Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDec 1, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 1- 1, 0' ` Meeting - Thursday, December 1, 2005 - 5:30 p.m. Council Chambers, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue 1. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish, Lomas Absent: Commissioner Tkac Advisory Members: Robert Sherfy, James D. Movius, Marian Shaw, Phil Burns Staff: Marc Gauthier, Jennie Eng, Pam Townsend 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS: Sharon Fortune submitted regarding a re-zone. She will wait for agenda item 8.6, which is on consent calendar, and therefore the item will be removed from the consent calendar. Larry Barrios on GP 05-1199, stated he will speak during the regular agenda item. Francisco Juarta on GP 05-1199, stated he will speak during the regular agenda item. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: 4.1 Non-Public Hearing Items 4.1a Approval of minutes for Planning Commission meetings of October 3 &6, 2005. Motion made by Commissioner Blockley, seconded by Commissioner Tragish, to approve the non-public hearing portion of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by group vote. 4.2 Public Hearing Items 4.2a Approval of Administrative Review#05-1207 (Porter— Robertson Engineering) (Ward 4) 4.2b Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 11293 (Porter-Robertson Engineering) (Ward 3) 4.2c Continue to January 5, 2006 Revised Vesting Tentative Tract 6202 (Ward 3) 4.2d Continue to January 5, 2006 Vesting Tentative Tract Number 6607 — Phased (Porter - Robertson Engineering) (Ward 1) 4.2e Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Number 6655—Phased (Scott Roylance) (Ward 3) 4.2f Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract 6622— Phased (The Monarch Affiliates) (Ward 3) 4.2g Approval of Zone Change No. 05-1190 (The Monarch Affiliates) (Ward 3) 4.2h Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract 6422 (McIntosh and Associates) (Ward 3) Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 2 4.2i Approval of Zone Change No. 05-1283 (McIntosh and Associates) (Ward 3) 4.2j Approval of Zone Change No. 05-1575 (McIntosh and Associates) (Ward 4) 4.2k Approval of General Plan Amendment 05-0410 (Pinnacle Engineering) (Ward 1) 4.21 Approval of Zone Change 05-0410 (Pinnacle Engineering) (Ward 1) 4.2m Approval of General Plan Amendment 05-0946 (SmithTech, USA Inc.) (Ward 4 upon annexation) 4.2n Approval of Zone Change 05-0946 (SmithTech, USA Inc.) I (Ward 4 upon annexation) 4.2o Approval of General Plan Amendment 05-1199 (Marino/Associates) (Ward 7) 4.2p Approval of General Plan Amendment 05-1287 (Porter- Robertson) (Ward 3) 4.2q Approval of General Plan Amendment 05-1319 (City of Bakersfield) (City Wide) Public portion of the hearing opened. It was noted that 4.2o Approval of General Plan Amendment 05-1199 (Marino/Associates) (Ward 7) will be removed from Consent Calendar. Greg Wilkerson stated he wanted to speak in regards to items 4.2f and 4.2h, so they were removed from the Consent Calendar. Laurel Duncan stated that she would like to speak on 4.2m and 4.2n, so they were removed from the Consent Calendar. Terry Chiles stated that he would like to speak on 4.2e and 4.2f, so they were removed from the Consent Calendar. Barbara Camp stated that she would like to speak on 4.2e, 4.2f, and 4.2g so they were removed from the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Spencer indicated that he would like to pull 4.2k, 4.21 from the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Tragish indicated that he would like recuse himself from items 4.2k and 4.21 (regular agenda items 8.2a and 8.2b respectively) which pertain to a development that is around the corner from some property that he represents clients on. He indicated that he does not believe that there is a conflict, but he does not want to give the appearance of such, and therefore he will recuse himself from these items. Commissioner Lomas requested removal of 4.2a. Commissioner Lomas indicated the following items remaining on Consent Calendar: 4.2b, 4.2c, 4.2d, 4.2i, 4.2j, 4.2p, and 4.2q. The public hearing on these remaining items is closed, except 4.2c and 4.2d which are continued. Commissioner Blockley moved, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to approve the public hearing consent calendar items which remain on the agenda as read. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners:Tragish, Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Lomas. NOES: None. Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 3 ABSENT: Commissioner Tkac 4.2a Approval of Administrative Review#05-1207 (Porter— Robertson Engineering) (Ward 4) The public hearing is opened. Staff report given. Harold Robertson, with Porter-Robertson Engineering, stated they are in agreement with Staff's recommendations. He indicated that this particular site plan was prepared for a potential user, and upon analyzing it they realized that with this parking layout and the corner, the potential for trucks and vans pulling in to unload inventory would make it difficult for them to turn around. Therefore, they discussed the possibility of using an exit only onto Hageman Road with the primary access into the site would be off of Centennial Plaza Way. The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Tragish inquired as to the location of Centennial Plaza Way on the map. Staff explained and Mr. Robertson further indicated that the dimension on the north line of the property is 1067', and the exit point is off the west property and therefore it is approximately 140' from Centennial Plaza. Commissioner Lomas commented that she does not like exit only because they are confusing. Mr. Weirather from the Fire Department. indicated that this proposed exit does not affect emergency services and there is adequate access. Commissioner Lomas stated that since there is adequate emergency access without the exit only, she does not like the idea of an exit only and does not see cost versus benefit, it will just create confusion. Commissioner Tragish inquired if in lieu of the testimony and comments made on this exit only, whether Staff still believes that it is justifiable to have an exit only access. Mr. Walker responded that traffic engineering staff is neutral on this aspect. He indicated that it meets the standards, so there is no opposition in that regard. Commissioner Tragish commented that there needs to be sufficient access so there is orderly circulation without congestion to the neighboring streets or neighborhoods. He indicated that if Staff felt that the exit only was absolutely necessary for circulation or emergency services he would go along with the proposal. Commissioner Tragish indicated that it can be served a greater distance by the exit onto Coffee Road, and that he will probably not be able to support this application. Commissioner Blockley stated that he has no opposition to this application, but inquired as to the construction of the exit only in that it appears to be constructed as a street corner as opposed to a drive approach in that the curve from Hageman wraps onto the site, and wraps back from the site onto Hageman, which would facilitate sort of easy access onto Hageman. He pointed out that there will have to be disabled sidewalk access on both sides which is not shown on the diagram, and therefore questions how effective the exit would be. He further inquired if that ultimate configuration would make it more attractive to drivers who would tend to ignore the "exit only" condition and enter anyway. Mr. Robertson pointed out that the primary reason for the exit was for the use of trucks and delivery vans, and that the design of the plan for the driveway is only 16' wide, and is curbed to the west which directs traffic to the flow of westbound traffic on Hageman Road. He indicated that with the curbs and narrowness of the driveway it will prevent vehicles from turning in, other than maybe very, very small compact cars. Mr. Robertson further pointed out that the reciprocal access requirements on this parcel map were specifically relate to the parcels that front on Coffee Road, which include a huge tower line easement, and McDonald's immediately east on the corner. He indicated that in order to accommodate McDonald's and the type of facilities that will be fronting onto Coffee Road, those reciprocal parking and access agreements along Coffee Road would only impact those parcels. He pointed out that on this side, there will be no reciprocal access or parking between this site, and the one to the north. Mr. Robertson pointed out that they will have standard handicap access ramps on both sides. Commissioner Blockley inquired if the handicap ramps would diminish the effectiveness of that sort of direct exit. Mr. Robertson responded in the negative, stating that it would not diminish anymore than the sidewalks and pedestrian traffic. Commissioner Blockley stated that he is satisfied with these explanations, and will support a motion in support of approval. Commissioner McGinnis inquired if the access point on Centennial Plaza Way is an entrance and an exit, to which Mr. Robertson indicated that it is entry and exit. Commissioner McGinnis stated that he agrees with Mr. Robertson, that in the way it is presently configured, it is configured for an exit only, and 16 feet Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 4 probably would not be wide enough to allow for both access and exit. However, he further pointed out that these exit only driveways are confusing to drivers. He stated that the configuration could be modified on the exit only to accommodate access into the site as well, and will oppose the applicant's proposal. Commissioner Johnson inquired if the McDonald's has an exit onto Hageman. Staff responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Johnson pointed out that it appears the change improves circulation, and for delivery trucks out and making it safer for normal vehicles. He stated that he is concerned with an entry and exit point right there at McDonald's where there might be too much dumping out of slow traffic onto a main thoroughfare. Commissioner Spencer stated that he is in support of this project as it provides a good degree of circulation in and off of the property. He further pointed out that it is also a secondary means for emergency access. He stated that he has no problems with it being utilized for transportation vehicles for delivery of products to the development. Commissioner Lomas stated the exit only creates confusion on Hageman which is a very busy road, and she has not heard any comments that would warrant a trade off for that confusion. She inquired what the standard distance is from a corner to where there can be an access. Staff responded that the distance from a major intersection would be 150' and a private drive is 100'. This particular project would require a standard of a minimum of 100' spacing and Mr. Robertson indicated it is approximately 140'. Commissioner Lomas stated that she does not see the benefit of this proposal. Commissioner Johnson indicated that with Staff's further comments and distance minimums, as well as the design of directing traffic out, he does not believe that it is similar to the exit only near the Jack `N the Box on Stockdale and California, because it is very straight and appears to be an entry/access drive, whereas the proposed exit only is very curved and creates a very different appearance as it will direct traffic strictly to go westbound onto Hageman. Commissioner Tragish moved, seconded by Commissioner McGinnis, to deny and reject Administrative Review Number 05-1207. Motion failed by the following tied roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Tragish, McGinnis, Lomas NOES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, Spencer ABSENT: Commissioner Tkac Commissioner Johnson moved, seconded by Commissioner Blockley, to approve Administrative Review Number 05-1207. Motion failed by the following tied roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, Spencer NOES: Commissioners Tragish, McGinnis, Lomas ABSENT: Commissioner Tkac 5. PUBLIC HEARING—Tentative Parcel Map 11293 (Porter-Robertson Engineering) (Ward 3) Approved on Consent 6 PUBLIC HEARINGS—TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS/ZONE CHANGES Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 5 6.1) Revised Vesting Tentative Tract 6202 (San Joaquin Engineering) (Ward 3) Heard on Consent- Continued until January 5, 2006. 6.2) Vesting Tentative Tract Number 6607— Phased (Porter- Robertson Engineering) (Ward 1) Heard on Consent- Continued until January 5, 2006. 6.3) Vesting Tentative Tract Number 6655— Phased (Scott Roylance) (Ward 3) The public hearing is opened. Staff report given. Terry Chiles stated that he is concerned about the 40 degree slope of the gully, and feels that it does not "jive"with the tentative tract map being proposed. He stated that he is concerned with the side grading and suggested that they try to maintain some of the natural slope of the land and orient the easterly and westerly streets to be parallel to the gully and have a low spot. He further stated he is concerned they are going to put a sump down there and stop the water that's been draining there forever and goes across his property and several other neighbors' properties. He stated that he sees no reason to stop the water flowing. Mr. Chiles inquired why there should be a set aside to provide land for future oil drilling when it is being closed down now. He suggested that this area be widened and flattened so if there is a problem with water coming there it is moderated somewhat and then it could be used for a ball field. He indicated that this land is not very permeable, and the water flows off the hillsides has not been an issue. Therefore does not see why there needs to be a sump there that's going to stop the natural flow of water. Mr. Chiles indicated they have been trying to get water in this area for about 30 years. The houses along Cosmos don't have good wells, and he further indicated that for the last three years they have been trying to get a water assessment district. He said that the city was going to require them to make a loop of water in their area that went past their area and stopped nowhere, and he requested that this developer be required to do the same. Mr. Childs stated that he would like to make sure that the road alignments are kept and at a minimum the water line should go to the end of those roads. Mr. Chiles further indicated that they are going to have to put a lift station in for their sewage, which will be in the sump area as it is the lowest part. He requested that it go west alongside Morningside Court and then turn and go up Cosmo. Mr. Chiles indicated that if they could require them to loop the water, and put the sewage line as outlined, he believes it will make the most sense and serve the most people, and prevent them from being one of those isolated pockets in the city that has no services. Barbara Kemp stated that one of their major concerns is the livestock that is adjacent to this project. She indicated that they would like to see some sort of buffer. A brick wall is not going to work. She further indicated that they are worried about the traffic. Greg Wilkerson, Bureau of Land Management, stated that on three of these tracts the BLM is the owner of mineral rights. He inquired if the proposal is to allow a 2-acre platform for possible future drilling and the platform is a sump area. He said that the concern that the BLM has with all these sorts of parcels is that as the City is growing out over the old oilfields, they can not re-lease the lands when they are inside the city limits, unless those lands are in danger of being drained by other wells. He stated that they are very concerned with this project. Mr. Wilkerson stated that they would not go into a sump area without major redesign of the drainage and other extraneous things, and if that is the proposal it would not meet the BLM's interest. Paul Feser with Daney Consultants, the engineer for Scott Roylance, responded to some of the concerns raised. He indicated that with respect to mineral rights, the above-mentioned 2-acre parcel has not shown in this plat and indicated that it would not be in the sump area. He mentioned that they feel the survey is accurate with regard to the runoff concerns. He further commented that developers generally try to avoid developing adjacent property owners, such as water or sewer, unless they are compensated Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 6 by the city or by a joint participating party. He indicated that they can put the lift station anywhere. He stated that with regard to the traffic concerns, they can provide a traffic study, and he pointed out that tract 6446 adjacent to the east has a significant amount more of traffic then their project, and they are all using Valley Drive. The public portion of the hearing closed. Commission Tragish inquired if the application provides for a 2 '/2 acre drill island to be part of the vesting tract map. Staff responded that typically they show it on the tentative tract map, and that late discussions with BLM concluded that a drill site will be placed on the property to BLM's and staff's approval. Staff pointed out that it could not be combined with a sump. Commissioner Tragish inquired if it is appropriate to put a drill island inside of a sump pursuant to existing ordinances, to which Staff responded no. Commissioner Tragish further inquired if there is any type of requirement as to the type of separation between the tract map and adjoining land owner. Staff responded that there is a requirement next to any zoning that allows animals in the city that the lots be extra deep. Staff indicated that the requirements are already provided in the design and the additional setback is enforced by existing ordinance, and therefore there is no special condition required. Staff indicated that there is a 60'wide local street buffer on the south of the pig farm. Commissioner Tragish commented that he would like to see the developer put in Bella Street earlier rather than later so as to create the buffer to the south. Staff responded that they are requiring that the roads be improved with Phase 1. Commissioner Tragish inquired about the steep gully, to which Staff responded that they acknowledge that there is a gully, but it is typically reviewed at the grading stage. Commissioner Tragish inquired if there is an R-1 hillside zoning, to which staff responded that there is a hillside development zoning, but does not cover this parcel, and would not have been appropriate for this project. Commissioner Tragish further inquired about the location of the sump, to which staff responded that the proposed sump is in the general area where they would expect to see one. Commissioner Blockley inquired about the flatness for the drill island, to which Staff responded that they do require that the drilling islands be accessible from roads as required by ordinance, and that they are actually useable. Commissioner Blockley inquired about the buildability of lots to which staff responded that a 2 to 1 slope is typical cut or fill slope. Commissioner Blockley stated that he would support a postponement so the drill island location and grading can be accommodated. Commissioner Lomas pointed out that Condition 17 appears to take care of the requirements for a drill island and BLM just needs to bring something in, as no where in Condition 17 does it say anything about it being in a sump. She stated that she is comfortable that they are in line on that issue. With regard to the neighbors' concerns some were already addressed, and some are conditions (5.1.1). Commissioner Lomas inquired about the water issues being covered, to which Staff responded that water is not under the jurisdiction of the city in this area, and is under Cal Water pervue, and they generally require looping for their systems. She commented that she does not see how they can weigh in on where a lift station should go. She inquired about the traffic concerns. Staff responded that there is nothing unusual, but does not see a requirement to make sure that Valley Lane has 32' of pavement to Paladino so it will be added as a condition. Commissioner Tragish moved, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to approve and adopt the Negative Declaration and to approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6655 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached Resolution Exhibit"A", with the added condition, "2.1.1.4. provide a minimum of 32' of pavement along Valley Lane alignment from the tract boundary to Paladino." and including the November 22, 2005 memo from Mr. Movius. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish, Lomas NOES: Commissioner Blockley ABSENT: Commissioner Tkac Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 7 Commissioner Blockley stated that his no vote was due to the lack of a provision of a drill island on a site that is obviously much more difficult than the normal development in that it slopes, and he believes there should be one shown on this subdivision. 6.4a&b)Vesting Tentative Tract 6622/Zone Change No. 05-1190— Phased (The Monarch Affiliates) (Ward 3) Public hearing opened. Staff report given. Greg Wilkerson spoke against the idea of approving this tract without the drilling island. He reminded the commission that any royalties that come off the federal parcels in the future half of those royalties come back to the state and local governments, and it would not be in the best interest to approve such a tract without a 2-acre drilling island that would accommodate their interests. He indicated that they think it is unwise to eliminate land from potential future development, and therefore requested that the Commission include 2-acre drilling islands for all of these parcels involving the BLM minerals. Cindy Azeltime, whose 2 '/2 acre is on the corner of Bella and Cosmo. She feel that the traffic problem has been overlooked in that Bella ends right where the pig farm starts, and the rest of Bella is a private access easement. She pointed out that the traffic will dead at the corner. She stated that there is no Queen Street as it also a public access easement, and the only part of the road that will be able to be developed is just a small section of that Monarch owns, as it won't go through, and it won't attach to Bella. She further pointed out that Dave Queen's property does not have a 60' easement off of Queen Street. She pointed out that there is a water issue and if they can bring it down to the end of their property like they have been told and allow them access they would appreciate that. Lynn Espericueta stated that she lives on Cosmo Street and inquired about the development of Cosmo Street. She pointed out that currently one car is able to go down Cosmo Street. Terry Chiles stated that he is concerned with the hydrocarbon pumping islands that are proposed. He pointed out that it seems very onerous for the developers to give away 2 acres of every 40 for a drilling island, and leads to sprawl because there is residential area that cannot be used. He further pointed out that he does not want the water coming off all of the land to stop coming to his agricultural property. He pointed out that he has not seen the city requirement the developers to maintain the sumps, and that many are eyesores. Harold Sugden, the writer of the letter from AJ Environmental to Monarch, does not believe it should have a drilling island because it doesn't need one. He pointed out that the immediate adjacent field, Kern Bluff, is very rapidly being reduced as far as the number of wells, and the kind of oil that is being produced there can only be produced efficiently if you have large steam generators, and you are not going to put steam generator on a 2 acre plot. He further pointed out that there is a dry hole in the center of this property, which was drilled to test whether or not the sediments that produce in the Kern Bluff Field would be productive and in 1948 it was found that it was not. He stated that the property is surrounded by dry holes that were drilled looking for oil and never found. Mr. Sugden stated that there needs to be a level platform for a drilling island. He suggested that the City, when making ordinances that involve the extraction of oil and gas, get together with the Society of Petroleum Engineers and the American Association of Petroleum Geologists to go over what can and can't be done. Mike White, Forma Engineering, stated that he believes that since BLM is the mineral right owners on both this property and the previous tentative map, that there could be a common general island to satisfy the BLM's needs. He stated that with regard to traffic at Vineland and Bella and the widening was a surprise and they were just apprised of this and did not have time to speak to Mr. Queen about whether he would be agreeable to them developing the curb and gutter along his property frontage. He stated that their tract has adequate circulation off of Valley Blvd. and Paladino that they don't necessarily need to develop the curb and gutter for Bella and Queen through Mr. Queen's property. He stated that with regard to the sump Mr. Chiles spoke about, he does not believe there is going to be as much water as he is talking about from the tract to the north. He indicated that he does not believe their tract will have any effect on Mr. Chiles at all. Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 8 Renalto Arreono, representing Monarch, stated that he concurs with their engineer and geologist's findings. He indicated that they have tried to work with the neighbors and that there are a couple of conditions to appease the fact that Mr. Queen has pigs on his farm. He stated that they will have paved streets on Valley and throughout the tract leading to Paladino, and it is very unlikely that anyone will want to drive onto Como on unpaved road. The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Blockley inquired if when a drill island is reserved if it expires overtime, to which staff responded that if it runs 10 years without any activity occurring on it, the applicant can come back and ask to resubdivide that property. He further inquired about the water flow across the property after it is developed and being less permeable, to which Staff responded that would be correct, although the soil is not real permeable in this area. Staff indicated that what is generally required is that there is a historic overland flow that the post development flows cannot be greater than the predevelopment flows. Commissioner Blockley stated that he generally support this because the terrain here does not effect drill island requirements and it is much flatter land. Commissioner Tragish inquired about the drill sites and if the prospect of retrieving minerals is zero there is no requirement for a drill site. Staff responded that if evidence is provided that there is lack of probability to access minerals beneath the site, you can waive the signatures of the mineral right owners on the map, and that it is acceptable without the reservation of a drill site. Commissioner Tragish inquired of Mr. Wilkerson's diagram and what part is a portrayal of Kern County, which Mr. Wilkerson said it was not for this particular tract but an overall general diagram. Commissioner Tragish inquired if Mr. Wilkerson has done any evaluation of the potential for minerals, to which Mr. Wilkerson responded that the land had some shallow drilling and concluded that there is a small possibility of future production from shallow oil zone, however with the other information available, there is potential for discovery of new deposits and for expansion of deeper potential sources of hydrocarbon that have not yet been tested, and they do not want those potential future discoveries ruled out by not allowing a drilling islands on these tracts. Mr. Wilkerson stated that he did the analysis himself and prepared a memo to the file, and to which correspondence was provided to the applicant and the city. Commissioner Tragish inquired of Mr. Wilkerson's opinion about Mr. Sugden's comments. Mr. Wilkerson stated that they are talking apples and oranges, as Mr. Sugdun was discussing the historic production from the zones that are present in the Ant Hill and Kern Bluff Oilfields. He indicated that they agree that there have been wells that have tested those horizons, and they agree that there are inadequate amounts of oil in those particular shallow formations to sustain new discoveries and future production. He stated that he is discussing the deeper horizons that do have potential, and avoiding blocking access to these potential deeper horizons. Commissioner Tragish inquired if the conditions provide that when the streets go in that the corner street will be improved, to which Staff referred to condition 5.1 which requires Vineland Street being constructed from the northern portion of Phase 1 to Bella Drive, including the frontage of the alleged pig farm. Staff further indicated that condition 5.1.5 requires the same for Bella from Vineland all the way to Valley. Commissioner Tragish inquired where Cosmo Street is located. Staff pointed out where it is located and stated that Bella Street is a fully paved street from Paladino to Bella through Cosmo, and that Cosmo is fully paved from Paladino up to Bella. Staff indicated that the street is wide enough for a 1-ton duly truck (30'). Commissioner Lomas interjected clarification of Vineland and Queen being the same street. Staff indicated that if Bella Street west of Vineland/Queen is a private street it does not have to connect and it can be blocked off. Commissioner Tragish inquired if all of the improvements to the street will take place upon the commencement of any phase, to which Staff confirmed. He further inquired about any trails, to which staff responded that there is nothing within this tract. Commissioner Tragish stated that he is confused about Mr.Chiles complaints about water runoff and stated he'll listen to the other commissioners. Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 9 Commissioner McGinnis inquired if the subdivision meets the health, safety and welfare needs with respect to traffic issues, to which Mr. Walker responded that it meets all of the current city standards for development with the application under the conditions of approval for widening of the streets and making the connection of streets for good circulation. He indicated that he approves of this project. Commissioner Blockley commented that he was mistaken in thinking that there was a drill island on this tract, and that it is flat enough that one could be accommodated. Commissioner Lomas inquired of Mr. Wilkerson in a given area how many drill islands are wanted. Mr. Wilkerson responded that an appropriate well spacing to develop the deep gas potential would be one drilling island for every 80 acres. Commissioner Lomas then inquired of Staff what the acreage total is for this property and the parcel to the north, to which Staff responded it, is a little less than 80 because of the alleged pig farm. Commissioner Lomas commented that for all intents and purposes there is a drilling island for these 80 acres from the previous map approval (the parcel to the north). Commissioner Lomas inquired of Staff about any criteria regarding the number of drill islands per acreage, to which Staff responded that they do not have a policy on parcel sizes. Commissioner Lomas inquired about safety and maintenance of the sumps. Staff responded that there are post development flows and predevelopment flows, and that Mr. Chiles is talking about historic predevelopment flows. Staff indicated that the tracts that go in are responsible for the difference between the historic predevelopment flow, and the post development flow. Staff indicated somebody from Water Resources would be better able to respond to the legal rights that Mr. Chiles has to water flow rights, however they do not believe that it is a water right issue. Staff further responded that there are no dangers with the sumps as they are all fenced and there are requirements for access. Staff indicated that starting with this cycle the City has started requiring the developer to put in a hydrodynamic separator at the sump. Commissioner McGinnis inquired about the requirement for 6' masonry fence to fence the pig operation away from similarly zoned properties, to which Staff responded that applicant agreed with the property owner to provide the wall, and it was just attached as a condition. Commissioner Johnson moved, seconded by Commissioner Blockley, to approve and adopt the Negative Declaration and to approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6622 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached Resolution, and including the memo from December 1, 2005, and recommend the same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish, Lomas NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Tkac Commissioner Johnson moved, seconded by Commissioner Blockley, to approve and adopt the Negative Declaration and to approve Zone Change 05-1190 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached Resolution, including and including the memo from December 1, 2005, and recommened the same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish, Lomas NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Tkac Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 10 6.5a Vesting Tentative Tract 6422/Zone Change No. 05-1283 (McIntosh and Associates) (Ward 3) The public hearing is opened. Staff report given. Greg Wilkerson stated they would be satisfied with just having one drilling parcel for the two parcels (6422 and 6423) because they are adjacent to each other and combined are less than 80 acres. Roger McIntosh, with McIntosh & Associates, representing Morning 178 LLC, stated that have reviewed the staff report and memo and pointed out that tract 6423, adjacent to this tract, was approved approximately four weeks ago, and it had a condition that there be a two-acre drilling island in proximity to that tract. Mr. McIntosh stated that they are in agreement to the same condition on this tract, and it is their understanding that there will be one drilling island for both tracts. The public hearing is closed. Staff recommended that on Condition 27.1, requiring a two-acre minimum drill site within a reasonable distance of this subdivision, that another sentence be added at the end which reflects, "A single drill site shall be adequate for both tracts 6423 and 6422." Commissioner Tragish inquired if they are allowed to add the suggested language given the fact that the ordinances would not be followed in this case by not putting a drill site on this tract with an executed waiver. Staff responded that if the mineral rights interests were not aware of what the P.C. was doing there would be a problem with his suggested condition, however, since BLM has been involved in conversations on both maps for several weeks, and the City has agreed to the wording with them, it is appropriate to take add the recommended language. Commissioner Blockley moved, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to approve and adopt the Negative Declaration and to approve Vesting Tentative Tract 6422 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached Resolution Exhibit "A", and incorporating the Planning Director's memorandum dated December 1, 2005, including the recommended language to Condition 27.1 from Mr. Movius ("A single drill site shall be adequate for both tracts 6423 and 6422.") Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish, Lomas NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Tkac 6.5b. Zone Change 05-1283 Approved on Consent. 7. Zone Change No. 05-1575 (McIntosh and Associates) (Ward 4) Approved on Consent. Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 11 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS —GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS / Land Use Element Amendments/Zone Changes/ Circulation Element Amendments/Williamson Act Land Use Cancellation, Specific Plan Line Adoption: 8.1a&b) General Plan Amendment/Zone Change 04-1344 (Maurice Etchechury) (Ward 6) The public hearing is opened. Staff report given. No one spoke in opposition to Staff's recommendation. Maurice Etchechury, the applicant representing the owner of the property, stated they are in agreement with Staff's recommendation. The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Blockley moved, seconded by Commissioner Tragish, to adopt the Resolution making findings, approving the Negative Declaration, and approving a GPA to change the land use designation from R-IA (Resource Intensive Agriculture) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 85.6 acres as shown on Exhibit "A-2", incorporating Planning Director's memo dated November 28, 2005, and Public Works memo from Marian Shaw, dated November 28, 2005, and recommend the same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish, Lomas NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Tkac Commissioner Blockley moved, seconded by Commissioner Tragish, to adopt the Resolution making findings, approving the Negative Declaration, and approving the zone change from A (Agriculture) to R-1 (Single Family Residential) on 85.6 acres, as shown on Exhibit "A-2", incorporating Planning Director's memo dated November 28, 2005, and Public Works memo from Marian Shaw, dated November 28, 2005, and recommend the same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish, Lomas NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Tkac 8.2a&b) General Plan Amendment/Zone Change 05-0410 (Pinnacle Engineering) (Ward 1) The public hearing is opened. Commissioner Tragish indicated that he will recuse himself as he represents a client very close to this property. Staff report given. No one spoke in opposition to Staff's recommendation. Matt Vovilla, Pinnacle Civil Engineering, the applicant and engineer for the project, stated that they are in agreement with Staff's recommendation. Tim Denario, the managing member of the LLC that owns the property, gave a brief background. Fred Woody, with WZI, indicated that they prepared the air analysis for this project, and submitted a letter for the record. The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Spencer stated he feels strongly about the removal of the existing golf course in this area in that once you remove a golf course it is not going to come back, and the proposed number of homes is significant when considering they just approved many acres for multi-family units to the north, south and west of this project. He stated that he could not support this project in any manner, and further commented that it is in close proximity to water spreading area for the City treatment plant. He indicated that the map does not show a separation between the proposed development and the ponds on the photo, and the environmental document prepared for this project is not sufficient. Commissioner Blockley inquired as to the 10 year build out and the air quality, to which Mr. Woody responded that with respect to this project, build out was estimated to occur by 2016, based on information obtained from the developer. He indicated that based on the information they estimate that there would be 48 units a year. Commissioner Blockley inquired if the build out was a shorter time period Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 12 if it would have an impact on the way the Air Pollution Control District assessed this project. Mr. Woody stated that he cannot answer for the APCD, but stated that the emissions would be greater if the build out were a shorter period of time. Commissioner Blockley inquired about the complicated change in use from golf course to residential relative to the GPA changing OS-P-open space/parks and P- Public Facilities to LR. Staff responded that OS-P is the only designation there is for golf courses, but does not imply that it is public. Commissioner Johnson inquired about condition 25 and if they need to make an addition to add a covenant noticing the property owners that there is the sewer treatment plant nearby. Staff responded that the language would need to be modified to indicate that the developer shall record a covenant over the property regarding the proximity of the treatment facility. Commissioner McGinnis commented about golf courses in general stating that they are looking at private enterprises and there is a difference between changing from one type of office to another type of office and changing a gold course land use to residential as there is more aesthetic value involved, and they are two different types of products. He stated that there should be some ability to differentiate between a medical building and a golf course as far as types of businesses. Commissioner Lomas inquired about the 48 units per year, to which Mr. Woody responded that based on available information, they have made an allowance for the number of projects that are occurring throughout the City of Bakersfield, and they decided that as a default they would use 48 houses a year, without consideration for a number of actual acreage usage. Commissioner Lomas inquired about the city's criteria of the number of units built per year, to which Staff responded that there is no City standard, but they agree with the assessment. Commissioner McGinnis stated that his underlying problem is with the sewer treatment plant, and that outside of that he thinks it's a good project, however they will be setting precedent for any future project that is a privately held golf course and they want to change their zoning from open space to R-1. Therefore, he stated that he cannot support the project. Commissioner Spencer indicated that in the environmental document there are levels of significance and levels of no impact, and that in his review he cannot agree with the environmental document, particularly with the "no impact on aesthetics, no impact on building, going to cultural resources." He stated that he disagrees that there will be less than significant impact on recreation, parking, or capacity. He does not agree with the EIR's indication that there will be no impact. He stated that he is not in support of this project. Commissioner Lomas stated that she does not see this as the same as Rio Bravo, and her criteria is the question: does it bring a need for benefit to the community, which to her it is obvious that this area could use some improvement, and therefore, she can support this project. Staff indicated their disagreement with commissioner Spencers opinion regarding the initial study on the project, and indicated that there is an attached document clarifying why staff found some things to be less than significant or insignificant. Staff indicated that if you take the comments of no impact or no significance or less than significant in a vacuum it does sound ridiculous, but when you look at all the ordinances and policies and conditions of approval for these projects when they are developed, in fact, there are circumstances and ordinances that come into play in all of these factors. Staff further indicated that he does not believe that the decision on this project will set any precedent on future golf course issues, because on a GPA you look at each one on it's own merits. Commissioner Johnson reminded Commissioner Blockley to add language to condition 25 that "Notice shall be made by covenant to all property owners regarding the proximity of the City's sewer treatment facility." He further commented that it is unfortunate to have to see a business change its use, but moving to homes in this area is a good use and will be a good addition to the community. Commissioner Blockley moved, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to adopt a Resolution making findings approving the Negative Declaration and approving a General Plan Amendment to change the Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 13 land use designation from SR, OS-P MP to LR on 106 acres as shown on Exhibit "A-2", incorporating Planning Director's memos dated November 28, 2005 and December 1, 2005, and a Public Works memo from Marian Shaw dated November 28, 2005, and modifying the condition of approval number 25 to include "Notice shall be made by covenant to all property owners regarding the proximity of the City's sewer treatment facility.", and recommended the same to City Council. Motion failed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, Lomas NOES: Commissioners McGinnis, Spencer ABSENT: Commissioner Tkac 8.3a&b) General Plan Amendment/Zone Change 05-0872 (c/o Chase Whitaker, Cornerstone Engineering) (Ward 7) The public hearing is opened. Staff report given. Hershel Wells, 27 West Houchin Road, stated he has lived there since before there were any apartments, and they don't need anymore high rise apartments in that area, and it needs to be kept R-1 single family dwelling. He inquired if they intend to blacktop that area where the sump is where the water is going to go. He further indicated that there is not a wide enough lane for two average cars. He indicated that there are already existing traffic problems, specifically on Hendricks Lane. Jackie Doolittle, at 1717 Hendricks Lane, which is in direct view of the proposed apartment building. She indicated that she already contends with two apartment buildings which do not have adequate parking. She further indicated that Wilson and Hendricks is one of the most dangerous spots in the city. She pointed out that there are 13 outlets between Wilson and Planz. In addition, the school in the area cannot support any additional children, and the school already has parking problems. She indicated that between Wilson Road and Planz Road there is actually almost 451 units of apartments in that half a mile square area. She further pointed out that there is an influx of graffiti, vandalism, and car theft. Ms. Doolittle stated that she does not see how you can justify changing the zoning from a single family dwelling to another 30 units of apartments when it is already so saturated. Lloyd Fry, 1712 Hendricks, shared some photos of existing apartment buildings and their trash collection area. He indicated that this area is already overburdened with apartments. He inquired if there will only be 30 units or 72.6 more units, and indicated that they already have traffic and parking issues. Mr. Fry also indicated that crime has increased and been perpetrated on him. He expressed concern over his privacy and safety of his children. Nancy Low, 1719 Hendricks Lane, stated her concern with the traffic issues. She concurs with previous speakers. Jackie Doolittle, inquired if she should read the letter that was submitted to chair of the petition, to which Commissioner Lomas indicated that they have a copy. Ms. Doolittle further commented that as a homeowner when she purchased her home 15 years ago, it was planned out what was available and would not have purchased her home knowing that there was going to be a third apartment complex. Chase Whitaker, with Cornerstone Engineering, stated that their initial investigation of the people in the area led them to believe they would be fine with this project. He indicated that he spoke at length with Mr. Brown who indicated that he was fine with the project and thought they were in agreement. Mr. Whitaker stated that he just learned of the petition yesterday, and as a result Cornerstone has not had an opportunity to investigate all of the issues raised. He requested a continuance based on this so that they have an opportunity to investigate further and possibly resolve some of these issues. The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Tragish stated that in view of all of the comments made by the homeowners in the vicinity of the project, and from the applicant, it would be beneficial for both sides to sit down and air out their particular disputes with this particular project. The homeowners may be able to effect various changes to the project that may be beneficial and address some of their concerns. Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 14 Commissioner Tragish requested a four week continuance. Staff indicated that this is a GPA and therefore it would have to go to the March cycle if continued for that long of a period of time. Staff further indicated that if it is continued for two weeks Staff may not be able to assist much because they are extremely busy. Staff requested that it be decided on this evening, or continued to the March cycle. Commissioner Tragish inquired of Mr. Whitaker about a continuance until the March cycle. Mr. Whitaker responded that they are interested in reaching a mutually agreeable solution; they would accept waiting until March. Staff requested a specific continuance date of March 16, 2006. Commissioner Tragish moved, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, to continue GPA 05-0872 and agenda item 8.3b, with zone change 05-0872, to March 16, 2006. Staff indicated that this item will be re-advertised and the public hearing will be re-opened at that time. Motion carried by group vote. 8.4a&b) General Plan Amendment/Zone Change 05-0926 (Jerry L. Hendricks) (Ward 7 upon annexation) The public hearing is opened. Staff report given. No one spoke in opposition to Staff's recommendation. Jerry Hendricks, representing the property owners, stated this is a natural expansion, in that they have an approved tentative tract directly to the west, and there is significant development to south, and therefore this project is a proper future use. The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Johnson moved, seconded by Commissioner Spencer, adopt a Resolution making findings approving the Negative Declaration and approving a GPA to change the land use designation from Resources Intansive Agriculture to Low Density Residential on 22.32 acres, as shown on Exhibit "A- 2", incorporating the November 28, 2005 memo, and recommend the same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish, Lomas NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Tkac Commissioner Johnson moved, seconded by Commissioner Spencer, adopt a Resolution making findings approving the Negative Declaration and approving the zone change from Agriculture to Single Family Residential on 22.32 acres, as shown on Exhibit "A-2", incorporating the November 28, 2005 memo, and recommend the same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish, Lomas NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Tkac 8.5a&b)General Plan Amendment 05-0946/Zone Change (SmithTech, USA Inc.) (Ward 4 upon annexation) The public hearing is opened. Staff report given. Lori Duncan stated she believes she is agreeing with staff. She indicated that they own the 10 acres on the east side of Mallory, and that on the north side they run Grandpa's Farm. She indicated that she received a letter regarding annexing the west property of Mallory to City and was advised that the applicant wants 70 homes. She indicated that she does not understand how they are going to do their streets and the lay out of the homes. She indicated that they have no intention of relocating Grandpa's Farm. Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 15 No one spoke in opposition to Staff's recommendation. Anthony Jaquez, representing SmithTech, stated that he submitted a letter early today and read the letter into the record requesting a continuance for further review, indicating that they do agree with Staff's recommendations for the GPA, however, they have some questions and disagreements with Staff's recommendations for a zone change to RS which requires a minimum 24,000 square feet lot. He indicated that they would request a continuance to the December 15, 2005 meeting. The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Johnson inquired of staff when it could be continued to, to which Staff responded it would be the March 16, 2006 meeting. Commissioner Johnson moved, seconded by Commissioner Blockley, to continue the GPA and zone change for 05-0946 to the March 16, 2006 General Plan cycle meeting. Motion carried by group vote. 8.6) General Plan Amendment 05-1199 (Ward 7) The public hearing is opened. Staff report given. Larry Barrios, representing the Springbrook Homeowner's Association, reject this land use designation change. He indicated his traffic concerns, especially due to a school bus stop. He indicated that they don't have a problem with duplex's, but doubling that would equate to about 43.55 units, which is too much for this small area. He submitted a petition. Francisco Hoerta, a resident of Springbrook, expressed his concern for safety and traffic flow. He indicated that he thinks they can deal with duplex's, but with four-plex's it will create about a minimum of 40 up to 80 vehicles on those 10 lots. He indicated they are trying to prevent individuals from coming into their private areas. Jim Marino, representing Zencal Construction, as well as Patrick Padilla, the owners of the property, stated there are 10 existing lots which face on Panama Lane and addressed the neighbors issues: 1) traffic, the fact that they have two access points and bottlenecking; 2) and privacy with the park area. Mr. Marino indicated that this is an infill project, and he explained the 10 acre parcel history. He pointed out that these 10 lots are not part of the Homeowner's Association, but are in a common access and maintenance agreement, including the alleyway and both of the streets. He indicated that there will not be any curb cuts onto Panama Lane as the apartments will be accessed from the alleyway. He indicated that the physical development and subdivision of this property is accommodating for the four-plex project being proposed. Mr. Marino stated that with regard to the traffic issues, the conditions of approval do discuss traffic, and gave a comparison with Park Stockdale. He stated that with regard to the park area his client would be willing to create a barrier between the park area and the duplex area by putting up a chain link fence on the north side of the alley if the neighbors would be agreeable. Mr. Marino stated that they agree with Staff's report and recommendations for approval. The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Tragish inquired how long the R-2 zoning has been in place, to which Staff responded they don't know the exact date, other than that Mr. Marino indicated it's been in place since at least 1980 (about 25 years). Commissioner Tragish spoke in reference to changing plans after 25 years. He also disagreed with Mr. Marino's analogy to Park Stockdale, and further stated that a four-plex is somewhat intensive for this area, and duplex's would be more consistent with the rest of the tract. Commissioner Tragish stated that he is not convinced that changing the land use of this property to HMR is wise or orderly development, or necessarily safe and to the welfare of everyone living in that area. Commissioner Lomas requested a better understanding of what this is going to look like. She indicated that her main concern is that there is no divider other than an alley and a park. She pointed out that a chain link fence is not going to keep the complexes from climbing the chain link fence. She stated that she would like to see a conversation between the applicant and the homeowners to try to find a common ground to deal with the park issue. She requested a continuance to give the applicant a chance to work Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 16 with the homeowners, and perhaps the complex can join the HOA to come together for perhaps a nicer facility. Commissioner Blockley stated that he was unaware that a project was submitted on this, and based on the conversations presented he has questions regarding waiver to direct access, which is not mentioned in the staff report, and whether this is at all part of this project. He further inquired what address these four-plexes would have, and how this project fits in with the four-plex ordinance and HMR and R-2. Staff responded that the applicant is not avoiding the ordinance, and they would have to comply with the four- plex ordinance regardless of the designation on the GP. Staff further indicated that the addresses would be on Panama Lane. Staff indicated that the map recorded on the property may already have a waiver of access along Panama, which can be checked. Commissioner Blockley stated that he would support a continuance on this matter for the same reasons that Commissioner Tragish enunciated. Commissioner Tragish inquired of Mr. Marino about a continuance to meet with the neighbors, to which Mr. Marino stated that a two week continuance would be acceptable. Mr. Marino stated that he would like more input from the Traffic Engineer as his Park Stockdale analogy was made on traffic for traffic similarities. Mr. Marino stated that with regard to a waiver of direct access, the tract map does have a waiver of direct access to Panama Lane and the tract map was all done together, and therefore all of the access has to come off the allies. Commissioner Tragish inquired of Mr. Barrios about meeting with the applicant, to which Mr. Barrios responded that they would like to try to attempt this. Commissioner Tragish moved, seconded by Commissioner Johnson, moved to continue agenda item 8.6 GPA 05-1199 to December 15, 2005. Staff clarified that there is no need to re-open the public hearing. Motion carried by group vote. 8.7) General Plan Amendment 05-1287 (Porter- Robertson) (Ward 3) Approved on Consent. 8.8) General Plan Amendment 05-0953 (Quad Knopf) (Ward 3) The public hearing is opened. Staff report given. No one spoke in opposition to Staff's recommendation. Christy Ashley with Quad Knopf stated that they concur with Staff's recommendation. Don Hazelhoff with Probuilt and Pritchard stated they agree with the recommendations. Ted Cossack, Denmark Communities, stated they agree with new alignment. The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Tragish moved, seconded by Commissioner Spencer, to adopt a Resolution making findings approving the Negative Declaration and approving the General Plan Amendment as recommended by Staff for Brentwood Drive as shown on the attached Exhibit, and recommended the same to City Council. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Spencer, Tragish, Lomas NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Tkac Planning Commission — Thursday, December 1, 2005 Page 17 8.9) General Plan Amendment 05-1319 (City of Bakersfield) located City-wide. Approved on Consent 9. COMMUNICATIONS: Staff indicated that there will be a pre-meeting on December 12, 2005. 10. COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commissioner McGinnis inquired if there could be an obvious colored notation made on proposed minutes for the coming meeting that a pre-meeting will be held. 11. ADJOURNMEMT: There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 11:09 p.m. Pam Townsend, Recording Secretary JAMES D. MOVIUS, Secretary Planning Director January 9, 2006