The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRES NO 301-04 RESOLUTION NO. 30~.n . RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD DENYING AN APPEAL BY WILLIAM AND DIANE HINKLE OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT'S DENIAL OF A MODIFICATION TO ALLOW 30-FOOT TALL NETTING AND POLES ON THE REAR AND SIDE PROPERTY LINES ADJACENT TO A GOLF COURSE WHERE A 6 FEET IS THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT PERMITTED ON PROPERTY ZONED R-I (ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) AT 9107 ELIZABETH GROVE COURT (FILE NO. 04-0969) WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Adjustment considered a zoning modification (File No. 04-0969) by William and Diane Hinkle to allow 30-foot tall netting and poles on the rear and side property lines adjacent to a golf course where 6 feet is the maximum height permitted. The proposal is located at 9107 Elizabeth Grove Court and is within an R-1 (One Family Residential); and WHEREAS, the Board through its Secretary set Tuesday, September 14, 2004, at the hour of 3:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber of City Hall, Bakersfield, California, as the time and place for a public hearing before them on said project, and notice of their hearing was given in the manner provided by Title Seventeen of the Municipal Code of the City of Bakersfield; and WHEREAS, at the public hearing said project was duly heard and considered, and the Board of Zoning Adjustment denied the zoning modification; and WHEREAS, a timely appeal was filed by William and Diane Hinkle objecting to the Board of Zoning Adjustment's decision with the Clerk of the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council through its Clerk set November 17, 2004, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber of City Hall, Bakersfield, California, as the time and place for a public hearing before them on the appeal, and notice of their hearing was given in the manner provided by Title Seventeen of the Municipal Code of the City of Bakersfield; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered during the hearing, all facts, testimony and evidence concerning the project, including the staff report, and deliberation and action by the Board of Zoning Adjustment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD AS FOLLOWS: The City Council hereby adopts the Board of Zoning Adjustment's findings as contained in their resolution (No. 04-21). The City Council hereby denies the appeal and upholds the decision of the Board of Zoning Adjustment. .......... 000 .......... ORIGINAL -2- I HEREBY CERTIFY thet the foregoing Resolution wes pessed end edopted by the Council of the City of Bekersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on N0¥ ! ? ~@_~ , by the following vote: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER CARSON, BENHAM, MAGGARD, COUCH, HANSON, SULLIVAN, SALVAGGIO COUNClLMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER PAMELA A. McCARTI¢~, CMC ~/ ' CITY CLERK end Ex Officio Clerk of the Council of the City of Bakersfield Mayor of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED as t~rm VIRGINIA G E,Nf)I'ARO City A~.,~tto....~ ~. ~ ORIGINAL RESOLUTION NO. 04-21 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD DENYING A MODIFICATION TO ALLOW 30-FOOT TALL NETTING ON THE REAR AND SIDE PROPERTY LINES ADJACENT TO A GOLF COURSE WHERE A 6 FEET IS THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT PERMITTED ON PROPERTY ZONED R-I (ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL). FILE NO. 04-0969 WHEREAS, William and Diane Hinkle filed an application with the City of Bakersfield Planning Department requesting a modification to allow 30-foot tall netting on the rear and side property lines adjacent to a golf course where a 6 feet is the maximum height permitted. The proposal is located at 9107 Elizabeth Grove Court and is within an R-1 (One Family Residential); and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Adjustment, through its Secretary, set TUESDAY, September 14, 2004, at the hour of 3:00 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, a public hearing was held before the Board of Zoning Adjustment on said date, and testimony was received both in support and opposition of the project; and WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City of Bakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures have been duly followed by city staff and the Board of Zoning Adjustment; and WHEREAS, the above described project is Categorically Exempt from the requirements of CEQA in accordance with Section 15305; and WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield Planning Department (1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California) is the custodian of all documents and other materials upon which approval of the environmental determination is based; and WHEREAS, the facts presented in the staffreport, 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 S.'IBZA~SPRIMODI2004104-0969 golfcoursenettinglResolution.doc WHEREAS, at the above mentioned public hearing(s), the proposal was heard and all facts, testimony and evidence was considered by the Board of Zoning Adjustment, and they made the following findings regarding the proposed project: All required public notices have been given. Heating notices regarding the proposed project were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project area and published in a local newspaper of general circulation l0 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 Categorically Exempt from CEQA under Section 15305 because it is a minor zoning modification to fence height that does not result in any changes to land use or density. The granting of the proposed modification will be materially detrimental to the public welfare, and injurious to the property or improvements in the zone or vicinity in which the subject property is located. The poles/netting is significantly out of character and is not architecturally compatible with neighborhood improvements. The poles/netting not only visually affects neighboring properties, but those across the fairway in adjacent neighborhoods. The golf course is a major open space component of the Riverlakes Specific Plan with lots created to enjoy the unique views. A 4-foot high wrought iron view fence preserves those views along the golf course home sites, and 6~foot high view fencing allows views from arterial and collector streets running through the Riveflakes area. Additionally, the homeowners association, being comprised of and representing neighborhood residents, denied the request. They considered additional issues such as whether the design was harmonious and in character with the area, that it blend with the natural topography, and did it unreasonably impair or interfere with views. The approval of this modification is not necessary to permit appropriate improvements on the site. Many other options exist to accomplish deflecting golf balls from the property. The applicants have not shown why other alternatives such as landscaping, orientation of improvements, freestanding patio structures, etc. are not effective. Other property owners in this and other subdivisions with lots fronting the Rivedakes golf course have similar issues but they have found appropriate methods to deal with golf balls that do not adversely affect views or compromise neighboring improvements. The granting of the modification would be inconsistent with the purposes and intent of Title 17, nor is it consistent with the Riverlakes Specific Plan. This area was master planned with the golf course as a major component of the Riveflakes development. The intent of the plan was to create a unique development in the city that included both usable open space and views for homeowners (ie. golf course and lake). Homes have been built along or around all 18 holes of the golf course. Trees, other landscaping and a 4-foot high wrought iron fence preserve the open space qualities and views of the course for residents of these lots. The netting is a visual impediment that is significantly out of character with area development, and negatively impac, ts adjacent properties. S:IBZ~_SPRL~[ODI2004104-0969 - golf course nettinglResolution.doc Page 2 ORIGINAL Approval of the request also sets precedent whereby more nets could be installed further compromising the unique aesthetic and visual qualities around the golf course, inconsistent with the goals and intent of the Riverlakes Specific Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD as follows: 1. That the above recitals, incorporated herein, are tree and correct. 2. That this project is Categorically Exempt from the requirements of CEQA. 3. That Modification No. 04-0969 as described in this resolution, is hereby denied. On a motion by Board Member Kunz, the Board of Zoning Adjustment approved this resolution by the following roll call vote: AYES: Kunz, LaRochelle, Leonard NOES: None I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Board of Zoning Adjustment of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of September, 2004. DATED: September 14, 2004 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT (~Leonard, Chairman S.'[BZA_SPRLMODI2004[04-0969 - golf course nettingIRe$olution,doc Page 3 ORIGINAL