HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/05/96MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Held Thursday, December 5, 1996, 5:30 p.m., City Council Chamber, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun
Avenue, Bakersfield, California.
COMMISSIONERS:
Present:
KENNETH HERSH,. Chairperson
DOUG DELGADO, Vice-Chairperson
MATHEW BRADY
ROBERT ORTIZ
WADE TAVORN
JEFFREY TI<AC
MICHAEL DHANENS
Absent:
STEPHEN BOYLE
ADVISORY MEMBERS:
Present:
LAURA MARINO, Assistant City Attorney
JACK LaROCHELLE, Engineer IV
DENNIS FIDLER, Building Director
STAFF: Present:
STANLEY GRADY, Planning Director
JIM MOVIUS, Principal Planner
MARC GAUTHIER, Principal Planner
LAURIE DAVIS, Recording Secretary
2. 'PUBLIC STATEMENTS
Jim Delmarter spoke concerning consent agenda items, stating his feeling that public
statements should be held at the end of the meeting.
Chairman read the notice of right to appeal as set forth on the agenda.
3. CONSEHT A~MS
None
Minutes, PC, 12/5/96
Page 2
4.1 - T T 58_¢8
Staff report recommending approval was given.
Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in favor or opposition.
Roger Mclntosh represented the property owner. He stated concurrence with conditions
of the staff report and memo dated December 3, 1996.
Jean Roberson spoke in favor of this request. She stated she is a resident on LaCroix
Which is a street that would most 'be affected by this proposal. She stated she and
several neighbors indicate their agreement with this plan. She cited the amount of multi-
family housing that is in the area and felt single family housing would be more suitable.
She asked about the possibility of two-story homes being built abutting their lots. '
Public portion of the hearing was closed.
Commissioner Delgado asked about the possibility of two-story homes being
constructed. Mr. Mclntosh stated at this time there are no building plans. The lots
would be sold to a builder who would comply with the height requirements allowed in the
R-2 zone. He stated he would pass this concern on to the applicant.
Concerning conditions of the Staff report which address how the pipeline traversing
through some of the affected lots is going to be treated, Commissioner Dhanens asked
for clarification. Mr. LaRochelle said the pipeline would' be a concrete irrigation pipe with
a reinforced concrete apron covering it.
Motion was made by 'Commissioner Dhanens, seconded by Commissioner Brady to
adopt resolution and to approve Proposed Vesting Tentative Tract with findings and
conditions as presented in said resolution (See Exhibit "1 ."), with addition of the
memorandum from the Public Works Department dateCt December 3, 1996. Motion
carried.
4.2 P_UJ3LI_~ARI ~II~IG~~RACT 5861_
Staff report recommending approval was given.
Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in favor or opposition.
Jim Delmarter represented the applicant. He stated concurrence with conditions of
approval. He brought the commission's attention to the paragraph under Condition
#9.14 stating the amount of $2,800 should read $1,800. Mr. LaRochelle concurred.
Public portion of the hearing was closed.
Minutes, PC, 12/5/96
Page 3
Motion was made by Commissioner Dhanens, seconded by Commissioner Ortiz to '
adopt resolution approving Vesting Tentative Tract 5861-with findings and conditions as
presented in said resolution (See Exhibit "1"), with the addition of the memorandum of
from the Public.Works Department with the following amendment:
Paragraph under Condition #9.14 - amount of $2,800 should read $1,800.
Motion carried.
o
~N CQNSISTENCY FINDING EQI~,J:)ROPOSED SA~CRE
SUJ~,B_LU_SD~AINA~MP LOCATED WEST OF CAS O_UTH QE
PLAZA
Staff report recommending approval was given.
Commissioner Brady asked about the provision of adequate drainage. Mr. Grady said
in order for this property to be declared surplus adequate drainage would have to be
available. Commissioner Brady was not comfortable declaring this property surplus
unless a condition existed stating the city would take the steps to provide drainage. Mr.
Grady said this could be added to an approval. Commissioner Brady asked how long
this sump has been in :place. Mr. LaRochelle said it was constructed in the early 1960's.
.He said it has been determined that sufficient capacity at the Lacey Street sump exists.
Commissioner Brady asked what this property is zoned. Mr. Grady said it is designated
as commercial on the 2010 General Plan which would be its anticipated .use should the
sump become surplus.
Commissioner Delgado asked if the project will come back to the commission for review
if this finding is approved. Mr. Grady said any project under the commercial zoning
would go through the site plan review process and would not come before the
commission.
Commissioner Brady was concerned that there has been a historic use of open space
adjacent to residences and was unsure 'if the issue of commercial property next to
residential could be taken into consideration. ~
Commissioner Hersh felt this type of use is necessary.
Commissioner Dhanens aSked if the site can be used for some other type of commercial
use beside Valley Plaza with respect to access and location. Mr. Grady said the only
access to the-property is through a service road from Wible Road. If the property were
owned by an individual they would have to enter into a parking agreement with Valley
Plaza. Commissioner Dhanens asked if conditions of the ordinance with respect to
development of commercial property next to residential would have to be adhered to.
Mr. Grady said this was correct. Commissioner Dhanens asked if the commission could
request t° look at future development of this property. Mr. Grady said they could not.
Minutes, PC, 12/5/96 ' page 4
CommiSsioner Brady asked what types of structures Could be built on this property
under present zoning and what the setbacks would be. Mr. Grady said there are 44
allowable uses with the inclusion of all uses allowed in the C-O and C-1 zones. The
maximum building height would be 90 feet. The front yard setback would be minimum
10 feet, side yards abutting an R zone would be 20 feet, rear yard setbacks would be 20
feet~ Commissioner Brady stated he had no comfort in approving this.
Commissioner Hersh asked Commissioner Brady if he were concerned that this'
property may not be used for a theater. Commissioner Brady was concerned that there
is no guarantee or control over what will be constructed.
Commissioner Tavorn stated his concern over the large amount of' commercial backing
to residential, however realized this area is predominantly commercial.
Ms. Marino said this finding cannot be conditioned however a recommendation can be
made to the City Council that as a condition of the sale the buyer be required to bring
any site plans back through public hearing before the commission. She stated that
Valley Plaza has indicated they would agree to this. Commissioner Brady said this
approach would address his concerns. He asked staff for language that would address
the issue of replacing this sump with another sump.
Commissioner Dhanens asked if it is possible to build a theater in a C-1 zone'because
he felt a great deal of the adverse.impacts of a commercial project in a C-2 zone which
Commissioner Brady is concerned about could be substantially mitigated. Mr. Grady
said it could' be constructed in the C-1 zone.
Mr. LaRochelle proposed the following wording to address the replacement of the sump:
"Prior to sale a plan for drainage including construction and all easements necessarY to
provide proper drainage shall be approved by the City Engineer."
*5-minute break was taken at this time.
Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Dhanens to
make a finding pursuant to Government Code Section 65402, that the proposed sale by
the City of the property in question is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010
General Plan, with the addition of a paragraph to be added to the resolution to read as
follows:
"WHEREAS, prior to sale the City Engineer will be satisfied that there has been
or will be provided adequate substitute drainage deliverY and capacity at no .cost
to the city."
It is further recommended that a condition be placed on the sale of the subject
property that the site plan for any commercial project on the subject property be
approved at a Public hearing.
Motion carried.
Minutes, PC,
12/5/96
Page 5
6. COMMUNICATJ_ONS
A) Written
Mr. Grady Stated a memo had been submitted to the commission regarding a
presentation on the effects of Proposition 218.
Mr. Grady said a copy of a letter from Commissioner Boyle' was submitted to the
Commission indicating he would not be present at this hearing and requesting
that the information on the cost of advertising the agenda as well as a web site
be present'ed at the next meeting. He als° asked that discussion of public notice
in a broader sense be placed on the following agenda.
B) Verbal
COMMISSION COMMENTS
A. Committees
Commissioner Delgado shared the results of the committee meeting which was
set up to review the site plan review process. He said at this time this issue is in
the hands of the Urban Development Committee. He summed up the major
points of discussion. He stated because of the fact that the possibility exists that
the ordinance could pass without there ever being a public hearing at the
commission level, the public presented four items to consider recommending for
inclusion when this issue is sent to the City Council.
Commissioner Hersh said he wants the committee to continue to follow through
on this issue. He asked that information on site plan review be obtained from
other communities. Mr. Grady asked for clarification of this. Commissioner
Hersh said.he would like coPies to be distributed to the committee and would like
the committee to continue to give the commission an update on this issue.
Mr. Grady said the first meeting in January would be the soonest the site plan
review issue cOuld be brought back to the committee.
Commissioner Hersh asked for an explanation of modifications which were made
to the traffic'impact fee ordinance. Mr. LaRochelle said residential and office
commercial were unchanged as well as industrial. Retail commercial changed
so that buildings over 100,000 square-feet were not assessed a fee because the
major retail ordinance requires that a traffic study be prepared anyway. Fees for
commercial under 100,000 square feet were modified slightly downward.' The
ordinance was unanimously approved.
Minutes, PC, 12/5/96
Page 6
Commissioner Hersh reminded Ms. Marino of a conversation with the City
Attorney concerning the draft of the site plan review ordinance, stating Ms.
Skousen said she wOuld keep the commission abreast as new drafts are
available. He asked that this be kept in mind.
· Chairman Hersh asked about the standing of the joint meeting with the Urban
Development Committee concerning the kiosk sign program. Mr. Grady said
they are meeting the following week and he would keep the commission.
informed of their decision. Chairman Hersh asked about the scheduling of the
P.G.&E. and Water Department representatives. Mr. Grady said they are both
scheduled for December 19th.
DI,SCIJ~S~I'~A~C POSSIBLE_CANCELLATION OF THE NF~I
-BPu~MEEZtNG.
Mr. Grady said the following meeting is a general plan cycle. The next pre-meeting Was
notcanceled.
9. A~
There being no further business to Come before the commission, meeting was
adjourned at 6:50 p.m.
Laurie Davis
Recording Secretary
Planning Director~