Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/03/94MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Held Thursday, August 3, 1995, 5:30 p.m., City Council Chamber, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California. 1. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: Present: STEPHEN BOYLE MATHEW BRADY KENNETH HERSH ROBERT ORTIZ WADE TAVORN MICHAEL DHANENS Alternate Absent: JEFF ANDREW, Chairperson DOUG DELGADO, Vice-Chairperson ADVISORY MEMBERS: Present: CARL HERNANDEZ, Assistant City Attorney JACK LaROCHELLE, Engineer IV DENNIS FIDLER, Building Director STAFF: Present: STANLEY GRADY, Planning Director JIM MOVIUS, 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, 8/3/95 Page 2 -4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Brady asked that the following change be made to the minutes of June 15, 1995. Page 7, last paragraph, second to last sentence be amended to read as follows: Commissioner Brady felt this staging area is being installed to benefit the entire community and he would be in favor of the city maintaining it. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Ortiz to approve minutes of the regular meeting held June 15, 1995. Motion carried. 5. PROPOSED AMENDING MAP FOR PARCEL MAP 10054 Commissioner Dhanens abstained because his firm has received income from the engineer within the last 12 months. Staff report recommending amendment of the parcel map was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition or in favor of the application. Dennis DeWalt represented the applicant stating his agreement with staff's recommendation. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Responding to question by Commissioner Boyle, Mr. LaRochelle said the deceleration lanes would be taken care of at the time of site plan review and would have to meet city standards. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Ortiz to adopt resolution amending final Parcel Map No. 10054 and make all findings set forth in the staff report and change Public Works Condition No. 21 to read as shown on Page 3 of the staff report with the requirement that the applicant file an amending map depicting said change. Motion carried. Commissioner Dhanens was absent. Minutes, PC, 8/3/95 Page 3 6. PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 10221 Staff report recommending approval was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition or in favor. Floyd Hinesley concurred with the findings of staff and modifications to recommendations. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Boyle, seconded by Commissioner Ortiz to adopt resolution approving and adopting the Negative Declaration, to make all findings set forth in the staff report and to approve Proposed Tentative Parcel Map 10221 subject to the conditions outlined in the Exhibit "A" and the memorandum of July 26, 1995. Motion carried. 7. PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT 5433 Staff report recommending approval was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in favor or opposition. Harold Robertson represented the applicant. He cited an updating memo from Public Works concerning Condition #'s I through 7. Regarding Condition #4 of the memo concerning construction of full half width of Akers Road, he asked that a statement be added allowing this to be tied to the city's construction of the improvements fronting on parcel 1. Regarding Condition #3 - requirement for 32 feet of paving on Berkshire Road he said this is entirely within Phase 4 of the development. He stated his client's feeling that these improvements are beneficial to property owners outside the development boundaries of this tract and would have no benefit to this tract until such time as phase 4 is constructed. Ben Ennis said he has the property in escrow. He said he has no problem with the conditions, however does have a problem with the timing. If Berkshire Road is required to be constructed before reaching subsequent phases it would make this situation economically unfeasible. Mr. LaRochelle said the condition is tied only to construction of Berkshire Road from the west boundary of the tract to Stine Road. The condition is not for those living outside this tract to obtain a faster route to Stine Road, but is for the lots within this tract because of the concern of outside traffic cutting through the tract. Discussion continued regarding the development of Berkshire Road. Mr. Ennis proposed that Berkshire Road be constructed as phases are constructed that front on Berkshire Road. Minutes, PC, 8/3/95 Page 4 Pat Valdez stated his concern about property values and possibility of a through street through Noella Road. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Mr. Grady clarified at Commissioner Boyle's request the ordinances under which the modification requests fall. Responding to questions by Commissioner Boyle, Mr. Grady said a park site at McKee and Akers exists for future park development. Responding to question by Commissioner Dhanens, Mr. LaRochelle said provisions are made for emergency access through the existing tract to the west. The construction of Berkshire would not have to be relied upon for emergency access. Mr. LaRochelle proposed wording to be added to the end of condition #4 to indicate that improvements would have to be bonded for or constructed within 90 days. Mr. Robertson concurred with this. Commissioner Brady stated he understood the financial concerns of the developer, however felt the need for consistent traffic flow. Mr. LaRochelle said with the addition of Ridgeview High School and the fact that Hosking to the south does not go through, the only access points are McKee and Panama Lane. Therefore the area is somewhat restricted from traffic. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Boyle to adopt resolution approving and adopting the Negative Declaration, to make all findings set forth in the staff report, and to approve Proposed Tentative Tract 5433 subject to the conditions outlined in the Exhibit "A," and addition of the August 3, 1995 memo from the Public Works Department with the following addition to Condition #4 of this memo: Addition of the following language at the end of the condition: , if the City of Bakersfield completes the proposed improvements to Akers Road at the Arvin-Edison crossing or within 90 days of that completion. Motion carried. Minutes, PC, 8/3/95 Page 5 8. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDING - DISPOSAL OF EXCESS ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR THE SOUTH SIDE OF STOCKDALE HIGHWAY BETWEEN OLD RIVER ROAD AND CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY Commissioner Dhanens abstained because his firm has received income from the applicant within the last 12 months. Staff report recommending approval was given. Responding to question by Commissioner Hersh, Mr. LaRochelle said plans are being reviewed for improvement of Stockdale Highway which show a deceleration lane and proposed access across the canal to this property. Motion was made by Commissioner Boyle, seconded by Commissioner Ortiz pursuant to Government Code Section 65402 to find the vacation of excess road right-of-way for Stockdale Highway between Old River Road and California State University Bakersfield consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan subject to the condition that an adequate easement be reserved for all existing public utilities in the vacating area. Motion carried. Commissioner Dhanens was absent. o 10. COMMUNICATIONS A) Written None B) Verbal None COMMISSION COMMENTS Regarding Tentative Tract 5433 Commissioner Boyle said after looking at the detailed map he was aware that the other two lots would not have come under the 5% rule because the change was more than that. He was concerned that using both ordinances would set a precedent, however now understands the reasoning behind it. Minutes, PC, 8/3/95 Page 6 Commissioner Tavorn said he has noticed in past meetings that information has been changed at meetings by urging of the applicants. He cited a proposal at a previous meeting which was literally rewritten at the podium. He felt this practice is very confusing and recommended that the commission decide on a set number of changes it will allow before requiring that the item be continued. Commissioner Hersh said this question has been posed in the past. While the commission wishes to accommodate applicants and the public the philosophy has been that if a minimum number of minor modifications not requiring a large amount of additional study are requested, those can be accommodated. However when there have been more than one or two and they are major changes to a complex proposal it has been the policy to send it back to staff for further study. He suggested this same practice be maintained. Commissioner Brady was concerned about setting a hard and fast rule because he did not want to stymie public input. Commissioner Dhanens suggested the chair encourage applicants to propose condition changes in writing themselves. Mr. Grady said. the applicant already receives information stating they are to make the effort to work out conditions prior to coming before the commission; they receive their information two weeks prior to the hearing. Commissioner Hersh said if he does not' have the information or time to make a rational decision he will request a continuance. Commissioner Boyle asked if it could be communicated to developers that if problems are not worked out prior to the hearing it is strongly recommended they bring language for the commission supporting their requested change. Mr. Grady felt going through these proposed changes at.the public hearing could be very time consuming and confusing. Commissioner Tavorn felt the commission needs to let the public know what the standards are. He felt the signal being conveyed by the commission is not clear. The applicant has two weeks in which to request changes and asking for numerous modifications at the hearing is placing the commission in a bad spot. He felt bad situations could develop by allowing this practice to continue and was concerned about the public perception. Minutes, PC, 8/3/95 Page 7 Commissioner Brady felt if decisions were set in stone there would be no need for a public hearing. The reason for hearings is to allow for involvement from everyone; therefore everything is subject to change. Mr. LaRochelle cited a situation at the previous meeting in which an applicant took a large amount of time propsoing changes, saying if this were to happen in the future he would recommend to the commission that they continue an item. Commissioner Hersh agreed with Commissioner Tavorn's comments regarding the confusion brought about by an enormous amount of changes. At the request of Commissioner Boyle, Commissioner Hersh gave information concerning a Development Opportunities for Existing Areas seminar he attended concerning rejuvenation of developed areas. He gave an example of cities which are using a great deal of landscaping, placing businesses on bottom floors of buildings, with offices, condos, town houses or apartments on the next floors. The business have little or no failure because they have built up a residency which supports them. A. Committees 11. Responding to question by Commissioner Hersh, Mr. Grady said a Commission workshop would be held at a future meeting concerning proposed sign ordinance changes. DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THE NEXT PRE-MEETING. 12. Responding to question by Commissioner Brady, Mr. Grady said a MondaY pre-meeting would be held for the first meeting in September. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, meeting was adjourned at 6:35 p.m. Laurie Davis Recording Secretary Planning Director