Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/07/96MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Held Thursday, November 7, 1996 5:30 p.m., City Council Chamber, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California. COMMISSIONERS: Present: KENNETH HERSH, Chairperson DOUG DELGADO, Vice-Chairperson STEPHEN BOYLE MATHEW BRADY ROBERT ORTIZ WADE TAVORN JEFFREY TKAC MICHAEL DHANENS 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 MIKE LEE, Associate Planner LAURIE DAVIS, Recording Secretary 2. PUBLIC STATEMENTS Jill Kleiss spoke concerning public review. She stated her feeling that they have a right to have their concerns heard. She proposed the following wording with respect to noticing requirements: "Anything that is not totally an infill project surrounded by commercial on all sides or a development that is building out a residential lot in a subdiVision ought to go before the Planning Commission in a public review process." She asked that this item be voted on at this hearing and if not that it be placed on the next agenda for discussion. She suggested a written report could be generated for all types of projects which have been approved without the Planning Commission through the site plan process. She cited the court's ruling with respect to noticing as it related to the Marketplace project and submitted a copy of it. Minutes, PC, 11/7/96 Page 2 Dave Homestead referred to the updating of the site plan review process. He asked for better noticing stating he felt 300 feet was inadequate and recommended 1,200 feet. He felt access to data needed to be improved and suggested' posting of agenda items on the Internet. He felt public input should not be limited to environmental issues, that the site plan review process should '--require increased public review. Hollis Carlisle stated his support for the comments of the previous two speakers. Public review in all aspects is necessary. He was concerned that properties be developed that will remain attractive for many years. He recommended the commission consider incorporating the public in changing the noticing process. Chairman read the notice of right to appeal as set forth on the agenda. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS_ Commissioner Tavorn stated that he had reviewed the tape of the Monday pre- meeting and would participate at this hearing. None PU~ING - TENTATIVE TRACT 56~ Staff report recommending approval was given. Mr. LaRochelle gave a report on traffic flow for this development as requested at the pre-meeting. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in favor or opposition of the application. Harold Robertson represented the applicant. He stated their agreement with conditions of approval with the exception of Condition ~ which he stated he had discussed with Mr. LaRochelle and Chief Pacheco of the Fire Department. He suggested a change in language as follows: Prior to recordation of Phase 2 approved emergency access shall be provided to the area east of Lots 13 to 26 from Cherry Blossom Court between Stacy Palm Court and March Meadows Way. The improvements for the emergency access shall be approved by the city engineer and the Fire Chief. Minutes, PC, 11/7/96 Page 3 Henry Pacheco, Acting Fire Chief stated he would accept the change to condition as recommended above. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Brady stated he 'could accept the access on Panama 'as proposed so long as no connection between Tract 5699 and the adjacent tract to the east is made other than emergency access. Commissioner Boyle asked if the 25-foot emergency access were coming off Lot 16. Mr. Robertson clarified the wording should be revised so that it would read "Cherry Blossom north of March Meadows Way." Motion was made by Commissioner Boyle, seconded by Commissioner Ortiz to adopt resolution, approving and adopting the Negative Declaration, and to approve Proposed Tentative Tract 5699 with findings and conditions as presented in said resolution with the following amendment to Condition ~4 of Exhibit "A," to read as follows: Prior to recordation of phase 2, emergency access shall be provided to the area east of lots 13 through 26 from Cherry Blossom Court and north of March Meadows Way. The improvements for the emergency access shall be approved by the City Engineer and Fire Chief. Motion carried. PJJJ3JJ~~J[~ -- PROP~ ORDINANCE AMENDING SUBSECTIOJ~LD~ 17_,60.030 OF T~I~SEIELD MUN~ ~OTICE OF CO Staff report recommending approval was given. Commissioner Brady asked for clarification on openness of discussion. Mr. Grady said discussion is limited to amendment of the ordinance with respect to expanding noticing requirements for comprehensive sign plans only. Jill Kleiss said the commission has the right to expand noticing requirements beyond the comprehensive sign plan citing a memo which was submitted by Ms. Marino, City Attorney. Ms. Marino said the only issue on this agenda is that of changing noticing requirements for the comprehensive sign plan. Minutes, PC, 11/7/96 Page 4 Ms. Kleiss cited the last page of Title 17 saying this item can be expanded upon at this time. Commissioner Brady did not feel the commission is precluded from discussing additional items at a future time, however is precluded at this time because they are not on the agenda. 'Ms. Kleiss felt the commission has the right to expand, amend or reject. She asked that the following be made part of the nOticing ordinance: "The city shall include among those sent public notice of commission and council hearings all homeowners within 300 feet of the exterior boundary of the property that is the subject of the hearing. Such notice shall be given at least 10 days in advance of the hearing and shall be given of all agenda items requiring Commission or Council approval or modification including but not limited to any site plan, sign plan, landscape plan, conditional use permit, subdivision map, change in use or other approval. Such notice shall also be posted on the exterior boundary of the project site. Additionally the notices shall also be mailed to any person who has filed a written request for the above-mentioned notices with the Planning Department. The request for notices shall be renewed annually." She felt this would be a fair 'resolution to the noticing problem. Renee Donato Nelson felt Commissioner Boyle brought the issues stated by Ms. Kleiss up at the last hearing. She was concerned that it was not what was placed on the agenda, however was what was discussed. Commissioner Boyle felt his request was more broad than what was noticed, however the Brown Act states that what is noticed is what must be discussed. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Brady felt the effort set forth on this noticing issue is a piece-meal approach which he felt would not solve all of the problems and for this reason he would not support the motion. An overall approach needs to be looked at, it needs to be studied and input given. He stated he would support a motion that a committee be formed to study public notice of all types of hearings in the broadest scope. In response to question by Commissioner Boyle, Ms. Marino explained the noticing requirements for various applications. Commissioner Boyle felt perhaps a committee was necessary to look at the overall noticing of projects. He stated he was not in favor of giving notice to property owners within 300 feet of a sign plan. He felt the proposed ordinance provision that allows for notice to those requesting special notice is adequate Minutes, PC, 11/7/96 Page 5 because there has not historically been any controversy regarding these items. The ordinance should include a provision that the request for special notice has to be filed within a certain amount of time. There should be some type of sunset provision. He said he would like to have an item placed on an agenda for a status report on where the commission is with the site plan review process. He · stated his willingness to support the motion with a provision of a sunset clause on how long a request for special notice is good and had no objection to appointing a committee to look into this to see what other changes may need to be changed in a broad-based ordinance. Commissioner Delgado stated he was not opposed to hearing a broader issue in light of the fact that it appears to be very important to the public as a whole. He stated he would be in favor of seeing the 300-foot notification as well as ensuring that anyone requesting special notice receive it. He asked how this requirement would be incorporated into the ordinance presented. Ms. Marino said the draft ordinance states that notice of the date, time and place of hearing, location, etc. will be given to a) the applicants, b) every person requesting notice and she suggested an item c) be added such that notice be given to those persons within 300 feet. Commissioner Delgado stated he was not opposed to a committee looking at the noticing issue as a whole, however with respect to this particular ordinance he would approve it but would like to see property owners within 300 feet included within the notice requirement. Commissioner Tavorn felt perhaps the committee needs to be appointed to look at noticing requirements. He asked if it would be possible to hold committee meetings during the latter part of the day instead of the noon hour. Chairman Hersh agreed with previous comments made by commissioners stating he did not feel the 300-foot noticing for sign plans nor a special notice requirement with a sunset clause was unreasonable. He stated he would like to see a motion to appoint.a committee to meet during the late day hours to swiftly make the necessary alterations and bring it back to the commission for consideration or an alteration at this meeting to address the points which were brought up at this hearing. He suggested that if a committee is formed that it allow for public input. Motion was made by Commissioner Delgado to continue this item to the next meeting and a committee meeting to be formed so that a compromise resolution can be worked out. Minutes, PC, 11/7/96 Page 6 Commissioner Brady stated his opposition to this motion because the issue that has been raised is public notice on more than just the sign ordinance. If this motion passes the comprehensive sign plan is going to be looked at in a vacuum. The commission will be focusing on one minor issue. He felt the ordinances need to be compared with respect to why certain projects are noticed within 300 feet ahd others are not. He did not feel this should be done in a piece-meal fashion. Commissioner Boyle felt if this matter is simply continued the same limitations will apply with respect to what can be discussed. He felt this ordinance should be adopted and a committee formed to look at noticing. However there is a possibility that the study may conclude that the other hearings already provide the proper noticing. In this case this piece-meal approach may solve the issue and if not some type of more exhaustive ordinance can be recommended. Mr. Grady suggested staff could prepare a report which identifies the public hearing items and current notice requirements. He felt the decision can be reached on this issue with respect to whether sign plans should be noticed and the report could give information and possibly direction with respect to other items which may need amendment. Commissioner Brady felt the system needs review, however he did not want to attempt to fix a problem of which this is not the source. He felt the source of the problem needs to be looked into. He asked that a motion be made to begin addressing the problem of public input on large commercial developments. He opposed any motion to approve this or continue it. Chairman Hersh asked if Commissioner Brady felt approval of this ordinance would allow operativeness until the issue of site plan review is dealt with. Commissioner Brady felt there are projects with comprehensive sign plans which have no public notice problems and this would place a burden on those projects. Commissioner Delgado felt every issue the commission deals with affects someone citing some contain major impacts and some minor. He withdrew his previous motion. Minutes, PC, 11/7/96 Page 7 Motion was made by Commissioner Delgado to adopt the resolution with all findings and conditions, approving the proposed ordinance and recommend adoption to the City Council, with the amendment of Resolution 102-96, Item #3 to read as follows: The proposed amendment is hereby approved and recommended for adoption by City Council. Also amendment to Section 17.60.030 - Comprehensive Sign Plans, Item #1.c. to include a notice to all property owners within 300 feet of the proposed project. Commissioner Boyle shared Commissioner Brady's concern that not all comprehensive sign plans need notice. He gave an example of a shopping center and asked for an estimate of square footage. Mr. Grady estimated 5,000 to 10,000 square feet and stated it should be noted that most shopping centers are not built with a comprehensive sign plan and gave reasons for a developer to request one. Commissioner Brady felt a continuance of this item will not solve the problem and he felt the piece-meal approach is the wrong approach to take. CommissiOner Tavorn seconded Commissioner Delgado's motion. Commissioner Boyle stated he would not support the motion as presently drafted. Chairman Hersh felt this proposal will allow the public to be notified as they have requested and for this reason he would support the motion and would appoint a site plan review committee. He stated he would therefore support the motion as made by Commissioner Delgado. Motion carrigd by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Ortiz, Tavorn, Delgado, Hersh NOES: Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Tkac Ms. Marino cited a problem in that the language placed in subsection C does not really cover how those property owners within 300 feet are known or define the exterior boundaries of the property. She suggested a reconsideration of the motion and additional language as follows: By mailing a notice postage prepaid to the applicant and to the owners of all property within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property involved using for this purpose the name and address of such owners as shown upon the latest county assessment roll. Minutes, PC, 11/7/96 Page 8 Motion was made by Commissioner Delgado, seconded by Commissioner Tavorn to reconsider the motion. Motion carried. Commissioner Brady abstained. Commissioner Delgado made a motion to amend his previous motion to include the language suggested by Ms. Marino. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Tavorn. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Ortiz, Tavorn, Delgado, Hersh NOES: Commissioners Boyle, Tkac ABSTAINED: Commissioner Brady Chairman Hersh appointed Commissioner Delgado as Chairman of the Site Plan Review Committee. He also appointed Commissioners Tavorn and Dhanens to that committee. He asked that this committee meet with staff to bring the commission up to date on what has been accomplished on the site plan review issue as quickly as possible. PJ~ESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF T_I:JF_~J3~'S FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL ~PDATE - JACK LaRQCHELLE Ted Wright, Public Works Department, submitted information on this item and gave an overview of it. Commissioner Tavorn asked if he felt White Lane would last until 1998-1999 when the improvement plan has it slated for resurfacing. Mr. Wright said staff looks at resurfacing projects every year and reprioritizes projects. Ms. LaRochelle said several major arterial roads which were constructed under a previous standard are in disrepair. Commissioner Tavorn asked if Panama Lane is proposed for rewidening. Mr. Wright said the Panama Lane overcrossing is out for bid. The widening of Panama Lane from Wible Road easterly to the new overcrossing project is under construction. Commissioner Delgado asked about funds projected for the wastewater treatment plants. Mr. LaRochelle said wastewater treatment plant #'s 2 and 3 are about to reach capacity and expansion is necessary. Minutes, PC, 11/7/96 Page 9 Commissioner Boyle asked for definition of "sidewalk construction project Phase 2." Mr. Wright said this is replacement of sidewalks in predominantly Iow-income areas which are accomplished with CDBG funds. Chairman Hersh asked if some of the wastewater upgrade was due to anticipation of annexation of a great deal of county areas which are not presently on sewer systems. Mr. LaRochelle said this is not the case. The city is operating under CSA #71 agreement which states sewer service for expansion of plant #3 shall be provided for the area. Commissioner Hersh asked about the future of underpasses and overpasses to accommodate for the railways and good traffic flow. Mr. LaRochelle said the city has received a large share of State money for this purpose. He explained the purpose of the Greater Bakersfield Separation of Grade District being to nominate grade separation projects. He gave an explanation of projects to be undertaken in the near future. Commissioner Hersh asked if there were a disproportionate application to the west and southwest with respect to a balance for the rest of the city as well as the downtown area. Mr. LaRochelle said he did not feel this was the case as staff looks not so much at an area but at where the need exists. Discussion continued regarding this issue. Chairman Hersh asked about the status of traffic impact fees. Mr. LaRochelle said the second reading before the Council was on the agenda the previous evening. The council desired to have additional information regarding the commercial/retail fee which will be brought to them on December 4, 1996. Every attempt is being made to address concerns which were raised regarding this issue. Responding to question by Chairman Hersh, Mr. LaRochelle said the fee is just under $2,200 per unit. Commissioner Hersh.asked why the light system is not being improved in the downtown area. Mr. LaRochelle said it is in the works. 7. COMMUNICATIONS A) Written None B) Verbal None Minutes, pc, 11/7/96 Page 10 o COMMISSION Chairman Hersh asked Mr. Grady about his previous statement that a list of public hearing items and noticing requirements would be prepared for the next meeting. Mr. Grady said this was offered as a suggestion, however if this item is · going to be sent to committee that would be the appropriate' place for this' material to be presented. Chairman Hersh stated his satisfaction with this approach. Commissioner Boyle said he would like to have this report presented at the next hearing. Commissioner Boyle raised the issue of an initiative that passed with regard to local property tax assessments, fees, etc. asking how this would impact the city. Ms. Marino said there is an attorney in her office that is well versed with respect to this issue and stated she would arrange for her to speak to the commission about this subject. Commissioner Boyle asked if there is a possibility that the commission would have to deny projects because voters will not pass necessary fees to mitigate impacts. Ms. Marino said it was difficult at this point to address this question, however agreed to pass this question on. Commissioner Boyle asked that this issue be placed on the next agenda or the following one. A. C~ At the request of Chairman Hersh, Commissioner Boyle gave an update on the Subdivision Committee saying the issue of multi-family housing is one of which the committee is grappling with. There will be a representative from the industry at the next meeting to present additional information. Commissioner Delgado asked about the issue of the sign committee meeting jointly with the Urban Development Committee. Mr. Grady said he prepared a memo with the commission's comments concerning this, however it is at the discretion of the Council's Urban Development Committee to determine the necessity of this meeting. As of this time an Urban Development Committee meeting has not been set. Commissioner Dhanens gave an update on the Ordinance Review Committee looking at the proposed Hillside Ordinance. The committee is looking into ways to incorporate ideas from other cities' ordinances into a plan that would provide subdividers with the ability to modify some of the current subdivision design standards to compensate for the hillside terrain. He stated the next meeting is scheduled for the following day. Minutes, PC, 11/7/96 Page 11 10. Chairman Hersh reminded the Commission of the Forum '96 Livable Communities seminar stating if commissioners wish to attend they should contact Planning staff. DISCUSSION AND ACTIONJ~~J:)JJ~LGP_OSSIBLE CAN~ ~Li:JF__I~IEXT Mr. Grady gave information concerning the next agenda. Chairman Hersh suggested the pre-meeting be held. All commissioners voted in favor of holding the next pre-meeting. ~NT There being no further business to come before the Commission, meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m. Laurie Davis Recording Secretary Planning Director