Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNovember 19, 2002MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING SITE PLAN REVIEW HEARING OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Held Tuesday, November 19, 2002, 4:00 p.m., Development Services Building, 1st Floor Conference Room # 107, 1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California. 1. ROLL CALL Director: JACK HARDISTY Staff: JIM EGGERT The Director read the Notice of Right to Appeal as set forth on the agenda. 2. P[IBLIC STATEMENTS None 3. APPROVE MIN[ITES The Director approved the minutes of the meeting held November 5, 2002. 4. P[IBLIC HEARINGS 4.A. FILE NO. 02-0803 - JIM WARD ARCHITECT[IRE HAS REQ[IESTED A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTR[ICTION OF A 96 [INIT APARTMENT COMPLEX (ONE AND TWO-STORY UNITS) ON 22 LOTS~ 8.14 ACRES IN AN R-2 (LIMITED MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING) ZONE DISTRICT~ LOCATED AT 2301 ALLEN ROAD. The Director, Mr. Hardisty, opened the public hearing. The application being considered was by Jim Ward for approval of a 96-unit apartment complex located at 2301 Allen Road. Staff's recommendation is to approve with conditions of approval as indicated in the draft letter of approval. Mr. Eggert noted that correspondence has been received from Mr. Kevin Williams concerning the relationship of property elevations to his property and a concern of overlooks into his property from the apartment site. Mr. Hardisty indicated that he believes his (Mr. Williams) concerns are addressed in the conditions of approval. Mr. Eggert also noted that there are additional special conditions that have been placed on this project by the City Council when they approved the tract map for this site. Pat Thompson, a resident of The Palms stated that they are not here in opposition to the project itself. They've already had discussions with the developer with the way it is being developed and they would like to see them move forward as quickly as possible to get the project on the ground. However, the information that was sent out by the City relative to this particular site plan we think is inaccurate as it does not reflect the intent of the decision of the City Council. Specifically, he noted that there should be a crash gate on the south end of the cul-de-sac as well as a pedestrian access S:IBZA SPR~inuteslsprmnl l.19. doc Minutes, SPR 11/19/2002 Page from the site to Allen Road located between buildings four and five of the project. He just wanted to ensure that these elements were properly incorporated into the final design. Michael Rossi, also a resident of The Palms echoed Mr. Thompson's comments that the map that was attached to the notice of the meeting didn't reflect anything that was the result of the negotiations, with the developer. Mr. Carlovsky, a resident of The Palms was also attending to make sure that those conditions are reflected in the approval. Mr. Eggert noted that the conditions have already been incorporated into the proposal and he read the conditions as follows: Item 15, "The applicant shall install landscaping and a wall along the west side of Allen Road adjacent to the subdivision, and along the entire north side of Dove Creek Drive, excepting the width that requires secondary emergency access. Secondary emergency access shall be provided through solid gates designed to compliment the wall treatment. All wall and landscaping designs shall comply with Planning Commission Resolution 5892. All wall and landscaping shall be maintained by property owners, and/or a homeowner's association. In addition, the developer shall construct a minimum six foot masonry block wall measured from the highest adjacent grade along the common property line between this proposed subdivision and the existing development to the south. The wall on the south side of the property west of Majesty Palm Street may be eight feet in height if agreed to by the developer and adjacent property owners without the need of a wall height modification." Item 16A, "Pedestrian access shall be provided through a break in the landscape wall along Allen Road, approximately 140 feet north of Dove Creek Drive, between the common entry courtyards of Lots 2 and 3 shown on tentative map 6108," which on this plan is right in this area. Item 16B, "A private sidewalk shall be provided from the development's interior street to the public sidewalk on Allen Road to allow students to walk in the landscaped area between the buildings, and not within the drive aisle. Final designs shall be approved by the Public Works and Planning Departments." Item 16C, "Along Allen Road, the developer shall install a detached sidewalk with landscaping, including trees between the curb and the sidewalk." Mr. Eggert noted that those conditions came from the tract map approved by the City Council and were carried over to this proposal. Neil Walker, a resident of The Palms and one of the adjacent property owners, stated that he was here because of the same concern, that the map that was sent out as an attachment wasn't very illustrative about where these things were located. He was satisfied based on Mr. Eggert's comments. S:IBZA SPRgdinuteslsprmnl l.19. doc Minutes, SPR 11/19/2002 Page In response to the overlook concern, Mr. Eggert stated that all the windows that are looking down to Dove Creek Road (Lot Number 1), are required to be screened from direct views into adjacent rear yards. The city usually prefers using landscaping because that's a more permanent solution than lattice or other building products that deteriorate. The applicant will have to plant evergreen trees in those areas that they overlook. The code says that if they are within 150 feet of the R-1 zone, screening will have to be provided. It appears that we only have one house that overlooks will be a concern. Mr. Jim Ward, the applicant's architect noted that the only overlook is going to be to the south of Dove Creek on that first lot. The other buildings are one-story. All of the units that back up to lots 12, 13 and 14 are single story. The grade on lot 16 is the highest and we're two feet lower than the adjacent lot and separated by an eight foot wall. Our finished pad is 3625, so we're dead level. On Dove Creek there will be a wall, a sidewalk, and about three feet of landscaping. Mr. Hardisty acknowledged a letter received from Patrick and Karen Thompson and made it an official part of the file. Discussion took place about the median landscaping along Allen Road since it was entirely in the county's jurisdiction. Mr. Hardisty noted that the median will eventually be constructed since Allen Road is an arterial road. However, as many of the existing tracts were developed under the county's rules, Allen Road will not have consistent landscaping. Mr. Hardisty asked if the applicant was in agreement with the changes that were talked about, and the discussions we've had concerning the overlooks, the walls, and the landscaping. There being no further comments, he directed staff to prepare a final letter of approval on this project. He thanked those in attendance for taking time out of their day to be part of the process. COMMUNICATIONS None DIRECTOR COMMENTS None ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 4:25 p.m. JACK HARDISTY Development Services Director S:IBZA SPR~inuteslsprmnl l.19. doc