Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 1, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MINUTES OF APRIL 1, 2004 - 5:30 P.M. Council Chambers, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue 1. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Gay, Blockley, Ellison, Lomas, Spencer, Tkac Absent: Commissioner Tragish Advisory Members: Robert Sherfy, Alan Shaw, Stanley Grady, Marian Shaw, Jack Leonard Staff: Jim Movius, Pam Townsend 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS: None 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Non-Public Hearing Items 4.1 a Approval of minutes for Planning Commission meetings of February 5, 19 and March 4, 2004. 4.1 b Approval of General Plan Consistency finding for the acquisition of the water well site in Tract 6121 located east of Jenkins Road, generally between Brimhall Road and Palm Avenue. (City of Bakersfield). (Exempt from CEQA) (Ward 4) Motion made by Commissioner Ellison, seconded by Commissioner Spencer, to approve the non-public hearing portion of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by group vote. 4.2 Public Hearing Items 4.2a Approve continuance to May 20, 2004 - Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 6295 (Porter-Robertson) (Ward 4) 4.2b Remove Revised Comprehensive Sign Plan (File No. 03-1464) (Panama Lane, LLC) (Ward 7) 4.2c Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6291 (Porter-Robertson Eng) Minutes, PC, April 1, 2004 Page 2 (Ward 7) Public portion of the hearing opened. No one spoke either for or against the projects. Public portion of the hearing closed. There were no Commission comments. Motion made by Commissioner Blockley, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to approve the public hearing portion of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by group vote. 5. EXTENSION OF VESTING RIGHTS ON TRACT 6125 UNIT 2 (Delmarter and Diefel Engineering) (Ward 7) Staff report given recommending denial. There would be economic consequences that would be born by the public if it were voted to extend vesting rights. Public portion of the hearing opened. No one spoke either for or against staff's recommendation of denial. Public portion of the hearing was closed. There were no Commission comments. Motion made by Commissioner Spencer, seconded by Commissioner Ellison, to deny the continuance as per staff's recommendation. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Ellison, Lomas, Spencer, Tkac, Gay NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Tragish On a motion by Commissioner Tkac, seconded by Commissioner Blockley, the order of the agenda was changed allowing 7.1 to be heard at this time. Motion carried by group vote. 7.1 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 6256 (Porter-Robertson Eng) (Ward 3) Staff report given recommending approval subject to conditions contained in the staff report. Public portion of the hearing opened. No one spoke in opposition to the project. Harold Robertson, representing the applicant, said they are in agreement with the conditions of approval with the exception of the condition regarding the improvement of Royal Coach Drive and Lamplight Street. The streets are within a private gated community and they are currently half- width. Mr. Robertson said they do not feel they should have to improve those streets within a private gated community with no access or means of utilizing that portion of those improvements for his development. Mr. Blumer, the applicant, then spoke. He stated that before he purchased the property in question he met several times with the homeowners association and proposed that he make the area connected and open to the existing Royal Coach Homeowners Association. The feedback he got from the association said they were not interested in any additional homes or traffic or people in their homeowners association. He then decided to make this parcel a separate/private parcel. Mr. Blumer said they have tried to do the right thing as a neighbor and engineer, If he hadn't purchased the 3.93 acre piece and incorporated it into this subdivision, it would be a waste land due to the shape, size and location of it. He told the association that he is willing to grant or convey the other half of their right-of-way if they are willing to accept it, improve it and maintain it. They said "no". They wanted him to build it and maintain it for them. He feels like he is being more than generous by purchasing the land and offering it to them and now he feels that he is being taken advantage of by requiring him to improve property that the association does not want him to have access to. The homeowners association does not want him to have access Minutes, PC, April 1, 2004 Page 3 to the two streets that he has to improve. Sonya Reiser, a resident of Royal Coach Estates and a member of the Board of Directors of the association stated they are in favor of the tentative plan as stated by Mr. Grady. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Blockley wondered why the developer should shoulder the entire burden of improving the streets? Ms. Shaw said it is unfortunate that the homeowners association would not accept Mr. Blumer's "annexing himself into the association." That would save a lot of problems. Commissioner Blockley asked if there has been any discussion with the homeowners association regarding Mr. Blumer putting the street in and the association paying for it? Mr. Robertson said one of the proposals was that Mr. Blumer improve the road and Royal Coach would put up a gate at the entrance but they are unable to do that without acquiring a right-of-way from Mr. Blumer. In a response from a question by Commissioner Ellison asking about the condition requiring Mr, Blumer to improve these streets, Ms. Shaw said that it is basically a requirement of orderly development and a requirement of the policies of the City of Bakersfield that everything within the blue border of the map be improved to city standards. Commissioner Ellison asked if private roads have the same standards? Ms. Shaw said that unless a request is made for the private streets to be done to a lesser standard, it is assumed that they would be doing the improvements to the same standard. Commissioner Ellison asked Mr. Blumer if he has some preliminary numbers for the construction costs of the two roads? Mr. Blumer said the total cost of all improvements is $154,000. Thirty- six thousand dollars of which he is asking be left up to the homeowners association. Commissioner Gay asked if they need to stipulate that the project cannot be started until there is a paved Paladino going either to Morning or to Fairfax? Ms. Shaw said it wouldn't hurt to stipulate it but in order to record a map he has to have approved improved access to the tract. Ms. Shaw said she would be happy to add a condition clarifying that "with the recording of the map they would have to include in their improvements approved improved access to the tract." Commissioner Gay asked for that to be added to the vote. Commissioner Tkac asked Ms. Reiser if the association is willing to compromise and potentially buy this back after Mr. Blumer has done these improvements? Ms. Reiser said that at this point the association is not able to purchase anything. Their budget does not enable them to do that. The preliminary cost estimates ($36,000) would be what they would pay for the street improvements and she does not know if they are prepared to pay that. She thinks a compromise would be in order if required. Mr. Robertson said he thinks it needs to be pointed out that in one of the previous meetings Mr. Blumer had with the association, that upon recordation of this map that Mr. Blumer offered to grant lot B to the homeowners association, construct the block wall along the perimeter plus grade the street at its ultimate width so it would be ready for the homeowners association to improve at such time as they had the funds or they chose to improve it. In doing that, it would allow the Royal Coach Homeowners Association to maintain the privacy of that street by not opening up Lamplight Drive into Paladino. Commissioner Gay asked Mr. Robertson with all of the various phases of various tracts that Ms. Shaw says there are if they feel they have a right to turn this around and have access to Royal Minutes, PC, April 1, 2004 Page 4 Coach without their permission? Mr. Robertson said what they would have to do to accomplish that is to revise this map so that they would widen Lamplight Street and Royal Coach Drive off of Paladino so they would basically create another street running parallel to the existing half-width street and fronting off of that and he does not think that is desirable for either party. Mr. Robertson said as far as adding a condition for off-site improvements he pointed out that Paladino Drive is an arterial and as a part of development standards, he is required (if there is not existing off-site access there) to develop two travel lanes. Since Paladino is an arterial on the traffic impact fee list and the developments he has to the east, the sequential part of this is that Paladino will most likely be constructed and if it is not, it would have to be designed and two lanes would have to be constructed by the developer of this tract. Commissioner Blockley said that without some sort of agreement or concurrence expressed to the Commission he doesn't see how they can proceed except to follow staff's recommendation. Continuing this may be an option if there is hope of getting a concurrence from the party's involved. Mr. Blumer said he does not want to continue it but if he needs to continue it to resolve the issue fairly he would do that. Mr. Blumer said that if it was possible to get the approval that the Royal Coach Homeowners Assoc. would accept "granting them" the widening of the strips of those two streets, that would be his number one preference. That would allow them to develop it at their own pace. Commissioner Ellison said this is a private road so, therefore, it is a private issue. Responding from a question regarding crash gates from Commissioner Gay, Ms Shaw said there is no requirement for putting a crash gate in on a private street. Commissioner Lomas agreed with a continuance. She didn't see why Mr. Blumer should pay for a road on private property that he has no use for. Commissioner Spencer said he feels the same as Commissioner Lomas but he doesn't see a compelling reason to continue this matter. In his opinion, it is not debatable. He feels the subdivision should be redesigned so that Mr. Blumer can take advantage of the street. Commissioner Ellison said he feels they should go with staff's recommendation. There were no more Commissioner comments. Motion made by Commissioner Ellison, seconded by Commissioner Blockley, to adopt a resolution approving the Negative Declaration and approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6256 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached resolution Exhibit A and adding the condition that prior to recordation of the final map approved improved public access must be provided to the tract. Minimum improvements will include 32 feet of paving and graded shoulders. Motion denied by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Ellison NOES: Commissioner Lomas, Spencer, Tkac, Gay ABSENT: Commissioner Tkac Commissioner Gay asked if the city would approve Mr. Blumer building lots 6, 7 & 8? Ms. Shaw said that Lamplight and Royal Coach would be 16 feet wide which is not wide enough to get two Minutes, PC, April 1, 2004 Page 5 cars to pass each other. They certainly couldn't park on it. It would not be her recommendation to do that. Commissioner Gay asked Ms. Reiser if the association has ever discussed an assessment to purchase the land from Mr. Blumer? Ms. Reiser said not to her knowledge. Mr. Blumer at their last meeting did propose that he would grant the land to them with rough grading. Commissioner Gay asked if this was acceptable to the homeowners association? Ms. Reiser said it is her personal opinion that his proposal to grant them the land and grade it would be acceptable but she cannot speak for the association. They could possibly get the streets finished at his cost. Commissioner Gay asked if there is a way to drop out Lot B from this or require an amendment that Mr. Blumer rough grade this to whatever level and deed this to Royal Coach. Mr. Grady asked if that would leave the wall and landscaping still in place? Commissioner Gay said that is a good point. They would have to require a block wall but the sidewalk and landscaping would be the homeowner's association. Mr. Grady said the way staff has it written Mr. Blumer would form a homeowner's association for his subdivision and they would be responsible for maintaining the landscaping on the opposite side of the wall. Commissioner Gay asked if it would be better to continue this item to give staff some time to work with Mr. Blumer? Mr. Grady said they could spend some time to explore the options. Mr. Blumer said he would like to continue this so that he can go back to the homeowners association and meet with them to get a formal direction from them. Commissioner Gay asked if May 20, 2004 would be a good date to continue this item to? Mr. Grady and Mr. Blumer said yes. Motion made by Commissioner Tkac, seconded by Commissioner Spencer, to re-open the public hearing and to continue this item until May 20, 2004. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Ellison, Lomas, Spencer, Tragish, Tkac, Gay NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Tragish 6. PUBLIC HEARING —Tentative Parcel Map No. 10991 (Cannon Associates) (Ward 1) Public portion of the hearing opened. Staff report given recommending approval subject to conditions contained in the staff report, including a memo from Ms. Shaw. No one spoke in opposition to staff's recommendation. Robin Dickerson, representing the applicant, said they have met with staff and accept all of the conditions. She is available to answer any questions the Commission may have. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Lomas asked why condition 14 refers to single family? Ms. Shaw said that was a typo. Minutes, PC, April 1, 2004 Page 6 Commissioner Spencer asked if condition 2.1 could state that "all access shall be restricted to East Brundage" in-lieu of the way it is worded right now? Ms. Shaw said that is what her memo says. There were no other Commissioner comments. Motion made by Commissioner Lomas, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to adopt a resolution approving the Negative Declaration and approving the requested Tentative Parcel Map 10991 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached resolution Exhibit A and including the memo from Marian Shaw dated March 25, 2004 and adding to condition 14 "per equivalent dwelling unit" instead of "for single family dwelling" and recommend same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Ellison, Lomas, Spencer, Tkac, Gay NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Tragish 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS —Tentative Tract Maps 7.1 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 6256 (Porter-Robertson Eng) (Ward 3) This item was heard earlier in the agenda. 7.2 Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6281 (McIntosh &Associates) (Ward 4) Roger McIntosh, representing the applicant, requested a continuance to April 15, 2004 to work out narrow streets with Public Works. Motion made by Commissioner Blockley, seconded by Commissioner Ellison, to continue this item until April 15, 2004. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Ellison, Lomas, Spencer, Tkac, Gay NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Tragish 7.3 Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6289 (Porter-Robertson Eng) (Ward 4) Public portion of the hearing opened. Staff report given recommending approval subject to conditions contained in the staff report. No one spoke in opposition to the project. Fred Porter, representing the applicant, stated they are in agreement with staff's recommendation and he is available to answer any questions the Commission may have. Minutes, PC, April 1, 2004 Page 7 Public portion of the hearing closed. Commissioner Tkac said the street lengths seem to be a little long and asked how long the City likes to keep them so that we don't have speedways? Ms. Shaw said the city's policy is 1,000 feet between blocks. They do allow longer streets under unusual circumstances. The way the property is divided is one reason. Commissioner Ellison asked Mr. Porter about the abandoned oil well on the site. Mr. Porter said the developer intends to abandon the well at such time as they complete their agreement with the owners of the facilities. Commissioner Ellison said that it appears the drill site may be in the flight path of the Mosquito Abatement Airstrip and wondered if that is an active air strip? Mr. Porter said yes it is. Mr. Grady said staff received a letter from Mosquito Abatement stating they do not have a problem with the site. Commissioner Ellison said he would be in support of the project. Commissioner Lomas asked if there is going to be some improvement in the area of Allen and Hageman and wondered if condition 18 is going to help that? Ms. Shaw said she knows there are some improvements for Hageman and Allen but without checking some of the documentation she cannot tell her what is planned. There were no other Commissioner comments. Motion made by Commissioner Blockley, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to adopt a resolution approving the Negative Declaration and approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6289 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached resolution Exhibit A, incorporating the March 30 memorandum from Marian Shaw and recommend same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Ellison, Lomas, Spencer, Tkac, Gay NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Tragish 7.4 Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6291 (Porter-Robertson Eng) (Ward 7) See Consent Agenda 7.5 Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 6295 (Porter-Robertson) (Ward 4) See Consent Agenda 7.6a&b Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6254/PUD Zone Change 04-0158 (McIntosh& Associates) (Ward 4) Public portion of the hearing opened. Staff report given recommending approval of the subdivision and PUD subject to the conditions contained in the staff report. Ms. Shaw asked the Commission to turn to page 6 of 8 of the PUD Minutes, PC, April 1, 2004 Page 8 zone change condition number 12 and strike out the second sentence that says: "This fee will be based at the rate in effect at the time the building permit is issued." Since there is a vesting map on this, Ms. Shaw said it is in contradiction to state law so the sentence must be struck out. No one spoke in opposition to the project. Mr. McIntosh, representing the applicant, said the developer has an agreement with the city to exchange some right-of-way for a retention basin in exchange for some improvements on Brimhall Road. This map would be subject to that agreement. This was originally an apartment complex and the developer decided that he would rather build four-plexes. To do that they could not follow the city standards with city streets the way he wanted to establish this development. He wanted to create seventeen, four-plex lots for sale and also to provide a recreational amenity unique to a typical four-plex project. The streets will be private and are slightly narrower than city standard. The individual owners will have ownership of the common areas, recreational facilities and private streets. They concur with the conditions of approval and subject to the memorandum dated November 20, 2003 from Ms. Shaw. Public portion of the hearing closed. Commissioner Gay asked if developers are going to private, gated streets to get around the new subdivision ordinance on four-plexes? Mr. Grady said he doesn't know if it is setting a precedent for the future but it is a departure from what they had envisioned when they did the four-plex ordinance. However, it was for project fronting on public streets. This does have one of the elements discussed in the committee and that was a provision for the four-plexes to provide for a jointly paid for and managed recreational amenity but it was not implemented in the ordinance. Commissioner Gay asked Ms. Shaw if the 24 street is wide enough for decel and stacking for access? Mr. Walker said in keeping the private street to at least 24 feet, it shouldn't be a design problem. Motion made by Commissioner Blockley, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to approve and adopt the negative declaration and to approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6254 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached resolution Exhibit A and recommend same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Ellison, Lomas, Spencer, Tkac, Gay NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Tragish Motion made by Commissioner Blockley, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to approve and adopt the negative declaration and to approve Zone Change 04-0158 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached resolution Exhibit A, incorporate Public Works memo dated November 20, 2003 and recommend same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Ellison, Lomas, Spencer, Tkac, Gay NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Tragish 8. PUBLIC HEARING —Zone Change 03-1540 (Tarr Architects) (Ward 7) Minutes, PC, April 1, 2004 Page 9 Public portion of the hearing opened. Staff report given recommending approval subject to the conditions contained in the staff report. No one spoke in opposition to staff's recommendation. Terry Tarr, representing the property owner, stated they had some last minute negotiations with Public Works and have come to an agreement. They are requesting some additional phasing of the fees and certain portions of construction. Ms. Shaw said the total payment of the median fee is required for the full width of the parcel but since the improvements for Stine Road are being allowed to be phased, the payment of the median fee can be phased as well. Staff has no objection. Ms. Shaw said the request for the deferral of the transportation impact fees is not allowed by ordinance. Those must be paid by building permit but you only pay them on a permit-by-permit basis. The maintenance district is another requirement by ordinance and cannot be waived or deferred. Mr. Tarr said he could accept Ms. Shaw's comments. Public hearing closed. Motion made by Commissioner Spencer, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to approve and adopt the negative declaration and to approve Zone Change 03-1540 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached resolution and recommend same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Ellison, Lomas, Spencer, Tkac, Gay NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Tragish 9. PUBLIC HEARING - REVISED COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PLAN (FILE No. 03-1464) (Panama Lane, LLC) (Ward 7) See Consent Agenda 10. COMMUNICATIONS: Mr. Grady called the Commission's attention to a memorandum they received tonight that was companion to the distribution to the Draft EIR for the Allen Road Bridge. The plan is to hold a public hearing in front of the Planning Commission May 6, 2004 and the public review period will be April 2, through May 17, 2004. This would provide for ultimate construction of the bridge over the Kern River to connect Allen Road with Stockdale Highway and territories to the north. Mr. Grady said there is a long agenda on June 17 for the general plan amendment hearings and one of the recommendations that the Commission made was to conduct two hearings back to back. It would be the 16tH and 17tH and a pre-meeting on the 14tH Commissioner Gay asked the Commission to schedule their time around those dates. Minutes, PC, April 1, 2004 Page 10 11. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commissioner Blockley said his vacation is already set for that time. Commissioner Lomas said she would not be here on April 15, 2004. 12. ADJOURNMEMT There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m. Pam Townsend, Recording Secretary STANLEY GRADY, Secretary Planning Director May 11, 2004