Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/15/94MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Held Thursday, December 15, 1994, 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 MATHEW BRADY KENNETH HERSH JIM MARINO ROBERT ORTIZ Absent: DARREN POWERS, Alternate ADVISORY MEMBERS: Present: LAURA MARINO, Assistant City Attorney JACK LaROCHELLE, Engineer IX/ JACK LEONARD, Assistant Building Director STAFF: Present: JACK HARDISTY, Planning Director MARC GAUTHIER, Principal Planner LAURIE DAVIS, Recording Secretary 2. PUBLIC STATEMENTS Steve Hartsell spoke representing the Kern High School District and Rosedale Union School District regarding agenda item #'s 5.2 and 5.3. He said the districts have concerns regarding the impacts of these projects. He said they have met with the representatives of the developer and felt an agreement would be reached before the matters are back before the Commission, as a continuance is requested. Regarding agenda item #5.2a) and b) he said they have met with representatives of Castle & Cooke and have worked out a condition to be included in the event of approval. Both districts are in agreement and a more formal agreement would be entered into in the future. He provided a copy of a letter of consent to these conditions to staff. He said he assumed the developer would also sign this agreement. Minutes, PC, 12/15/94 Page 2 Chairman read the notice of right to appeal as set forth on the agenda. Commissioner Delgado stated he was absent at the Monday meeting, however had listened to the tape and would be participating at this hearing. 3. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Agenda Item #4. - Final Development Plans for UA Theater at East Hills Mall. Motion was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Hersh to approve consent agenda. Motion carried. Commissioners Boyle and Brady were absent. 4. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR UA THEATER AT EAST HILLS 5.1 a&b MALL Approved as consent agenda item. PUBLIC HEARINGS - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 4-94, SEGMENT II AND ZONE CHANGE #5568 Chairman Andrew abstained on these items because he was involved in the sale of land to the property owner. He turned the chair over to Commissioner Delgado. Mr. Hardisty said a letter had been received requesting continuance of these items. Staff report recommending disapproval was updated from the Monday meeting. Public portion of the hearing was opened. Nile Kenny represented Kern Schools Federal Credit Union stated he would make comments at the continued hearing if this is in fact what occurs. Motion was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Ortiz to continue these items to the next General Plan Amendment Cycle. Motion carried. Commissioner Andrew was absent. Minutes, PC, 12/15/94 Page 3 5.2 a&b PUBLIC HEARINGS ~ GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 4-94, SEGMENT III AND ZONE CHANGE #5599 Commissioner Andrew abstained on these items because he lives in the area. He turned the chair over to Commissioner Delgado. Staff report recommending approval was updated from the Monday meeting. Commissioner Delgado clarified a notice was submitted to the public concerning the consideration of 12,000 square foot lots, however the Commission is considering 14,000 square foot lots. Mr. Gauthier stated there are other significant differences in the current request before the Commission and what was actually noticed to the public. Public portion of the hearing was opened. Pam Gavin, property owner on Greenhaven Street, said an informational meeting with the developers had been conducted at her home. She said at that time the concensus of the group was that if certain conditions such as lot size were imposed they would not oppose the zone change. Steve Ratty, resident of Birchhaven, said his back fence abuts subject property line. He was concerned about the possibility of overlook from this development. Mr. Hardisty said there is no restriction for two-story homes when built on 12,000 to 18,000 square foot lots, Responding to questions by Mr. Ratty, Mr. Hardisty said staff recommends approval of this request in accordance with conditions agreed upon by the neighbors at their meeting. If these are not to be followed staff would recommend denial based on commitment to maintain the size of lots as outlined in the general plan. Richard Burritt, resident of Brimhall Estates, said he was not included in the neighborhood meeting previously mentioned, therefore had no input into decisions which were made at that time. He said when he purchased property he understood the entire development would be 18,000 square feet. He felt a commitment was made to those purchasing in the first development and that no reason had been given for the request for change. Impacts are placed upon traffic, schools, water usage, which he felt should be of concern to the Commission. He stated objection to gating of the community because problems would be directed to unsecured portions of the neighborhood. He asked the Commission to deny the request based on the commitment of those previously purchasing in the area. Minutes, PC, 12/15/94 Page 4 Richard Pellerin, resident of Old Town Road, stated concerns with traffic. He said he did not recall any concensus of favor for this project being made at the previously mentioned neighborhood meeting. He submitted a petition signed by. 44 property owners in the area asking that the lot size be maintained at the 18,000 square foot size. King Vaughn, 1610 Greenhaven Street, asked what would be the size of homes on the lots. Mr. Hardisty said this is up to the developer to determine and this information has not been indicated. Mr. Vaughn was concerned about reduction in property values. Responding to question by Commissioner Marino, Ms. Gavin said their neighborhood meeting was primarily informational and those present wanted to see specifics regarding the size, number of lots, possibility of a gated community and contents of the C.C.&R.'s. She felt that those present wanted to convey the message that if this were approved it would not be downsized to less than 14,000 square feet and that it stays as a gated community. Sheila Plane stated she is a resident of April Anne Street, and is opposed to the downsizing of lots due to issues of traffic, noise and density. Responding to question by Commissioner Brady, Ms. Plane said her lot is 24,000 square feet. Roger Mclntosh represented the applicant. He gave history on this proposal. He said the majority of the. neighbors were in agreement with this proposal with conditions in the staff report placing restrictions on design of a subsequent subdivision map. This area has been previously approved for a total of 74, 18,000 square foot lots and an additional 19 lots within the school area. He said staff is recommending a condition restricting the 14,000 square foot lots in a gated community as proposed by the applicant. He felt the two-story issue is a non- issue because two-story homes are allowed adjacent to other residential homes. Regarding the increase in density the existing plan allows 93 versus 106 with subject plan. They are attempting to create a secure neighborhood with the addition of security gates. He requested a copy of the previously submitted petition. He stated a concern that if the general plan amendment is approved, the conditions of approval not apply to the already approved tentative tract map. He submitted a condition of approval which reads as follows: "Conditions 1 through 6 shall not apply to tentative tract 5489 approved May 2, 1991 or a subsequent tract submitted to subdivide the area shown as a school site on said- tract." He said if this condition were incorporated they would not object to conditions proposed by staff. Minutes, PC, 12/15/94 Page 5 Randy Wheeler, Castle & Cooke, said the average size lot in this proposed development is 17,000 square feet, with the smallest lot being 14,000 square feet. He said they intend to place in the C.C.&R.'s that the smallest size home for this subdivision could not be less than 2,500 square feet. He felt this tract would be a benefit to the Greenhaven tract, blocking off Greenhaven Avenue thereby lessening the traffic going through it. He noted that the existing approved tract has already been approved and can be constructed, which does not contain the agreements to conditions as this tract does. Responding to question by Chairman Delgado, Mr. Hardisty had no objection to placing condition #10 on this approval as requested by Mr. McIntosh. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Brady noticed most of those signing the petition have 24,000 square foot lots. He felt gated communities are an advantage to a neighborhood. He did not feel this development, with conditions agreed upon, would have a negative effect on the neighborhood. Mr. McIntosh proposed a tier of 18,000 square foot lots on the north side and was in agreement with this being made a condition of approval. Steve Ratty said he would be agreeable to this project if the condition stated above by Mr. McIntosh were imposed. Commissioner Marino felt the proposal is better than the alternative. Regarding the overlook problem, building two-story units is something that can be done with the existing approved tract. Responding to question by Commissioner Hersh, Mr. McIntosh stated his agreement with 18,000 square foot lots along the north side. Commissioner Hersh said higher density means greater traffic also saying proportionality between structure and lot size would solve a great number of problems. He stated he would not support the reduction in lot size because of the continuing claims that existing residents were told that the integrity of the area would be maintained. Responding to question by Commissioner Boyle, Mr Mclntosh said no representations of lot size were made to surrounding property owners at the time of hearing on the approved tract. The applicant requested to change the general plan from ER to SR with the lot size being 12,500 square feet. Some of the neighbors protested at that hearing prompting staff to recommend an 18,000 square foot minimum and he agreed to this condition. The market has changed which has prompted this request. Minutes, PC, 12/15/94 Page 6 Responding to question by Commissioner Boyle regarding the possibility of the widening of Brimhall between Old Farm Road and Coffee Road, Mr. LaRochelle said staff is in the process of working through an assessment district for this improvement. Mr..McIntosh gave information concerning this improvement. Mr. LaRochelle said at this time Brimhall Road is operating fairly well. Ms. Marino responded to question by Commissioner Boyle saying no additional specific findings need to be made, however evidence must be on the record to support existing findings. Commissioner Boyle stated his reservations that he did not feel evidence existed to support the finding that this request is consistent with the 2010 General Plan or surrounding land use. He did not feel further reduction in lot size should be made unless there is some real documentation of a change in circumstances or definite need. Richard Pellerin felt there was a concensus at the neighborhood meeting in opposition to this.request. Commissioner Marino felt this project would be a benefit to the community. Motion was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Brady to adopt resolution making findings as set forth in the staff report approving the Negative Declaration and approving the requested change from Suburban Residential - 18,000 square foot lot size to Suburban Residential - 14,000 square foot minimum lot size, subject to the conditions included in Exhibit "A," and recommend same to City Council, with the inclusion of Condition #10 proposed by the developer, outlined as follows:' Conditions 1-6 shall not apply to Tentative Tract 5489 approved May 2, 1991 or a subsequent tract submitted to subdivide the area shown as a schoOl site on said tract. Motion failed to carry by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Brady, Delgado, Marino NOES: Commissioners Boyle, Hersh, Ortiz ABSENT: Commissioners AndreTM, Powers Minutes, PC, 12/15/94 Page 7 Motion was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Brady to adopt resolution making findings as set forth in the staff report approving the Negative Declaration and: approving the requested change from One Family Dwelling - 18,000 square foot minimum lot size to Estate - 14,000 square foot minimum lot size, subject to the conditions included in Exhibi~ "A," and recommend same to City Council. Motion failed to carry by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Brady, Delgado, Marino NOES: Commissioners Boyle, Hersh, Ortiz ABSENT: Commissioners Andrew, Powers 5.3 a,b,c PUBLIC HEARINGS - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 4-94, SEGMENT IV, KERN RIVER FREEWAY SPECIFIC PLAN LINE AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE #5603 Commissioner Andrew abstained on these items because the property line to be subdivided is within 300 feet of the street on which he lives. He turned the chair over to Vice-Chairman Delgado. Mr. Gauthier added to staff report at the Monday meeting outlining correspondence which was received. pUblic portion of the hearing was opened. Carolyn Belli represented Kern Equestrians for Preservation of Trails. She said assurances had been given in the past by developers that trails would be included in subject area upon development, however there is nothing that shows this. The development is not consistent with the subdivision map act because reasonable, safe public access is not provided along the river. This project is not consistent with the Kern River Parkway Plan adopted by the city. She stated their concern about future trail connections between the Western Rosedale Specific Plan and the Kern River Parkway Plan along the Goose Lake Slough and Allen Road. She stated their feelings that trails must be planned for and provided at the beginning phases of land development. She requested that this item be referred back to the Planning Department and Trails Technical Advisory Committee to address the concerns and include the development in the Kern River Specific Trails Plan. Roger McIntosh represented the property owner. He asked that this item be continued to the January 5, 1995 meeting rather than the March General Plan cycle. Minutes, PC, 12/15/94 Page 8 Responding to question by Commissioner Brady, Mr. LaRochelle said it would be very difficult for public works staff to address the concerns by the January 5, 1995 meeting because items raised are not of a minor nature. Mr. Walker said he would not have time to adequately address traffic issues. Mr. Mclntosh said they have been working with CalTrans and felt concerns could be worked out within a two-week period. Commissioner Brady felt if staff cannot resolve concerns before the meeting in January there would not be sufficient time for the Commission to adequately review this item.. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Hersh to continue these items to the next General Plan Amendment Cycle, with a trails committee set to look at the trails issue surrounding this area. Motion carried. Ms. Marino clarified trails in general could be discdssed at the committee meeting, however this particular application could not be discussed. Mr. Hardisty said a provision in the Brown Act precludes the commission from splitting a hearing. Responding to question by Commissioner Boyle, Mr. Hardisty said the committee could lOok at the Kern River Specific Trails Plan from Allen Road east. Chairman Delgado appointed Commissioners Marino, Boyle and Ortiz to the Trails committee. 5.4 *5-minute break was taken at this time. PUBLIC HEARINGS - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 4-94, SEGMENT V Commissioner Marino abstained due to a potential conflict of interest in that he is ten percent owner of property in the downtown area. Update to staff report was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition or in favor. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Minutes} PC, 12/15/94 Page 9 Motion was made by Commissioner Hersh, seconded by Commissioner Delgado to adopt resolution making findings as set forth in the staff report approving the Negative Declaration, and approving the amendment of the Land Use Element map of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General plan from Major Commercial, General Commercial, Office Commercial, Downtown Mixed Use Categories D3, D4 and D5 and Public Facilities to Mixed Use Commercial; and from Downtown Mixed Use categories D2 and D3 to Office Commercial and General Commercial, as shown on Revised Exhibit "B." Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Delgado, Hersh, Ortiz, Andrew NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Marino, Powers Motion was made by Commissioner Hersh, seconded by Commissioner Delgado to approve the amendments to the Land Use Element text of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, including deletion of the Downtown Mixed Use categories D1, D2, D3, D4 and D5 land use designations and text descriptions, as shown on Exhibit "C.' Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES:' Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Delgado, Hersh, Ortiz, Andrew NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Marino, Powers Motion was made by Commissioner Hersh, seconded by Commissioner Delgado to approve rescission of the existing Redevelopment Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, and renumbering the remaining existing chapters of the General Plan text. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Delgado, Hersh, Ortiz, Andrew NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Marino, Powers Minutes, PC, 12/15/94 Page 10 5.5 PUBLIC HEARINGS - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 4-94, SEGMENT VI Mr. Gauthier stated staff had received no calls or comments regarding this request and he had no further information to add to the staff report. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition or in favor. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Delgado to adopt resolution making findings as set forth in the staff report approving the Negative Declaration and approving the requested Light Industrial land use designation, and recommend same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Delgado, Hersh, Marino, Ortiz, Andrew NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Powers 5.6 PUBLIC HEARINGS - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 4-94, SEGMENT VII Nothing was added to the previous staff report. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in favor or opposition. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Marino to adopt resolution making findings as set forth in staff report recommending approval of the Negative Declaration as set forth on Exhibit "A," approval of the rescission of the Baker Street Specific Plan and recommend same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Delgado, Hersh, Marino, Ortiz, Andrew NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Powers Minutes, PC, 12/15/94 Page 11 5.7 PUBLIC HEARINGS - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 4-94, SEGMENT VIII Commissioners Brady and Boyle abstained on these items because a client of their law firm owns property in the vicinity. Mr. LaRochelle responded to previous comment regarding alternate alignments being taken off the map saying when it was determined what the grade of the road would be with these alternates they were determined to be unfeasible. Public portion of the hearing was opened. Don Galey, 3408 Panorama Drive, said every map he has seen in the past showed the proposed Morning Drive extension would run through his property between Paladino and Morning Drive. He did not feel the current alignment shown would be feasible and hoped that the committee would research this further. Mr. LaRochelle said the old Morning Drive alignment cannot physically be connected to the existing interchange because of changes to the location of the interchange. Mr. Galey said there is basically no difference at this time to what existed in the past except that his property was excluded. Mr. LaRochelle clarified an alignment was chosen from a prepared study. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Responding to question by Commissioner Marino, Mr. Galey said he purchased this property for investment. Mr. LaRochelle explained the portion of roadway that does not line up to the Morning Drive, 178 intersection. Commissioner Marino asked about bringing the alignment back as quickly as possible at the corner north of Thorner School. Mr. LaRochelle explained a tentative tract map at the northwest corner of Paladino and Morning Drive precipitated this alignment. Bob Engel spoke saying the original plan showed the alignment through Mr. Galey's property. Motion was made by Commissioner Marino, seconded by Commissioner Delgado to continue these items to the meetings of January 3, and January 5, 1995 asking staff to present the Commission with a preliminary alternative alignment option which crosses through Mr. Galey's property returning back to the section line south of Paladino if possible. Motion carried. Minutes, PC, 12/15/94 Page 12 6. COMMUNICATIONS A) Written Mr. Hardisty said an article from "Zoning News" was included in the packets of the Commission regarding planning for open space and developments. B) Verbal Mr. Hardisty said at the Council meeting the previous evening Mr. Grady's reclassification to Planning Director was approved. He also stated the Council had approved the classifications for Code Enforcement Officers saying it related to maintenance of abandoned buildings in the city. 7. COMMISSION COMMENTS A. Committees Sign Committee -- Off-site residential directional kiosk Signs - update and Commission direction. Chairman Andrew summarized committee report. He said the committee is looking toward a kiosk program which would replace the existing off-site signage with existing signs to be phased out within 90-180 days. He asked for direction from the commission on this issue. Commissioner Boyle clarified by changing to the kiosk sign program builders would be allowed to have signage much further away from subdivisions. It is contemplated that the plan would be administered by the BIA in conjunction with staff with respect to design and location. He said the committee was in favor of alternative #1. Responding to questions by Commissioner Delgado, Chair'man Andrew said those jurisdictions that have been contacted regarding their kiosk programs, have done well. Commissioner Hersh felt the building community seemed divided on this issue. Chairman Andrew felt most attending the committee meetings have been more in favor of the kiosk program in addition to what currently exists. Commissioner Hersh suggested that this item be continued to a future meeting in order to give the commission time to further study it. Minutes, PC, 12/15/94 Page 13 Commissioner Brady was concerned that a sign program be made uniform so that those developing within the city were not at a disadvantage to those in the county. He was in favor of the committee contacting the county regarding joint development of this kiosk program. Commissioner Boyle said this was discussed early on and the committee was advised by staff that a comprehensive program would probably not work. He felt once a proposal was available the county could be approached. He did not feel builders within the city would be at a disadvantage, but would be placed at an advantage because the program would allow advertising closer to the major arterials. Commissioner Brady said unless the county had such a program in the metro area he would be against this sign program. Mr. Hardisty felt the county would not be inclined to allow a kiosk in their right-of-way. Motion was made by Commissioner Boyle, seconded by Commissioner Hersh to continue this item to the next regularly scheduled meeting. Motion carried. 8. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, meeting was adjourned at 8:11 p.m. Laurie Davis Recording Secretary