Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/16/95MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Held Thursday, February 16, 1995, 5:30 p.m., City Council Chamber, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California. 1. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: Present: JEFF ANDREW, Chairperson' DOUG DELGADO, Vice-Chairperson STEPHEN BOYLE JIM MARINO ROBERT ORTIZ Absent: MATHEW BRADY KENNETH HERSH DARREN POWERS, Alternate ADVISORY MEMBERS: Present: LAURA MARINO, Assistant City Attorney JACK LaROCHELLE, Engineer IV DENNIS FIDLER, Building Director STAFF: Present: STANLEY GRADY, Planning Director JENNIE ENG, Associate 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 Chairman Andrew stated that although he was not present at the Monday meeting he had listened to the tape and would be participating on items at this hearing. Minutes, PC, 2/16/95 Page 2 4. PUBLIC HEARING - ZONE CHANGE #5613 Staff report recommending approval was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened. Deyane Leiby, President of the Westwind Homeowners Association represented 124 condominium owners and submitted copies of a map of the area to the commission. He outlined problems of the neighborhood being continual trespassing, vandalism, parking problems, drug trafficking, noise and traffic. He contended that noise and lighting issues had not been addressed for this project. Ken Kind represented the applicant. He submitted a letter signed by property owners immediately adjacent to the project on Canter Way. He did not know how this project could affect any of Mr. Leiby's complaints, saying he felt the issues are problems which already exist. Regarding the backup of traffic on Ming, he said this project would significantly expand the entrance into the Taco Bell and Copelands's site, with the entire intersection being resignalized and a deceleration lane put. in place. The applicant accepted all recommendations except condition #1, regarding a 48-foot setback on the south side. He asked that it be reduced to a 45-foot setback. He said in speaking with staff they were in concurrence. Mr. Grady stated agreement with this. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Responding' to question by Commissioner Boyle, Tom Teagarden said signatures were from owners of income properties. Mr. Grady responded to a comment by Commissioner Marino saying the reason for the 48-foot setback is because a massive building will be adjacent to' and in close proximity to residential property. Mr. Grady responded to previous statements made by Mr. Leiby. Regarding the lack of a condition addressing lighting, he said Condition #12 addresses the lighting issue. Regarding noise he said the noise referred to is existing and will not be intensified as a result of this project, which is why no conditions were added to address the noise issue. Responding to question by Chairman Andrew, Mr. Antonino said the hours of operation would be Monday through Friday from 10:00 a.m.to 9:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Chairman Andrew said concerning Mr. Leiby's concerns that he felt the concerns are created by the high school. Minutes, PC, 2/16/95 Page 3 Lynda DeBrum said she had lived in this complex since 1977. She felt this project would create an area where people could congregate causing more noise problems. Commissioner Marino said he had spoken with the applicant regarding the sign situation which has been resolved. This property is already designated commercial on the general plan and the commission has been adamant about requiring a PCD plan so that the city can control the development. He felt out of all commercial uses which can be developed for this site this would be the less intense type. Motion was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Delgado to adopt resolution making findings as set forth in staff report and approving the Negative Declaration, and approving Zone Change No. 5613, subject to the conditions of approval on Exhibit "A," and recommend same to City Council, with . the addition of February 3, 1995 memo and changes and additions of conditions outlined in the February 14, 1995 memo from the Planning Director with the following change: Condition #5 amended to reflect 45-foot building setback. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Boyle, Delgado, Marino, Ortiz, Andrew NOES: None 5. PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 15.80 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING TECHNICAL CLARIFICATIONS TO PARK LAND REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS INCLUDING IMPLEMENTATION OF UNIFORM STANDARDS FOR APPRAISAL REPORTING AND DELETION OF OBSOLETE TEXT. Staff report recommending adoption of ordinance amendments was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened. Barbara Don Carlos asked that the commission review the portion of the ordinance amendment which will not allow any credit for private park and recreation facilities that are part of a PUD or optional design subdivision. She cited the Quimby portion of the Subdivision Map Act which specifies that the commission is creating the ]and dedication or in-lieu fee to provide land for neighborhood or community parks to serve the subdivision. In regard to staff's Minutes, PC, 2/16/95 Page 4 comment that there may be an opportunity for a 20 percent credit, they felt this would be a minimum. Regarding private facilities she said this would have to be subject to interpretation. She asked that a credit be allowed for these types of optional and PUD subdivisions or allowing it to be at the discretionary of the advisory agency as to the amount of credit given. Responding to Ms. Don Carlos comments concerning the possibility of a credit, Mr. Grady said if there is a desire to address this issue at a later date staff would be agreeable to having it removed from the ordinance and dealt with at a later date. He said it was staff's feeling that developments have a responsibility to provide public park space and the option to provide private to space as a marketing tool is an individual decision. Approvals under which this is generally occurs are those that require this type of amenity such as in the optional design subdivision. It was felt they would be getting credit twice. Responding to question by Commissioner Delgado, Mr. Grady said there could be instances in which a developer would want to include a private park in a development which is not an optional design subdivision. Commissioner Delgado concurred with staff's opinion regarding the double credit issue. Optional design subdivisions typically contain smaller lots, gated entrances with part of the small lot subdivision being the inclusion of some open space and park area. When there is a situation in which open space is not part of a special project there may be a circumstance where this could be rewritten to allow some type of credit. Mr. Grady said if it is recreational area which is provided and not part of development which is not required credit is given. If building a gated community and providing a private park credit is given at seven-tenths of an acre. He clarified Ms. Don Carlos issue being that developers developing standard subdivisions and providing private open space the same as those developing under an optional design or small lot subdivisions where open space is the reason for requesting deviations from standards. Commissioner Marino felt the proposed ordinance treats those developers who choose to build private parks unfairly. On the other hand he felt since the park is private full credit should not be given. He was in favor of these developers not being given more than 50 percent credit. Mr. Grady said Mr. Marino is proposing to allow more credit than what is allowed at this time. He suggested this portion be taken out for further consideration and discussion regarding the impact of this proposal. Minutes, PC, 2/16/95 Page 5 Ms. Marino clarified Subsection A allows only seven-tenths of an acre to private parks in other areas and more credit would be given to optional design subdivisions if credit were increased to 50 percent as proposed by Commissioner Marino. She said if Subsection C were eliminated it would revert back to private parks being given seven-tenths of an acre as all other private parks in the city. She felt it was inconsistent to give more credit for optional design subdivisions. Commissioner Marino said he has always felt seven-tenths of an acre was low. Commissioner Boyle said he would be concerned about changing the standard at this hearing with little discussion. He said he would be in favor of deletion of Subparagraph C or amendment to make it the same as Section 15.80.120A. making the credit seven-tenths of an acre. Concerning a question regarding determination of fair market value when the city has already acquired the land, Ms. Marino said the developer would purchase park land property from the city at the rate in which the city purchased it. Commissioner Delgado agreed with striking Subparagraph C or changing it to concur with the seven-tenths of an acre credit, and future discussion of this issue. Motion was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Boyle to adopt resolution-making findings as set forth in staff report, and adopting and approving the ordinance amendments as proposed, and recommend same to City Council, with the following amendments: Section 15.80.120 A. - Delete the following wording from the last sentence "subject to the provisions of Section 15.80.120(C):. Section 15.80.120C. shall be deleted. The issue of credit to be sent to committee with the make-up of the committee at the discretion of the chairman. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Boyle, Delgado, Marino, Ortiz, Andrew NOES: None Responding to comments by Mr. Grady, Commissioner Andrew referred this item to the standing Subdivision and Public Services Committee. Minutes, PC, 2/16/95 Page 6 6. COMMUNICATIONS A) Written None B) Verbal Mr. Grady informed the Commission of the February 22nd deadline for reservations for the Planning Institute. Per Commissioner Marino's request he said that information had been provided regarding general plan amendment cases to be heard in March. 7. COMMISSION COMMENTS A. Committees Discussion took place regarding rescheduling of Trails Committee meeting which was not held previously due to the lack of commissioners present. It was decided that it would be rescheduled to February 21,' 1995 and noticed as a special meeting. Chairman Andrew reminded those present of the sign committee meeting the following Wednesday. 8. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, meeting was adjourned at 6:27 p.m. Laurie Davis Recording Secretary STANLEY GRADY, Planning Director