HomeMy WebLinkAboutNov 3, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
1- 1, 0' ` Meeting - Thursday, November 3, 2005 - 5:30 p.m.
Council Chambers, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue
1. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, Spencer, Tkac, Tragish, Lomas
Absent: Commissioner McGinnis
Advisory Members: Robert Sherfy, James D. Movius, Marian Shaw, Steve Ewing
Staff: Jennie Eng, Jim Eggert, Pam Townsend
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS: None
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Non-Public Hearing Items None
4.2 Public Hearing Items
4.2a Approval of Amendment to the text of Title 17 amending the C-B (Central Business) and C-
C (Commercial Center) zone districts. (Exempt from CEQA)
4.2b Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract 6397 (SmithTech USA, Inc)
4.2c Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract 6488 (Cornerstone Eng, Inc.)
4.2d Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract 6557 (Maurice Etchechury)
4.2e Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract 6565 (McIntosh &Associates)
4.2f Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract 6571 (Matt VoVilla)
4.2g Approval of Zone Change No. 05-1658 (Cat Harbor Properties LLC)
Public portion of the hearing opened. No one spoke either for or against the projects. Public portion of
the hearing closed. Commissioner Tragish requested 4.2(a), 4.2(b) and 4.2(c) be removed from the
Consent Calendar. Commissioner Lomas requested the removal of 4.2(e) for small change in language.
Motion made by Commissioner Tkac , seconded by Commissioner Spencer, to approve the remaining
items on the public hearing portion of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by group vote.
Staff pointed out that 4.2(a) didn't have a separate spot on the agenda, so it would be heard next in
order.
Planning Commission - Thursday, November 3, 2005 Page 2
4.2a Approval of the Amendment to the text of Title 17 amending the C-B (Central Business)
and C-C (Commercial Center)zone districts. (Exempt from CEQA)
The public hearing is opened. Staff report given. No one spoke in opposition or in favor of Staff's
recommendation. The public hearing is closed.
Commissioner Tragish inquired if previously the C-C zoning was only used for the downtown area or for
specific plans? Staff responded that it has only been used in the downtown area, and it hasn't been used in
an area where it would require a specific plan. Commissioner Tragish inquired why it was tied into a
specific plan. Staff responded that it was because they wanted some additional control back in 1995 as it
was a new concept. Commissioner Tragish further inquired what Staff's understanding is of a specific plan
as to a general plan? Staff indicated that a specific plan actually has ingredients under state law that must
be included in it regarding how it describes the development that will take place. Commissioner Tragish
commented his concern that it limits the Commissions' discretion. He stated that his concern is leaving the
12' allowance in the C-C with no specific plan that it could be attached to. Staff suggested that it may need
to be continued as it will take some time to come up with something that will work.
Commissioner Lomas inquired about the setback and staff responded that it can be continued and worked
out.
Motion made by Commissioner Blockley, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to continue agenda item
4.29a) to the November 17, 2005 meeting. Motion carried by group vote.
5. PUBLIC HEARING —Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 11334 (TRC Solutions)
The public hearing is opened. Staff report given. No one spoke in opposition or in favor of Staff's
recommendation. The public hearing is closed.
Commissioner Tragish inquired into the anticipated park land, and if it is definitive-+
N Staff responded that the anticipated is based on the actual acreage depending on the ultimate number of
units, and indicated that there will definitely be a park in this area.
Commissioner Lomas inquired about page 2 in Staff's report regarding consistency and deviation from
design standards, and inquired what is being waived. Staff responded that the map presented shows the
map alignment of some bikeways, but is indicative of some of the circulation element roads that cross this
section, and those would be the expected improvements (the major roadways) and it has been asked not to
put these major roadways in which is what is being deferred. Staff further indicated that generally there is a
requirement for parcels to have access to each parcel, but since the parcels are so large they are deferring
the specific access to the parcel requirement as well.
Commissioner Lomas then inquired why there is a parcel map at this point before the PC. Staff responded
that previous conversations with Chevron indicate that they are ultimately interested in selling the larger
parcel and retaining ownership of the 40 acre parcel in the SE corner.
Commissioner Blockley inquired if they can do a parcel map before coming before the PC. Staff responded,
"not in this town."
There were no more Commissioner comments.
Motion made by Commissioner Blockley seconded by Commissioner Spencer, to approve vesting tentative
parcel map 11334 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached resolution Exhibit A. Motion carried
by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, Spencer, Tkac, Tragish, Lomas
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner McGinnis
Planning Commission - Thursday, November 3, 2005 Page 3
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS -TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS
6.1 Vesting Tentative Tract 6397 (SmithTech USA, Inc)
The public hearing is opened. Staff Report given recommending approval subject to conditions contained
in the staff report. No one spoke in opposition to Staff's recommendation. Anthony Hawkez with SmithTech
stated they are in favor of Staff's recommendations. The public hearing is closed.
Commissioner Tragish stated his concern was the phasing of the project and the improvements to
Berkshire and Madison. Staff responded that Berkshire looks to be the only point of access for this tract,
and the way the condition is written is if Phase 1 goes first they have to build the frontage of Berkshire,
including the out parcel (all the way to the canal), plus they have to build a minimum of 32' of roadway all
the way over to Union. If Phase 2 is commenced first, they have to get there, so it is anticipated that the
same condition will apply, to build Berkshire, including the piece from Union to the boundary of the tract.
Staff confirmed that if they build something out of order they have to come to the City Engineer and the
conditions would be re-written for building Phase 2 before Phase 1.
Commissioner Tragish stated that the language in paragraph 3 states, "The following conditions are based
upon the premise that filing a final maps will occur in the order shown on the map, Phase 1 first, then Phase
2, and then Phase 3, etc. If recordation does not occur in that normal progression, then prior to the
recordation of a final map, the City Engineer shall determine the extent of improvements to be done with
that particular phase." Commissioner Tragish indicated that he feels that 3.1.1 should also apply whether
no matter what phase it is. Staff indicated that a condition could be added indicating that if the progression
is out of order then 3.1.1, 3.1.3 and 3.1.4 would apply to phase 2, as well as all previous conditions placed
on phase 2.
Commissioner Lomas commented that this same type of condition is also in 6.3, and that it would be
micromanaging each and every project to include the additional requested language. Commissioner
Lomas stated that all of the conditions are clearly written and that Staff will refer back to those if the phases
are completed out of numerical order.
Commissioner Tragish stated his concern is making sure the streets get done as soon as possible. He
further indicated that this is a vesting tentative tract, and it is subject to whatever is in place at that time and
he'd rather that the developer be put on notice now rather than later.
Commissioner Blockley stated that they have given the City Engineer the ability to make these types of
progressions decisions in the past and there are no problems.
Commissioner Johnson moved, seconded by Commissioner Spencer, to approve vesting tentative tract
map 6397 with the findings and conditions set forth in the attached Resolution. Motion carried by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, Spencer, Tkac, Lomas
NOES: Commissioner Tragish
ABSENT: Commissioner McGinnis
Commissioner Tragish reiterated his comments that under the circumstances of location and size of this
project, and the fact that it only fronts Berkshire, and he believes that Berkshire is the only way to get into
this property, if they build the second phase, otherwise they will be using a farm road to get in, and that it
would be prudent to make the phasing of either one or two to require that all of the subparagraphs of 3.1
through 3.2.3 apply, except for 3.1.2. He indicated that for safety, welfare and circulation it would be the
appropriate way to go.
Planning Commission - Thursday, November 3, 2005 Page 4
6.2 Vesting Tentative Tract 6488 (Cornerstone Eng, Inc.)
The public hearing is opened. Staff report given. No one spoke in opposition to Staff's recommendation.
Daryl Whiten, with Cornerstone Eng., stated they are in agreement with Staff's report. Merna Parks, one of
the co-owners of the property in the tentative map thanked the PC for their consideration, and asked that
they pass their request. The public hearing is closed.
Commissioner Tragish inquired about the proposed drill island. Staff responded that there is a letter from
Stream Energy indicating they are desiring to drill a well in the northeast portion of this tract, and they are
actually requesting an additional drill island up in the northeast corner of the tract. Staff indicated that the
ordinance gives the developer several ways to address the mineral rights issues and the people who have
surface entry rights to the property, and one of the ways is to reserve a two-acre drill site. Staff indicated
that they have actually reserved a larger than 2-acre drill site and is actually closer to 2.6 acres, and it
includes the active well, as well as room for an additional well to be punched within this area. Staff
indicated that the PC has full authority to approve this as the drill island.
Staff indicated that the developer's proposal is reasonable, and the applicant provides evidence that these
are extremely deep wells in this area, and it is no problem with a centrally located drill site to access all of
the minerals within the 40 acre parcel.
Commissioner Tragish further inquired about the requirement of the DOGGR of a 75' setback, in that it
appears that it is a minimum. Staff responded that Mr. Huey in the Fire Safety Division determined that the
68' set back was sufficient as it is from the road, as opposed to a home. Staff further indicated that the 75'
setback is for safety and not turnaround.
Mr. Whitten stated that the reason the could only accommodate 68' is that Stream built this well too close to
the midsection line, which is the SP line for Windermere, and therefore there is a minor collector street
that's designated to go on Windermere, and they drilled the well too close to it. The map indicates a
deviation from the alignment of Windermere to go around the well. Mr. Whitten also pointed out that Public
Works has an interest in seeing that Windermere has a minimum amount of curvature to it because it is
going to be a minor collector (such as Ash Road). He indicated that they would like to see a separate
between the well and the road, but they also don't want to put too much curvature in the road because it
would be a non-standard road alignment and Windermere has to be kept on the midsection line at the north
and south boundary of the tract.
Commissioner Tragish inquired if the 75' setback from the end of the draw island to the next adjoining
home. Dave Weirather, from the Fire Department, responded that the distance from the setback is
determined by the location of the well, and in this case, 75' from the edge of the roadways to the edge of
the well. Commissioner Tragish stated his concern for safety and arbitrarily changing the setback. Mr.
Weirather indicated that the law does allow for a 10% discretionary area because it recognizes that there
are areas where it would apply. He indicated that 10% is not unreasonable even on fire access.
Commissioner Blockley and Staff discussed mineral rights and the island spacing. Commissioner Blockley
indicated that he is inclined to support this as recommended by Staff on the basis that it seems there are
reasonable alternatives to what's been suggested by letter.
Commissioner Tkac inquired about "Stream controlling the area in the NE", and what this means. Staff
responded that they are not sure how much Stream owns in the NE.
Commissioner Johnson stated that he is comfortable with the drill island as it stands now. He inquired
about condition 6 at 1.3 which states, "construct a road a minimum of 32' wide from Buena Vista Road to
the eastern boundary of the tract," and where it is going to connect. Staff stated that it could connect at
Pensinger, but all the developer needs to do is provide access to the tract. Mr. Johnson commented that
Pensinger appears to be the major thoroughfare that would be going there, but it could go to Teton Court as
well, and inquired if it would be appropriate to request that the developer make an amendment to the
condition specifying that it connect to Pensinger. Staff responded that Public Works would have no
objection that it specify that the roadway be along the Pensinger alignment. Commissioner Johnson stated
that he would like to make this amendment to condition 6, 1.3, specifying that construction of a minimum
Planning Commission - Thursday, November 3, 2005 Page 5
32' wide road from Buena Vista Road to the eastern boundary of the tract connect with Pensinger.
Commissioner Lomas responded that it was her understanding that it is written the way it is is because if
more development took place they have the northern boundary that this would accommodate, and that
taking a street on the northern boundary gives the applicant some leeway.
Commissioner Lomas inquired of Commissioner Johnson why it would be necessary to be Pensinger if the
northern boundary would be more beneficial to the community at the time of development. Commissioner
Johnson responded that it seemed more orderly for proper growth, but given her comments, and tenured
experience, his recommendation would be a little far reaching.
Commissioner Lomas indicated that Harris Road will become Pensinger Road and inquired if it will be a two
named street. Staff responded that the County has required that the name Harris Road stop at Buena Vista
and become Pensinger from that point west.
Commissioner Tkac commented that he does not know why they can't directionally drill from another area
outside as Mrs. Parks has already given quite a bit of property up considering 2-1/2 acres out of 40. He
inquired about in and around this gas/oil field what the average amount of drill islands is given to anybody
in the average of a 40 acre area. He inquired if they are asking for reservation of more drill islands in this
area then they are anywhere outside of this general area/oil field. Staff responded that typically you would
not see more than 1 drill island on a 40 acre map. Commissioner Tkac further inquired about the possibility
of Stream appealing. Staff responded that there is a 10-day appeal period where they can appeal the PC's
decision to City Council.
Motion made by Commissioner Spencer, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to approve and adopt a
Negative Declaration and to approve vesting tentative tract 6488 with findings and conditions set forth in the
attached Resolution, Exhibit "A". Motion carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, Spencer, Tkac, Tragish, Lomas
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner McGinnis
6.3 Vesting Tentative Tract 6557 (Maurice Etchechury)
Heard on Consent Calendar.
6.4 Vesting Tentative Tract 6565 (McIntosh &Associates)
The public hearing is opened. Staff report given. No one spoke in opposition or in favor of Staff's
recommendation. The public hearing is closed.
Commissioner Lomas inquired about Condition 11 requiring CC&R's for this project, but does not requirement
the establishment of a Homeowner's Association. She indicated that since CC&R's are almost impossible to
enforce, she is requesting that a Homeowner's Association be added and included in the motion.
Commissioner Tragish inquired of Mr. Sherfy and converting an apartment to a condominium apartment that
the Department of Real Estate requires that there be a Homeowner's Association as part and parcel of the
approval process. Mr. Sherfy indicated that he is aware that the Department of Real Estate does review
these, but does not know of the top of his head whether or not they actually require a homeowner's
association. Commissioner Tragish inquired if Commissioner Lomas' suggested addition state that it be
required according to law, or that the PC is requesting the condition. Staff responded that the suggested
condition can be included; however, it is their understanding that the engineer for the project could not stay
for the meeting, and would like to discuss this issue before adding the suggested condition. Staff indicated
that they could add the suggested condition, or they could continue it to give them an opportunity to discuss
this issue further.
Commissioner Lomas stated she would suggest a continuance. Commissioner Blockley stated that he would
recommend a continuance as well to the17th.
Planning Commission - Thursday, November 3, 2005 Page 6
Motion made by Commissioner Blockley, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to continue this item to the 17th of
November for study of a Homeowner's Association.
Commissioner Tragish commented that Mr. Blockley is correct in that it is not called a Homeowner's
Association, but an Owner's Association.
Motion carried by group vote.
6.5 Vesting Tentative Tract 6571 (Matt VoVilla)
Heard on Consent Calendar.
7. PUBLIC HEARING—Zone Change No. 05-1658 (Cat Harbor Properties LLC)
Heard on Consent Calendar.
8. COMMUNICATIONS:
None.
9. COMMISSION COMMENTS:
None.
10. ADJOURNMEMT:
There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 6:54 p.m.
Pam Townsend, Recording Secretary
JAMES D. MOVIUS, Secretary
Planning Director
December 27, 2005