Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/16/96MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Held Thursday, May 16, 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 Alternate 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 MIKE LEE, Associate Planner LAURIE DAVIS, Recording Secretary 2. EUBLIC STATEMENTS No .one made any public statements. Chairman read the notice of right to appeal as set forth on the agenda. Commissioner Dhanens stated that althoUgh he was absent from Monday's pre-meeting he had reviewed the tape and would participate on items listed on this agenda. Minutes, PC, 5/16/96 Page 2 3. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Agenda Item #7 - General plan consistency finding for sale of Lots 70 and 71, Tract 4761, Unit "A." Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Delgado to approve consent agenda item. Motion carried. 4. APPRO · Commissioner Brady asked that the spelling of his name be corrected on Page 1 of the March 18, 1996 minutes. Commissioner Dhanens asked regarding the April 4, 1996 minutes, Page 8, last paragraph that the references to C-MAC and ICE-T be spelled out in parenthesis after these acronyms. Regarding Page 10, second paragraph of these minutes, last sentence which states "He also felt perhaps a larger fee should be looked at for office and commercial." he did not feel this statement accurately reflected his comments. He asked that the tape be reviewed and appropriate changes be made. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Ortiz to approve minutes of the regular meetings held March 18, April 1, April 18, and April 29, 1996. Motion carried. The minutes of April 4, 1996 were not approved at this time and will be placed on a future agenda for approval. *Commissioner Tkac was seated at this time. 5. PUBLIC_HEARING - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 10300 Staff report recommending approval was updated from Monday's meeting. Public portion of the-hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition or in favor. Steve DeBranch represented the applicant. He stated concurrence with the staff report and memo submitted at this hearing. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Regarding the project analysis of the staff report indicating a visit to the site revealed a zoning violation and requirement for barbed wire on top of fences, Commissioner Tavom asked where the condition covering this is located in the conditions of approval. Staff pointed this condition out. Minutes, PC, 5/16/96 P~e3 Motion was made by Commissioner Boyle, seconded by Commissioner Ortiz to adopt resolution to make all findings set forth in the staff report, and to approve Proposed Tentative Parcel Map 10300 subject to the conditions outlined in the Exhibit "A," and the Public Works memo dated May 13, 1996. Motion carried. ~PTIONALJ~,SIGN 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 their concurrence with the memo dated May 15, 1996 from the Public Works Department changing condition #3.2. Regarding Condition # 10 he asked that the following wording be added: "The sewer system shall be designed to Public Works standards." because these are private streets to be maintained by the homeowner's association. Concerning condition #11 he submitted wording from the PUD zone change #5666 to clarify that construction of chain link fences along the canal shall occur during the phase of development in which they are located. He pointed out a typo on Condition #'s 9a and 9b in which condition #1 is referenced of Zone Change #5666, stating he felt it should reference Condition #13. Concerning condition #10, Mr. LaRochelle added the following amendment to the end of Mr. McIntosh's amendment that sewer system be designed to Public Works standards adding the following "within the private streets." Mr. Grady stated agreement with Mr. McIntosh's proposed amendment to condition #11. Commissioner Brady asked if staff was in agreement with the change to Condition #'s 9a and 9b with respect to the condition referencing condition #13 rather than condition #1. Mr. LaRochelle was in agreement with this amendment. Commissioner Hersh asked Mr. Mclntosh why-he requested an optional design subdivision on this property. Mr. Mclntosh said they must comply with the subdivision ordinance as well as the zoning ordinance. The PUD falls under the zoning ordinance, however the optional design is covered under the subdivision ordinance and when street right-of-ways are less than standard an optional design subdivision still must be requested. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Ortiz to adopt resolution making findings set forth in the staff report, and to approve Proposed Optional Design Tentative Tract 5836, as shown on map dated April 25, 1996, subject to the conditions outlined in Exhibit "A," with the following amendments: Condition~9 - change_reference to Condition351 [oEond~ Minutes, PC, 5/16/96 Page 4 6.2) 6.3 Eondition~l 0 add the folloayJng: Sewer systems shall be designed to Public Works standards within the private streets. Con--he ~: Construction of chain link fences shall occur during the phase of development in which they are located. Addition of the May 15, 1996 memo from the Public Works Department. Motion carried. PUBLICHE - V~;SIE>JG~EN T AT I V E_TiLf~T 5~D) Staff report recommending approval was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in opposition or in favor. Roger Mclntosh represented the property owner. He stated concurrence with staff report and memo of May 13, 1996 from the Public Works Department. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Ortiz, seconded by Commissioner Boyle to adopt resolution, making all findings set forth in the staff report, and approving Revised Vesting Tentative Tract 5290, subject to the conditions in Exhibit "A," and memo from Public Works Department dated May 13, 1996. Motion carried. G -~REY_LSEDJ~NTATIVE TRACT 5418 PH2kS_ES2.~~ Commissioner Delgado abstained from participating on this item because he represents a client who is in the process of purchasing this property. Staff report recommending approval was given. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in favor or opposition. Steve DeBranch represented the applicant. He stated concurrence with staff report and memo dated May 13, 1996. He asked regarding the letter submitted by the school district if there were any changes as a result of this letter. Staff indicated there was not. Minutes, PC, 5/16/96 Page 5 Bob Smith, Sequoia Engineering, stated they requested that the phases be switched. Mr. Movius said this was discussed with staff and is acceptable. He pointed out the changes to phasing on the map. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Brady asked for language for the phasing change. Mr. Grady said the following could be added to the end of the motion: "Phases 4 and 5 of the map would be transposed." Commissioner Brady asked the applicant if this was acceptable. Mr. DeBranch indicated it was. 6.4) 6.5) Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Dhanens to adopt resolution to make all findings set forth in the staff report, and to approve Proposed Revised Tentative Tract 5418 subject to the conditions outlined in the Exhibit "A" with the Public Works memorandum dated May 13, 1996 and the Planning Department memorandum dated May 15, 1996, with development of phases 4 and 5 transposed. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING - VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 5427 There were no additions to Monday's staff report. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in favor or opposition. Roger Mclntosh represented the applicant. He stated their concurrence with staff report and conditions of approval. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Motion was made by Commissioner Ortiz, seconded by Commissioner Brady to adopt resolution approving and adopting negative declaration, to make all findings set forth in the staff report and to approve Proposed Vesting Tentative Tract map 5427 subject to the conditions outlined in the Exhibit "A." Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING - VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 566_4 There was no new information to add to Monday's staff report.. Public portion of the hearing was opened; no one spoke in favor or opposition. Roger Mclntosh represented the applicant. He stated their concurrence with staff report and recommendation. Minutes, PC, 5/16/96 Page 6 Public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Tavorn asked about the discrepancy of the amount of acreage shown on the agenda and that shown in the staff report. Mr. Movius said the applicant's map shows this site to be 12.61 acres. Motion was made by Commissioner Boyle, seconded by Commissioner Tavom to adopt resolution making all findings set forth in the staff report and to approve Proposed Vesting Tentative Tract 5664 and modification, subject to the conditions outlined in the Exhibit "A." Motion carried. 6.6) P_ - TATINEXRACT 5698_OP_T I ON ALDES[GBI Commissioner Boyle stated since Monday's meeting he has discovered he has a conflict of interest and would not participate on this item. Staff report recommending approval was given. Beth Van Voorhis, Clifford and Brown Law Firm, stated she was representing Stan Antongiovanni who owns a 12.5 percent interest in the mineral and gas rights beneath the surface of subject property. She said while the other mineral rights owners have waived their surface rights he has not. The proposed project is within a fast developing area. The property is located south of some oil wells which are currently producing. They are pulling from reservoirs to the south of this project. There is vacant land to the south of this property which is developable. She cited the municipal code which requires that the surface owner obtain the consent of over 50 percent of the mineral right owners. In the event there is a non-consenting mineral right owner that owner owns 20 percent or less. She cited a third alternative which requires that the fee surface owner reserve a drill site on the property which will permit the mineral right owner to access the property for drilling purposes. This right only lasts for 10 years after which if drilling has not commenced the fee surface owner can request that the tract map be amended to delete reference to the drill site, They have attempted unsuccessfully to negotiate with the applicant for this drill site. She reqUested that the commission approve the tentative map with condition of reservation of a drill site in the adjacent lot 19 which will permit Mr. Antongiovanni to exercise his rights over the course of the next 10 years. The size of the site can be negotiated at a later date. Commissioner Brady asked where in relation to this property is the nearest property owned by Ms. Van Voorhis' client and why he cannot drill on this property. Ms. Van Voorhis said it is immediately to the south outside Section 22 and he cannot drill because he does not own the mineral rights of that property. He asked if it were her position that the commission must require the reservation of a drill site. She said she felt it was the commission's option to require this reservation. Minutes, PC, 5/16/96 Page 7 Commissioner Hersh asked Ms. Van Voorhis if her client has any mineral interest~ in the properties to the east and west. She said he has mineral right interest in the entire southeast quarter of Section 22 which will incorporate some of these properties. Commissioner Hersh asked if her client has had a definite professional opinion on the potential in this area. She said no study of this precise area has been done, however north of Harris Road operating oil well sites exist which are pulling from the south. Harold Robertson represented the applicant of this project. He stated concurrence with conditions of approval and the memo of May 13, 1996. In response to the request for a drill site he cited Section 16.20.060, paragraph 2 of the ordinance saying 87-1/2 percent of the mineral rights owners have waived the right to surface entry. He was concerned about a minority mineral right interest holding up development. Frank St. Clair stated he is the developer. He said a report as to the feasibility of drilling on the property was prepared stating oil prices would have to be above $40-50 per barrel to be feasible.. He said a drill site existed on subject property on the north half of Harris Road and approximately 1-1/2 years ago the mineral rights owners signed in agreement to eliminate their surface entry. Commissioner Delgado asked if there was a drill site reservation close to the subject area in which Mr. Antongiovanni had the ability to utilize the area in the past and if the other owners waived their right to use it. Mr. St. Clair said this was correct. Mr. Delgado asked if Mr. Antongiovanni withheld his consent to waive access. Mr. St. Clair said he was not sure. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Dhanens asked staff if a comprehensive wall and landscape plan application had been submitted for this development. Mr. Movius said the applicant would have to install landscaping as it is shown on the plans before the Commission. Commissioner Dhanens asked if there were guidelines which outlined what an extraordinary amenity can be with respect to the use of an optional design subdivision and the allowance of double frontage lots. Mr. Grady said there is not a guideline; the commission reviews the applicant's proposal and makes a value judgement as to its appropriateness with respect to their request for deviation from standards. Chairman Hersh asked where the nearest drill site in this area is. Mr. Grady responded that he did not know. Commissioner Hersh said this is a deep and expensive drilling area. He said he would like to see a designated drill site since the mineral owner has such a vested interest in the minerals of this area. Commissioner Tkac stated in learning of the parties involved he has a conflict of interest and would not participate further on this item. Minutes, PC, 5/16/96 Page 8 Commissioner Brady asked if it were the opinion of the City Attomey that based on the information the commission has at the present time that they are not obligated to provide a drill site on this property. Ms. Marino stated this was her opinion. Commissioner Brady asked about the nature of the negotiation of the drill site. Mr. St. ' Clair said he has offered a drill site in the past and no one has wished to use it. He stated his opinion that the applicant wants payment for his 12.5 percent interest. Ms. Van Voorhis said no money offer has been made, they are simply trying to reserve a drill site. Commissioner Brady asked if only 12 percent of a drill site is owned can a well be drilled. Ms. Van Voorhis said it can be done with royalties being paid to the other mineral rights owners. Commissioner Brady stated his feeling that he would not want to see a drill site in this neighborhood because of the messy nature and potential problems. He stated he would not support the requirement of a drill site as part of approval of this tentative tract. Commissioner Tavorn asked how many phases this project consists of. Mr. St. Clair said it would consist of 2 phases on 20 acres; they are projecting completion preferably within the next year and are hoping it does not take more than 2 years maximum. Commissioner Hersh answered a previous question by Commissioner Brady, saying it would be infeasible to drill this well with only a 12 percent interest because it is such a deep well. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, 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 the optional design Tentative Tract 5698 subject to the conditions outlined in the Exhibit "A," with the following amendment: Deletion of the existing Finding # 12, and addition of the following to replace it: Mineral right owners signatures may be waived on the final,map. (BMC Section 16.20.060 B.2.) Addition of the Public Works memorandum dated May 13, 1996. Motion carried. Minutes, PC, 5/16/96 Page 9 GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDING - SALE OF LOTS 70 AND 71, TRACT _4261 UNIT "A," LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WESTWOLD DRIVE BETWEEN GOSFORD ROAD AND BROOKSID~LDJLLV~. This item was approved as a consent agenda item. DISCLISSION AND ACTION REGARDING AMENDING PLANNING CDMMISSION BY-LAWS WITH RESPECT TO CHANGING REGULAR MEETING DATES. *5-minute break was taken. Commissioner Boyle said Kern COG meets on the first Thursday of the month and felt it may cause some conflict for staff and commission members to attend these meetings and provide input saying it was his understanding Commission meeting dates could be changed. He said he would not suggest changing meeting dates for the remainder of this calendar year because the City Council sets their calendar each year and meetings may be scheduled based upon the Commission's calendared meetings. He felt at some point in time moving it would not interfere with Council's calendar especially if they are given sufficient notice. Commissioner Brady did not feel it was appropriate for the Commission to be Kern COG's watch dog when the city already has input on that board. He stated he would vote no on any motion to change the meeting schedule, however would be in favor of sending a letter indicating the commission's desire to be kept informed of what they are doing. Commissioner Hersh said he was not in favor of changing the commission's meeting schedule, however agreed with sending a letter informing Kern COG the commission wishes to be kept informed. Commissioner Boyle felt by attending the Kern COG meetings it would allow the Commission to see planning at a level that is broader and different than what is being done at the commission level. Commissioner Brady asked "staff for ideas on how the commission and Kern COG might maintain communication. Mr. Grady said staff receives their agendas of which copies could be distributed to the commission. Mr. LaRochelle felt it would be advantageous for the commission to delve more deeply and find out what it is that Kern COG does. Minutes, PC, 5/16/96 Page 10 Commissioner Hersh agreed that the commission should learn more about Kern COG, however would prefer not to interrupt the present meeting status. In-lieu of this he would like to request that Kern COG address the commission periodically to educate the commission. Commissioner Dhanens asked if there were someone on a staff level from the city who attends the Kern COG meetings. Mr. LaRochelle said there was not with the exception of the Traffic Engineer attending occasionally when called upon to do so. Commissioner Dhanens felt it would not benefit the commission to change their meeting schedule in order to send a representative. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady to continue this item to the regular meeting of November 7, 1996. Commissioner Delgado asked for an explanation as to why Commissioner Brady' wishes this item to be continued to the November 7th meeting. Commissioner Brady felt there was a legitimate concern that there is a problem adjusting the commission's meeting schedule to provide for personal input on Kern COG's board. Continuing this item to November will allow those concerned to see if another arrangement can be made. Commissioner Boyle seconded the motion by Commissioner Brady. Motion carried. Commissioner Delgado voted no. Commissioner Delgado asked if perhaps the council member involved in this situation should be consulted with, with respect to the possibility of changing meeting dates. Commissioner Hersh felt Mr. Brummett could be asked to give a presentation to the Commission with Councilman Salvaggio present to give his point of view. 9. COMMUNICATIONS A) Written None B) Verbal None Minutes, PC, 5/16/96 Page 11 10. COMMISSIDN C OMMEiXLTS Commissioner Ortiz said he had been approached by the Bakersfield Major Transportation Investment Study group to bring an update of their work to the commission. He outlined the makeup of the group which is working on the MTIS and their goals of accessing the future transportation needs of the central Bakersfield area, development of alternative transportation strategies, identification of possible funding sources, selection of a locally preferred investment strategy. He asked that a representative of this group be allowed to make a short presentation to the Commission. Commissioner Hersh asked that Commissioner Ortiz recommend a representative so that this can be set up. Mr. Grady said this could be placed on an agenda. Commissioner Hersh said a meeting of the subdivision committee was held previously discussing small lot amenities in the R-2 zone. The Council's direction was for the commission to define the open space amenities and prepare them in such a way as to be a selection list for the building community, however he felt this discretionary power should lie with the planning commission and City Council with respect to making the final decision of which amenity is required. Commissioner Brady asked legal counsel for a definition of the commission comments section of the agenda. Ms. Marino clarified this section is intended so that the commission can give direction to staff to place items on the agenda for discussion or action. She further clarified the Brown Act prohibits discussion by any member of a board about any subject that is not on the agenda. The Commission has the right to call staff at any time and request that an item be placed on an agenda. Commissioner Brady asked that this information be presented in writing 'with references cited. Commissioner Brady asked that the issue which previously arose at this hearing regarding communications between the Commission and Kern COG be added to a future agenda with a recommendation from staff as to how communication might be ' better effected between these two bodies. He also requested that staff draft a letter expressing commission concerns about Kern COG's representation of the city's needs before the CTC. Mr. Grady suggested the commission place an item on an agenda to discuss the issue of the letter and to direct staff as to What concerns the commission wishes to address in this letter so that staff may draft it. Minutes, PC, 5/16/96 · Page 12 Commissioner Dhanens gave an update on the Ordinance Review Committee which is working on the Hillside Ordinance issue. He also asked that the suggestion which was previously made so that staff reports would be repeated at the Thursday hearings, be enacted. Mr. Grady assured him this would be enacted. 11. AND ACTION REGARDING POSS~ C~AZq~LATION OF THE NEXTP~. Mr. Grady gave a summary of items on the next agenda, stating the agenda would be short. He also stated the council chambers would be used on that day for a council budget hearing and recommended this pre-meeting could be canceled. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Boyle to cancel the pre-meeting of June 3, 1996. 12. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, meeting was adjourned at 7:17 p.m. Laurie Davis Recording Secretary STANLE~ Planning Director Planning Commissioners Ballot Election of Chairman Commissioner Delgado ! Vote Cast For: Planning Commissioners Ballot Election of Chairman '~ Commissioner Ortiz Vote Cast For: J~/~'~ Planning Commissioners Ballot Election of Chairman', Commissioner Tavorn Vote Cast For: Planning Commissioners Ballot Election of :Chairmari ~ Commissioner Hersh Vo~e ~s~o~: \~5~ Planning Commissioners Ballot Election of-Chairmanl Commissioner Tkac Vote Cast For: Planning Commissioners Ballot Election of Chairman Commissioner Brady Vote Cast For: Planning Commissioners Ballot Election of'Chairman'~ Commissioner Boyle Vote Cast For: Planning Commissioners Ballot Election of Vice Chairman Commissioner Delgado Vote Cast For: Planning Commissioners Ballot Election of Vice Chairman Commissioner Brady Vote Cast For: Planning Commissioners Ballot Election of Vice Chairman Commissioner Ortiz Vote Cast For: Planning Commissioners Ballot Election of Vice Chairman Commissioner Hersh Planning Commissioners Ballot Election of Vice Chairman Commissioner Tavorn Vote Cast For: Planning Commissioners Ballot Election of Vice Chairman Commissioner Tkac Vote Cast For: Planning Commissioners Ballot Election of Vice Chairman Commissioner Boyle Vote Cast For: