Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 7, 2003Council Chambers, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Commissioners Tragish, Blockley, Ellison, Lomas, Spencer, Tkac Commissioner Gay Advisory Members: Ginny Gennaro, Jim Movius, Jim Holladay, Phil Burns Staff: Louise Palmer, Pam Townsend Due to the absence of Commissioner Gay, Vice-Chairman Tragish conducted tonight's meeting. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: PUBLIC STATEMENTS: None CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 4.2 Non-Public Hearing Items 4.1a Approval of minutes for Planning Commission meetings of June 16, 19 and July 17, 2003. Motion made by Commissioner Spencer, seconded by Commissioner Blockley, to approve the non-public hearing portion of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by group vote. Public Hearing Items - None PUBLIC HEARING - Tentative Tract Maps 5.1 PUBLIC HEARING - Revised Vestinq Tentative Tract Map 6185 (Mclntosh and Associates) (Continued from July 17, 2003) (Ward 4) Public portion of the hearing was opened on July 17, 2003. Minutes, PC, August 7, 2003 Page 2 Staff recommended approval subject to conditions contained in the staff report. The applicant has requested park credit and staff is recommending, along with the North of the River Parks and Recreation District, that the request be denied. Roger Mclntosh, representing Castle & Cooke, Inc., spoke in opposition to staff's recommendation. Mr. Mclntosh said that the reason they are asking for park credit is that these are 5,000 sq. ft. lots with a private gated street area and a private rec facility is not done all over the City of Bakersfield. It is usually done by Castle & Cooke to serve the inhabitants of a subdivision. They feel that it provides recreation for the residents so they don't have to go to a public park somewhere up the road. The park will provide picnic areas, open space, bar-be-que areas, pool and a shade trellis totaling about 5.35 percent of the gross acreage of the subdivision. The requirements for getting a small lot subdivision approved is 2-1/2 percent of the overall gross area to be provided as open space. The park will be maintained by the homeowners association and, therefore, there will be less wear and tear on the public park nearby (Liberty) and less need for park services. Mr. Mclntosh requested that the Planning Commission also allow them to remove the ten parking spaces that is being required which will give even more recreation area. Parking can be provided on the private streets around the park site. Mr. Mclntosh concurred with Public Works in removing condition 7.2 and the altering of condition 8.1 and all other conditions of the staff report except condition 24.1 which needs to be altered to delete the requirement for the ten parking spaces. Mr. Mclntosh said he is available to answer any questions the Commission may have. No one else spoke either for or against staff's recommendation. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Spencer asked how the subdivision will be accessed and stated that he agrees with the Parks and Recreation letter and supports staff's recommendation on the park credit. Mr. Mclntosh said that Jewetta Avenue will cross over the Kern River Freeway. Currently it is being built up and the roadway will be constructed to connect to the north all the way to Brimhall and all the way down to Stockdale Highway. The access to Tract 6185 is through two access points off of Jewetta Avenue. Commissioner Blockley asked staff if there is any sort of incentive for small lot subdivisions with the amenity that he is describing and the park credit system? Mr. Movius said what the Planning Commission committee and the Planning Commission looked at when they redid the ordinance was the amount of requests for small lot subdivisions and they decided that if you are providing small lots, there should be a benefit to the community as far as recreational facilities or open space. Commissioner Ellison said he has no problem with removing the senior citizen restriction and asked how the Municipal Code handles park land credit on gated community parks? Mr. Movius said the muni code does not differentiate between a gated recreational facility or one that has public streets all around it. It allows you to provide seven tenths of an acre credit in either case. Commissioner Ellison stated he agrees with the justification for denying the credit as stated in the staff report. Minutes, PC, August 7, 2003 Page 3 Commissioner Lomas asked how NOR factors into this and what would happen if the city would give the park land credit? Mr. Movius said they would have to accept it as the city is the lead agency on the subdivision map and they do honor city ordinances. Commissioner Lomas asked about the ten parking spaces. Mr. Movius said there would be no parking to serve the park site without them. The city has found that many people drive to the park and the streets in this subdivision are private narrower streets. The city has required parking in most of the private parks in gated communities. Commissioner Lomas asked Mr. Mclntosh why they want the parking spaces removed? Mr. Mclntosh said it encourages people to walk to the park which cuts down air pollution and they do not feel that ten spaces are needed. The Planning Commission determines the parking requirements for park and recreation facilities. There is no minimum code requirement and they think it would be better served to turn those ten spaces into grass, trees, shade and open space. Commissioner Lomas said she thinks the parking spaces are needed. Commissioner Lomas asked why they have changed their mind about the age restriction? Mr. Mclntosh said he did not know for sure but the need for age restriction housing has changed in the last three months. Commissioner Spencer asked why the developer finds it necessary to eliminate the ten parking spaces and why couldn't they eliminate one lot so that they could have more parking? Mr. Mclntosh said it is not a matter of adding a lot or taking a lot out but that staff's justification for not allowing a park credit is that the area developed into park is further reduced by ten parking spaces. Their response to that is if that is the problem, then take the ten spaces out and put more park in. Commissioner Tragish said he is in favor of withdrawing the senior designation. Commissioner Tragish asked if other private-gated communities get park credit? Mr. Movius said that sometimes yes and sometimes no. Sometimes the applicant requests this at the hearing which does not give staff enough time to review the request or sometimes staff will recommend a park credit if there are significantly more amenities than required. In this case, this is not as intensely developed recreational area as staff has recommended approval of in the past. Secondly, this is in a different jurisdiction for park services and their board is recommending denial. Unless there is something very unique and they are receiving a deviation from standards to a lesser standard than the city requires, staff is pretty consistent in recommending denial. Commissioner Tragish asked how close we try to make our parks in the City? Mr. Movius said he believes the service area is around % mile for a neighborhood park. Commissioner Tragish asked if the people in the area of this tract will be served by having this particular recreation area? Mr. Movius said it is a great marketing tool but it is within the service area of Liberty Park. Commissioner Tragish asked if there are any other parks planned in the area? Mr. Movius said there is a 30 acre park planned where Stockdale crosses the river with the soccer fields next door. Commissioner Tragish said he doesn't see how the park in the gated community will benefit other residents in the area. He feels that the credit the applicant is seeking will cut into the benefit to the area of building other parks that will benefit the people in that radius. Mr. Mclntosh said there is about 120 acres within % mile of this area for park. Minutes, PC, August 7, 2003 Page 4 There is no reason to pay anymore fees for acquisition of park land. In addition, these homes will pay a $680 fee for park land improvements. They are not asking for a credit on the fees paid for capital improvements. Commissioner Tragish asked Mr. Movius how they justify not allowing the credit to be extended? Mr. Movius said that if that argument is used, then they should give credit to all of the developers in the area and there is still % square miles to be developed. He doesn't think that that argument can be used tonight. He is not sure how North of the River built Liberty Park - whether the people out there now paid for the park or they used money from other areas and that maybe they still need money from these developments that are on-line to re-coop that money. Commissioner Tragish said the ordinance is there for a purpose and is there to allow a developer to build smaller lots. Just because there is higher density, it doesn't necessarily mean there is a benefit in this particular area. Commissioner Tragish said his position is that he would not allow the park credit. Commissioner Tragish asked Mary Jane Wilson, from WZI, how the air quality study can say the project whether it is built or not it will have no affect when the project is going to have eight homes per acre on five thousand square foot lots? Ms. Wilson said it was put in there to give the Commission a relative context of the San Joaquin Valley and the total amount of emissions in the San Joaquin Valley versus the emissions from this one project as a project. The important portion of the study is the significance level of ten tons and the fact this project was well below ten tons and the origin of the ten ton significance level which is more to the question as to what makes a project "small" or "less than significant." The ten tons threshold is actually predicated on the State implementation plan that the San Joaquin Valley developed for reaching attainment with the Federal standards. Commissioner Tragish asked if conditions 27 and 28 pertaining to the canal fencing requirements could be combined because they are talking about any canal within ¼ mile of the project? Mr. Movius said they are actually two different instances. One is to make sure they address the part of the project that is immediately adjacent to the canal. The other addresses any part of this tract that is within ¼ mile of the canal that may extend to the west or to the south of the project. There is a part of the ordinance that says if you are within a ¼ of that, you have to make sure you are fenced off also. Commissioner Tragish says he feels that the conditions should still be combined and that one condition could be written to cover both instances. Commissioner Tragish asked if the proposed Westside Freeway has been graded and if so is work scheduled to commence on it? Mr. Holladay said he doesn't know. They haven't been out to look at it. There were no more Commissioner comments. Motion made by Commissioner Ellison, seconded by Commissioner Blockley, to approve and adopt the Negative Declaration approving Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6185 with findings and conditions set forth in the resolution attached to the Planning Director's memorandum dated July 24, 2003 Exhibit A. AYES: Commissioner Blockley, Ellison, Lomas, Spencer, Tkac, Tragish NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Gay Minutes, PC, August 7, 2003 Page 5 5.2 PUBLIC HEARING - Vestinq Tentative Tract Map 6196 (SmithTech USA, Inc) (Ward 5) Public portion of the hearing opened. Staff stated that the applicant has requested a continuance until August 21,2003. No one spoke against the request. Cindy Parra, representing SmithTech USA, stated they are requesting the continuance. Motion was made by Commissioner Spencer, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to continue this item until August 21,2003. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioner Blockley, Ellison, Lomas, Spencer, Tkac, Tragish None Commissioner Gay 5.3 PUBLIC HEARING - Vestinq Tentative Tract Map 6210 (Pinnacle Engineering) (Ward 1) Public portion of the hearing opened. Staff report giving recommending approval with conditions. Applicant has requested to be put on the consent calendar and agrees with all conditions. No one spoke in opposition. Trent Miller, representing Pinnacle Engineering, stated they are in full agreement with staff's recommendations. Public portion of the hearing closed. Commissioner Lomas asked about Public Works condition number 2 requiring the fence be replaced and wondered if the applicant owns the adjacent property? Mr. Movius said that what this is requiring is the temporary cul-de-sac be removed and replaced with standard street improvements. It is a different owner but the cul-de-sac is on this owner's property. There were no more Commissioner comments. Motion made by Commissioner Tkac, seconded by Commissioner Ellison, to approve and adopt the Negative Declaration and approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6210 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached Resolution A. AYES: Commissioner Blockley, Ellison, Lomas, Spencer, Tkac, Tragish NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Gay Minutes, PC, August 7, 2003 Page 6 6. PUBLIC HEARING -Vestinq Tentative Parcel Map 10606 (Dawson Engineering & Associates) (Ward 6) Public portion of the hearing opened. Staff stated that the applicant has requested a continuance until September 4, 2003. Commissioner Ellison recused himself from this project. No one spoke against the request. Brett Dawson stated they asked for the continuance to allow time to work with the well operator in getting a sufficient parcel size for the well site. Motion was made by Commissioner Spencer, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to continue this item until September 4, 2003. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioner Blockley, Lomas, Spencer, Tkac, Tragish None Commissioner Gay, Ellison COMMUNICATIONS: None ~COMMISSION COMMENTS: None DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THE NEXT PRE- 10. MEETING: It was decided there would not be a pre-meeting on August 4, 2003. ADJOURNMEMT: There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 6:37 p.m. Pam Townsend, Recording Secretary August 26, 2003 JAMES MOVIUS, Acting Secretary Principal Planner