is that
other areas outside the floodplain have not been looked at. He stated opposition
to site # 1 and agreement that there is no access to the other 3 sites at this time.
Responding to question by Commissioner Brady, Mr. LaRochelle said
construction of Mohawk extension would probably begin in 1999. The staging
area could easily be addressed at this time, however the funding element would
have to be addressed.
Commissioner Dhanens felt additional sites could perhaps be looked at north of
the floodplain which could integrate more specifically with the Rosedale
circulation. He asked if any effort had been made to work with the County in
looking for sites to replace those in the floodplain. Mr. Grady said the KEPT
organization has contacted the county concerning this, however city staff has not.
Responding to question by Commissioner Dhanens, Mr. Hernandez said the
problem with acquiring additional land with the right-of-way is that if property
owners do not want to sell, it would have to be condemned which is something
the City Council does not like to do. Commissioner Dhanens said he would tend
to support the recommendation for site it's I and 5 because of their geographical
location.
Responding to question by Commissioner Andrew, Mr. Grady gave an estimate of
developing the staging area at $30,000. Commissioner Andrew felt the possibility
of flooding is minimal. He was concerned about the cost of having to acquire
additional land and was in favor of approving these sites.
Minutes, PC, 9/21/95
Page 5
Responding to question by Commissioner Delgado, Mr. Grady said there are no
sites available for consideration that are owned by the city. Other sites are not
probable.
Discussion continued regarding primary and secondary floodplains. Responding
to question by Commissioner Boyle, Mr. LaRochelle indicated if the river were to
flood into the staging area the equestrian trails would also be under water.
Commissioner Hersh stated he would be in favor of a continuance so that more
study can take place on this item.
Mr. Grady brought attention to a memorandum dated September 21, 1995
including a motion to be included relating to comments from Kern Mosquito and
Vector Control District. He asked that if the Commission were inclined to make
a motion for approval that the condition in the staff report pertaining to mosquito
abatement be deleted and Condition #'s ! and 2 be included.
Rob Cramer, City Parks Department, recommended that their comments on Page
8 of the staff report be incorporated. Responding to question by Commissioner
Dhanens, Mr. Cramer said the North Bakersfield Recreation and Parks District
would maintain the staging areas on the north side of the river.
Motion was made by Boyle, seconded by Commissioner Brady to adopt resolution
making findings, as set forth in staff report, approving the Negative Declaration
and approving a General Plan Amendment to the Kern River Plan Element and
an Amendment to the Kern River Parkway Plan by establishing two "staging"
areas along the Kern River, as shown on Exhibit "B," subject to the requirements
of the September 21, 1995 memorandum from the Planning Director regarding
mosquito abatement district, and inclusion of comments by the Parks Department
as shown on Page 8 of the staff report, and recommend same to City Council.
Motion carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Dhanens, Andrew, Delgado
NOES:
Commissioners Hersh, Tavorn
ABSENT: Commissioner Ortiz
Minutes, PC, 9/21/95 Page 6
5. PUBLIC HEARING - ADOPTION OF SPECIFIC TRAILS PLAN, ADDITION
TO MUNICIPAL CODE, CIRCULATION ELEMENT AMENDMENT, KERN
RIVER PLAN ELEMENT AMENDMENT
Staff report recommending approval was given.
Responding to request by Chairman Delgado, staff reviewed and responded to
letters received from the public. Regarding letter from the Rio Bravo Riding
Club concerning comments about liability, Mr. Hernandez, City Attorney said
there is no way to say whether or not the city would be held liable for injuries
sustained without the facts of each situation because there are other factors
involved. Regarding increased exposure to crime, Mr. Movius said crime would
probably increase as the area urbanizes, however there is no evidence that
implementation of this plan would increase crime in the area. Regarding the
Circulation Element map he said that it includes a class 1 designation along
Rancheria Road, Old Walker Pass Road and Alfred Harrell Highway which is an
upgrade of what would normally occur. He outlined the differences between
Class 1, 2 and 3 bikeways. Regarding road improvements he felt there is not a
conflict between the parking lot and where the horses are to be boarded.
Regarding the issue brought up by Mr. Nickel concerning the pedestrian access
trail being limited to pedestrian uses only, he said this is the restriction placed on
the parcel map by the City Council. Wording has been changed in the plan to
require that any improvements to fencing only accommodate pedestrian access.
He said staff would be amenable to a condition being placed on this site allowing
only pedestrian access. Regarding funding he said it has been clarified in the
plan that maintenance would be funded from the general fund for the parking lots
and so long as there are not a sufficient number of homes constructed to generate
the need for trails. Regarding security Mr. Movius said changes in location of
trails were made to address this issue. Staff feels the city is equipped to deal with
this issue. Regarding fencing and requirement for unobstructed public access
along the river, Mr. Movius said it is the responsibility for the developer to
accommodate access through fences. Regarding the issue of installation of trails
with relation to development, Mr. Movius said a restriction could be placed on
this item such that no trails could be activated until recordation of the first
residential subdivision in the area.
Public portion of the hearing was opened.
Suzanne Icardo represented a group of residents of the Rio Bravo area and
members of the Rio Bravo Riding Club. She addressed the issue of their
concerns of environmental impacts and assessments outlined in the letter which
Mr. Movius had previously addressed. She felt it was unfair that they be assessed
for something that they do not want. She said they support a paved bike lane on
either side of Highway 178 and a bike lane on either side of Alfred Harrell
Minutes, PC, 9/21/95
Page 7
Highway to connect to existing bike paths. She was concerned about liability
concerning the mixed uses of horses and people using the bike trail. She gave
information about vandalism and drug activity. She did not feel the city could
provide adequate protection for those using the trail. Regarding environmental
impacts she felt contrary to the report that there would be impacts to animal
habitat.
Jim Nickel stated his concurrence with designation of trail along the river to be
restricted to pedestrian access. Regarding maintenance he felt with the
modification to the trails plan it has been taken care of. He said a lot of
vandalism and trespassing occurs in this area. They have a full-time security
patrol. He said the fencing issue has been resolved. He also wanted
improvements to be outlined in written form so that it could not change in the
future. He stated his agreement with reserving land for trails, however he wanted
a restriction piaced on it so that it could not be used until the property is actually
subdivided.
Discussion continued regarding the percentage of development with relation to
activation of trails. Mr. Movius said a condition could be placed on this project
such that no trail could be activated outside an area subdivided for residential
uses, meaning if money were acquired for a trail it could be activated, however
anything outside that could not. The river access trail being activated early.
Philip Icardo, 6109 San Benito Court spoke. Responding to question by him, Mr.
Movius indicated the cost of maintenance in the staff report is a per year cost
which would be borne by those included in the maintenance district. Discussion
continued regarding the boundaries of the maintenance district. Mr. Icardo felt
this would benefit the larger population of the city especially when staging areas
are in place. The cost of this should be spread out over the general population.
Mr. Grady said a public hearing before the Council would be held to establish a
maintenance district or some other method of funding will be adopted. Mr.
Icardo felt an increase would occur with this trail. He stated he is opposed to the
trail plan as it exists.
Barbara Don Carlos represented the Building Industry Association. She asked if
the development fees would be subject to 100 percent of the Quimby Park
dedication requirements as well as park improvement impact fees. Mr. Movius
said they would unless an agreement is entered into for park credits for
something else they are developing in the area. Ms. Don Carlos said they would
then object to this. These trails are open space and recreational amenities. She
did not feel it was appropriate to levy a double expense for park and recreation
improvements in this area. She requested this be credited toward the park
improvements.
Minutes, PC, 9/21/95
Page 8
Marcy Cunningham represented the Kern Equestrians for the Preservation of
Trails. She said they feel this is progress. Experience with sharing of trails has
been positive and they have blended well with the wildlife in the area. He stated
agreement that there should be no trail development until the area is opened up
to housing. She stated their feeling that this trails system will be a benefit to any
subdivision.
Responding to a question by Commissioner Hersh, Ms. Cunningham said they
have realized that moving inland is more safe for the equestrians.
Rich O'Neil represented the Kern River Parkway Committee and Kern River
Bike Path Committee stating their agreement with the adoption of the proposed
plan with the public access trail remaining primitive. He asked that it also be
designed as pedestrian. He said they favored the parking lots for rescue purposes
and did not feel it was necessary to open those sites up until urbanization occurs.
He favored the bike path as defined as a class 1 along the Walker Basin Road
stating they would like to see it developed with TDA funds.
Harold Sprayberry, Southern Sierra Fat Tire Association, stated their favor for
the bike path. He said he had been working on a trail plan with the Forest
Service. This would tie into that plan.
Public portion of the hearing was closed.
*10-minute break was taken at this time.
Acting Chairman Delgado stated it had come to his attention that he has a
conflict of interest on this matter, therefore he excused himself from participating.
Chairman Andrew reconvened the meeting.
Chairman Andrew was concerned about the formation of an assessment district
since he felt the majority of those using the trail would be coming from outside
the area. He also felt the developer should receive some credit toward park
requirements. He said he would feel more comfortable looking at some of the
issues surrounding this trails plan a little longer before making a decision and
therefore would be in favor of a continuance.
Commissioner Brady did not feel mixing these uses is a good idea for safety
reasons. He stated his concern about the trails coming together at Alfred Harrell
and Old Walker Pass Road, asking how it is proposed to keep these different uses
from colliding and also getting them across Alfred Harrell Highway. Mr. Movius
explained the location saying it appears more complicated than it actually is.
Responding to question by Commissioner Brady, Mr. Movius said a City Council
Committee is looking into funding of this trails issue. Approval of this project
Minutes, PC, 9/21/95
Page 9
would state that the maintenance district mechanism would be the mechanism for
funding those trails that are away from the river. It would not fund maintenance
of the parking lot or river access trail. Commissioner Brady felt this would be
somewhat like having a park in the area and therefore he did not have such a
problem with trails being funded from a maintenance district because those living
there would reap more of the benefit. Responding to question by him, Mr.
Movius said it is set up at this time to allow credit if the parking lot is constructed
in association with a neighborhood park. However there is nothing in the plan to
allow for park credit if a standard trail is built. Council has given park credit for
enhanced trails. Discussion continued regarding park development fees.
Commissioner Brady said. he would be opposed to any language which would say
the developer would build the trails piece-meal or only when a particular phase of
development is constructed. Mr. Movius explained the finding that must be made
so that the trail would not ultimately lead nowhere. Commissioner Brady said he
would accept this language. He state his concerns regarding mixed uses, hOWever
stated he was not concerned about the possibility of increased crime from this use
because anytime more people are placed in an area crime will increase. The
trails will benefit the entire community and he therefore felt the entire community
should share in the cost.
Commissioner Hersh was concerned about who would pay for and maintain the
trails system. He felt if the public is going to use the trails system the entire
public should share in the cost. He agreed' with Ms. Don Carlos' comments
concerning double park improvements and felt it was something that needed to be
looked into more closely. He stated his concern about multi-uses on the trail.
He was also concerned about placing walls around large portions of trail.
Responding to question by him, Mr. Movius said the county is in the process of
constructing a portion of trail to the northwest. He told those present that if
these trails are not constructed something will be lost to the community. Mr.
Grady said staff had drafted language to address issues raised by Mr. Nickel.
Commissioner Tavorn agreed with the community concerning crime surrounding
parking areas. He felt cost of maintenance and overall effect to the community
needs to be taken into consideration. He felt additional review of this issue needs
to take place.
Responding to questions by Commissioner Dhanens, Mr. Movius said an effort
was ~nade to separate uses by using paved and unpaved trail. Commissioner
Dhanens felt the trails are a benefit to the community beyond this particular area.
He asked if there were a possibility of striking aspects of the plan which deal with
funding. Mr. Grady said maintenance assessment districts are the current method
of funding these types of facilities and should not be ignored when adopting this
plan. He agreed that the developer should not be required to double pay for
these facilities.
Minutes, PC, 9/21/95
Page 10
Responding to question by Commissioner Brady, Mr. Movius said he had no
problem with restricting horses on the trail along Old Walker Pass.
Commissioner Brady felt this was a good plan, however he still had a lot of
concerns, stating his support of a continuance on this item so that staff can review
and bring back options to concerns. He specified park dedication vs. the
dedication for trails issue and various funding proposals.
Mr. Grady gave language for proposed changes. He said it is not the
responsibility of the Commission to solve the maintenance district issue.
issue is being addressed by the City Council.
This
Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Dhanens
to continue these items to the regularly scheduled meetings of October 16, and
October 19, 1995. He requested that staff bring additional language back to the
Commission ahead of the meeting to allow time to consider them. Motion
carried.
6. COMMUNICATIONS
A) Written
None
B) Verbal
None
7. COMMISSION COMMENTS
Responding to Commissioner Boyle concerning a letter received from the
Southwest Community Action Committee regarding creation of an ordinance to
allow public approval of projects, Mr. Hernandez said the Mayor will be
addressing this issue.
A. Committees
Mr. Grady said a sign committee meeting would be held on September 27,
1995.
Commissioner Hersh felt the trails committee had done a good job on the
issue. It will be impossible to address all issues, therefore he felt the
commission should do the best job it can.
Minutes, PC, 9/21/95
Page 11
8. DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF
THE NEXT PRE-MEETING.
Mr. Grady said there are no items for the next meeting and would therefore be
canceled. Mr. Grady felt the commission would want a pre-meeting for the
meeting prior to October 19th meeting because of the amount of items on the
agenda. The pre-meeting of October 16, 1995 was not canceled.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Commission, meeting was
adjoul'ned at 8:40 p.m.
Laurie Davis
Recording Secretary
Planning Director