Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD NO 3925 3925 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SUBSECTION E. OF SECTION 17.14.026 OF TITLE 17 OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO BUILDING ORIENTATION OF MULTIPLE FAMILY BUILDINGS WITH FOUR UNITS OR LESS IN THE R-2 ZONE DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield initiated a proposal to amend Title 17 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code relating to building orientation of multiple family buildings with four units or less in the R-2 zone district; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission through its Secretary set Thursday, July 15, 1999 at the hour of 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield1 California, as the time and place for a public hearing before said Commission on said ordinance, and notice of the public hearing was given in the manner prescribed in the Municipal Code and the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 122-99 recommending approval of the proposed ordinance amendments and forwarded its recommendation to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council through its City Clerk set Wednesday, September 8, 1999 at the hour of 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, as the time and place to consider said ordinance; and WHEREAS, the ordinance was found to be exempt from the provisions of CEQA and the law and regulations as set forth in CEQA and the City of Bakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures have been duly followed by city staff and this Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council, at said public meeting, considered the ordinance and all relevant facts, and the Council adopted the findings made by the Planning Commission as contained in the Commission's Resolution No. 122-99. JE: P:\R-2 change_cco~d wpd NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Bakersfield as follows: SECTION 1. Subsection E. of Section 17.14.026 is hereby amended to read as follows: E. For multiple-family dwellings with four units or less, the street end unit entry and windows must face the street, utility and other mechanical equipment shall not be visible from the street, and architectural elevations for adjacent buildings shall not be the same. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall be posted in accordance with the Bakersfield Municipal Code and shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. .......... 000 .......... JE: P:\R-2 change_ccord wpd .~ I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on SEP ~, ~. 199~J , by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER CARSON, COUCH, DEMOND, MAGGARD, ROWLES, SALVAGGIO, SULLIVAN COUNClLMEMBER ~O ~ COUNCILMEMBER ~,J D ~,,~ ·¢' COUNCILMEMBER l'Jo ~ APPROVED: SEP ~, 1999 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD CITY CLERK and EX OFFICIO of the Council of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED AS TO FORM: BART J. THILTGEN, CITY ATTORNEY By: JE: P:~R-2 change_ccord wpd Minutes~ PC, Thursdayr July 15, 1999 Page 7 put in along the west side of the project at AIIoway Lane and Ross Street a chainlink fence closing off the gap between the project and the school modified by the memorandum dated July 13, 1999, from Stanle' Director, 3) as part of returning to us with a Final Development Plan applicant will also include a landscape plan and a "tot lot" either in or the soccer park, and 4) the applicant will be entitled to a park to be calculated by staff using the standard rate of 7 tenths 1,000 population. g y park Commissioner Kemper said she had a concern increase in cost to the homeowner in the monthly ho~ It might make it prohibitive for the economic status Kemper said that she would like the applicant to I association dues for puffing in a "tot in the parks to put one in. lot" and about the association fee. buyers. Commissioner back a cost impact of the ~y not be enough room Mr. Grady commented that staff wanted clear that in reg subdivision. the motion made it the P.U.D. not the entire Commissioner Boyle said amend the motion to make it part of the P.U.D. only and as far as Ms. ;omments, he feels they could also be addressed as [ d P.U.D. map. Commissioner Dhaner roll call vote: I the motion. Motion carried by the following AYES: Brady, Dhanens, Kemper, McGinnis, Tkac NOES: ABSEF Commissioner Sprague made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Dhanens, to ~rove and adopt the Negative Declaration to approve Vesting Tentative Tract ~ 5948 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached resolution Exhibit "A' and with the addition that the applicant would be entitled to a park credit to be calculated by staff at 7 tenths of an acre per 1,000 population for those units inside the P.U.D. Motion carried by group vote. PUBLIC HEARING-ORDINANCEAMENDMENT Staff report was given recommending approval of the change in the ordinance. Public portion of the meeting was opened. No one spoke against the project. Dennis Fox spoke in favor of the project. He mentioned that an allowance might be made to get parking off the streets. Minutes~ PCp Thursday~ July 15~ 1999 Page 8 Public portion of the meeting was closed. Commissioner Kemper stated that she was a member of the committee and is in agreement with the changes. Commissioner Boyle said that he sat on the committee also and supports the change in the ordinance. Commissioner Dhanens said that he had mixed feelings about this. One of the benefits of turning a unit parallel to the street is that it avoids the "barracks" affect. He thinks it is a worthwhile goal the way it is. He cannot support the ordinance change. He cannot see the problems and feels the development community is being faced with something they are not used to and the issues can be worked out. Commissioner Sprague said that he agrees with staff and Commissioner Kemper. The change is good to what was originally proposed, Commissioner Boyle said that he would not be opposed to send this back for further study but was not willing to make a motion, Commissioner Brady stated that he was on the committee and it was a long drawn out process and he feels that it is not necessary to send this back to committee. Commissioner Brady asked staff how long the ordinance had been in effect? Mr. Grady replied that it had been in effect for a year or more. Commissioner Brady then asked how many projects has the city had that has been affected by it? Mr. Eggert responded by saying we had had one on Brookside Drive. He stated that there were numerous projects that came in with unworkable designs - too much open space for one. Commissioner Brady asked if this is unworkable under any circumstances and no one can develop under this ordinance or can an exception be made on a case-by-case basis? Mr. Grady responded by saying the difficulty with that is everyone would come in with a reason that they could not comply. It would be hard to come up with some measurable criteria for judging whether or not there is some real reason why they can or cannot accommodate this turning of the lots. Commissioner Brady asked if its' staffs position that the remaining ordinance achieves the goal that it was set out to achieve? Mr. Grady responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Brady said that he would support staff's position. Commissioner Sprague made a motion to adopt the attached resolution with all findings approving the proposed text change to Section 17.14.026 E. supporting the recommendations of staff. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Kemper. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Boyle, Brady, Kemper, McGinnis, Sprague, Tkac NOES: Commissioner Dhanens ABSENT: None RESOLUTION NO. 122-99 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE TEXT OF SECTION 17.14.026 E RELATING TO BUILDING ORIENTATION OF MULTIPLE FAMILY BUILDINGS WITH FOUR OR LESS UNITS WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield initiated a text amendment to Section 17.14.026 E. relating to building orientation of multiple family buildings with four or less units; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, through its Secretary, set THURSDAY, JULY 15, 1999 at the hour of 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, as the time and place for a public hearing before them on the proposal, and notice of the public hearing was given in the manner provided in Title 17 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City ofBakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures have been duly followed by city staff and the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the above described project is Categorically Exempt from the requirements of CEQA in accordance with the general rule of CEQA (Section 15061); and WHEREAS, the facts presented in the staff report, and evidence received both in writing and by verbal testimony at the above referenced public hearing(s), support the findings contained in this resolution; and WHEREAS, at the above mentioned public hearing(s), the proposal was heard and all facts, testimony and evidence was considered by the Planning Commission, and they made the following findings regarding the proposed project: The amendment is necessary and desirable as proper use of the c ty s zomng author ty for the protection of the general health, safety and welfare of the community. The amendments are consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan. Hearing notices regarding the proposed project were published as a l/8th display advertisement in a local newspaper of general circulation at least 10 days prior to the hearing. The provisions of CEQA and City of Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures have been followed. Staff determined that the proposed activity is a project and is exempt in accordance with the general rule of CEQA (Section 15061). The amendment modifies a design feature of multiple family projects of four units or less. Therefore, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the project will have a :~. c . significant effect on the environment. .~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE C1TY OF BAKERSFIELD as follows: 1. That the above recitals, incorporated herein, are true and correct. That the text amendment to Subsection E. of Section 17.14.026 is recommended to be forwarded to the City Council for adoption reading as follows: "For multiple-family dwellings with 4 units or less, the street end unit entry and windows must face the street, utility and other mechanical equipment shall not be visible from the street, and architectural elevations for adjacent buildings shall not be the same." On a motion by Commissioner Sprague, and seconded by Commissioner Munis-Kemper, the Planning Commission approved this resolution by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Tkac, Brady, Boyle, McGinnis, Munis-Kemper, Spraque Dhanens None I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting held on the 15'~ day of July, 1999, DATED: July 15, 1999 CITY OF BAKI~SFIELD N~G~ION JElc~y'*I'KACk~ hairman Bakers, field MuniciIval Code - Title 1 7, Zoning Ordinance R-2 Zone EXISTING PROPOSED Chapter 17.14 R-2 LIMITED MULTIPLE-FAMILY DWELLING ZONE 17.14.026 ADDITIONAL REQUI CLEMENTS. The following requirements shall apply to al! r ewlopzne~t permitted by this chapter: A. All permitted and conCitior~al ~ses pi :rst,a,~t to t,fis chapter shall be subject to site plan review as provided in Chapter 17.08. B. Landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 17.61. In addition, projects with 4 units or less, a block wall and landscaping is required along arterial streets. C. Off-street parking and loading shal', oe subject to the requirements of Chapter 17.58. D. Signs shall be subject to the require~:nts of Chapter 17.60. For multiple-family dwellings with 4 units or less, no more than 2 adjacent buildings shall be perpendicul: r to 11 e street. Street end unit entry and windows must face street. Utility and AC units shall not be visible from the street. Elevations for adjacent units shall not be the same. For multiple-family dwellings with 4 units or less. the street end unit entry and windows must face the street, utility and other mechanical equipment shall not be visible from the street, and architectural elevations for adjacent buildings shall not be the same. Febraa?,,,J 999 ~ hapter l .]4, l~age ] Typical 4-plex develo ~ment Older infill project 4-plex with buildings parallel to the street Street AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING DOCUMENTS STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS. County of Kern ) PAMELA A. McCARTHY, being duly sworn, deposes and says: That she is the duly appointed, acting and qualified City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield; and that on the 23rd day of September , 1999 she posted on the Bulletin Board at City Hall, a full, true and correct copy of the following: Ordinance No. 3925 , passed by the Bakersfield City Council at a meeting held on the 22nd day of September 1999 , and entitled: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SUBSECTION E. OF SECTION 17.14.026 OF TITLE 17 OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO BUILDING ORIENTATION OF MULTIPLE FAMILY BUILDINGS WITH FOUR UNITS OR LESS IN THE R-2 ZONE DISTRICT. /s/PAMELA A. McCARTHY City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield DEPUTY City Clerk -- ~/ S:\DOCUMENT~AOPOSTING September 23, 1999