HomeMy WebLinkAboutNovember 2, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
� ` Meeting — November 2, 2006 — 5:30 p.m.
Council Chambers, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Lomas, Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Tkac (arrived at 5:37 p.m), Tragish
Absent: Commissioner Spencer
Advisory Members: Robert Sherfy, James D. Movius, Marian Shaw, Phil Burns
Staff: Jim Eggert, Jennie Eng, Dana Cornelius
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 meeting of October 5, 2006.
4.1b PCD Status Report Pursuant to B.M.C. Section 17.54.080 A.1 — Various
Cases
Commissioner Tragish made the following corrections to the Planning Commission Minutes dated
October 5, 2006, page 3, second paragraph, "Commissioner Tragish assumes Chrisman wants
the EIR to address the fact that the oilfield may be more productive then how it is projected in the
Draft EIR, and he stated that he thinks the oil drill site..."
Commissioner Tragish also made a change to the October 5, 2006 Minutes on page 6, paragraph
2 where it states, "Commissioner Tragish stated that he likes the signage posting, but he feels
that it is more of a bandaid." And on page 7, last paragraph starting with, "Commissioner Tragish
inquired if there are any policies of general plan specifics that address health, safety and welfare,
and they discussed the welfare of adjoining neighborhoods that they be designed in such a
fashion so that..."
Another correction was made by Commissioner Tragish on page 8, 1 st paragraphs beginning with,
"He inquired why staff did not...."
Commissioner Blockley moved, seconded by Commissioner Johnson to approve the non-public
hearing items on the consent agenda.
Motion carried by group vote.
• Items on this Agenda will be heard at 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, but not necessarily in the same order.
Planning Commission - November 2, 2006 Page 2
4.2 Public Hearing Items
4.2a Approval of Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6148 (Pinnacle
Engineering)
4.2b Approval of Revised Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 11118 - Phased (McIntosh &
Associates)
4.2c Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6755 (Hendricks Engineering)
4.2d Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6858 (SmithTech/USA, Inc.)
4.2e Approval of Tentative Tract 6519 For Condominium Purposes (Pinnacle Civil
Engineering, Inc)
4.2f Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6860 (SmithTech/USA, Inc.)
4.2g Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6919 Optional Design (Cornerstone
Engineering)
The public hearing is opened. Commissioner Tkacjoined the Commission.
Commissioner McGinnis requested removal of 4.2c, Agenda Item 7.1). The public
hearing is closed.
Commissioner Blockley moved, seconded by Commissioner McGinnis, to approve the
public hearing consent calendar with the exception of 4.2c which has been removed.
Motion carried by group vote.
5. PUBLIC HEARING — Certification of Final Environmental Assessment/Environmental Impact
Report (FEIR) for Tier 2 Environmental Assessment for the Westside Parkway (City of
Bake rsfield/Caltrans/Federal Highway Administration)
The new east-west parkway project is approximately 8.1 miles long and extends from approximately
Heath Road to near State Route (SR) 99. The project includes the extension of Mohawk Street south
from Rosedale Highway, across the Kern River to Truxtun Avenue. (Wards 2, 4, and 5)
Approval of Specific Plan Line Amendment for the Westside Parkway (03-1163)
The Specific Plan Line Amendment includes construction of a new east-west parkway (Westside
Parkway) as well as the extension of Mohawk Street. The proposed alignment begins at the intersection
of Stockdale Highway and Heath Road, then bends northward, paralleling Stockdale Highway
approximately 0.5 mile to the north to Allen Road where it would extend eastward parallel to the Cross
Valley Canal and Kern River, ultimately crossing the Kern River near the existing Burlington Northern
Santa Fe railroad bridge and terminating on Truxtun Avenue near SR 99. Access to the parkway would
be provided at Stockdale Highway, Allen Road, Calloway Drive, Coffee Road, the new extension from
Mohawk Street, and the eastern terminus on Truxtun Avenue or Oak Street. (Wards 2, 4 and 5)
The public hearing is opened. Staff report given. Jeff Chapman with URS, the city's consultant, gave a
presentation.
Arthur Unger, Kern Kaweah Chapter of the Sierra Club, stated that more roads mean more reliance on
gasoline from foreign countries. He stated that mass transit would reduce traffic congestion.
The public hearing is closed. Commissioner Tkac inquired about the light rail aspect. Mr. Chapman
responded that the median of the Westside Parkway is large enough to accommodate some mass transit
forms and possibly not light rail, but other things like bus rapid transit, express bus, and car pool lanes.
Commissioner Tkac inquired what experience Mr. Chapman has with planning light rail. Mr. Chapman
Planning Commission - November 2, 2006 Page 3
stated that he has done a lot of high occupancy vehicle lanes, car pool lanes, bus rapid transit planning
and some light rail planning. He explained that there are only a few areas around the country that are
actually implementing light rail project,
Commissioner Tkac inquired of Mr. Chapman if Bill Thomas' recent funding has expedited this Westside
Parkway project. Mr. Chapman responded that he does not know if it is true or not. Mr. Wright stated
that this project was pretty far along before Congressman Thomas' funding came through, and therefore
it probably hasn't expedited it too much. Mr. Wright further stated that they have entered into some
contracts with Parson's Transportation Group and explained the funding sources.
Commissioner Tkac inquired what the timeline is to be driving on the road in a perfect environment. Mr.
Chapman responded that the project will be phased in and that the funding is phased to come in over a
number of years. It is anticipated to be completed by 2012. He further indicated that they hope to start
the first phase of the project in a little over a year from now, which would be Mohawk Street between
Rosedale Hwy. and Truxtun Ave. and then progressing to work from the east to the west.
Commissioner Tkac also inquired if San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District involvement or
money has been pushed this way given the fact that we are in the valley. Tom Bailey with URS
responded that Kern Cog needs to go through a conformity analysis which is reviewed by the air district.
He stated that this project has gone through the conformity analysis which has been reviewed by the
district, EPA and FHWA, all of which provide some improvement to air quality by reducing congestion.
Commissioner Tkac stated that he doesn't see any problems with the design of this project.
Commissioner McGinnis inquired of Mr. Chapman if most of the parkway will be below grade, to which
Mr. Chapman responded that the simulation was only through a portion of the project and not the entire
eight mile, and that simulated portion was below grade. Mr. Chapman stated that about half of the
project will be below grade and half will be at or above grade. Commissioner McGinnis inquired where
the people would get on and off a mass transit system if were to exist. Mr. Chapman responded that
there could be stations at the over-crossing bridges of the interchanges, and further indicated that there
are facilities that access from the outside such as ramps that move into the median area and then down
the center of the project, or side locations would be an option.
Commissioner McGinnis inquired about the Westwind and Empire interchange so as to avoid a Hwy 58
and Real Road mess.
Commissioner Johnson referenced page 2-1 and 2.0 of the EIR regarding alternatives in the second
paragraph, which states, "The purpose of this project is to reduce congestion on existing east-west
arterials in west Bakersfield." He further stated that with respect to mass transit, it reads: "The mass
transit alternative was considered as a method of reducing traffic demand on the transportation network
in the western Bakersfield metropolitan area. If this could be accomplished, it will not directly improve the
connectivity of the existing transportation network, although, would satisfy at least a portion of the
purpose and a need for the project. Hence, it doesn't achieve the purpose as outlined in Section 2.1 as
for why we need the project." Commissioner Johnson stated that the Westside Parkway is a needed
addition to the city, and thinks the EIR adequately addresses the majority of the concerns.
Commissioner Blockley inquired of Mr. Chapman as to the relative value component of rail being a high
dollar investment, with low flexibility compared to a road which flexibility is very high. Mr. Chapman
responded that the relative value between the different type of systems lies with the users and how many
people will use the various facilities. Mr. Chapman further stated that at this time the relative value to the
users of Bakersfield's transportation network would be skewed compared to a roadway network because
of the large single family homes in the area, and people utilizing their cars. He further stated that the
value to the user of the facility is enhanced by a roadway facility.
Commissioner Blockley inquired if it could be several decades before any rail transport system would be
viable in Bakersfield, to which Mr. Chapman responded in the affirmative.
Mr. Bailey with URS stated that the EIR on page 2-49 documents some rough ratios for light rail, and
pointed out that Bakersfield is too dispersed to support light rail effectively.
Planning Commission - November 2, 2006 Page 4
Commissioner Lomas inquired what should be looked at when considering fog and lighting being
addressed in the environmental document. Mr. Chapman said the safety lighting that we have put in
there, and the deflector shields would deflect it down towards the roadway would help to some extent in
foggy conditions, instead of having a light just disperse into the fog. It would focus down on the roadway
so you would get a bit of safety even in fog condition with that lighting. What you're looking for is in our
project description. We need to include some of the details that would address potential foggy conditions
like pavement markers instead of just painted stripes on the roadway so the person can actually feel and
hear as well as see the roadway ahead so the site lines are diminished because of fog. You actually see
this a lot on Cal Trans freeways. You could also use what's called rumble strips on the edge of the road
on the shoulders so that if you're getting off to the right you would feel that and then you would know you
need to correct and get back into the lane. We've considered signing during foggy conditions, even a
lighted sign that would have a yellow light potentially that would say, foggy conditions ahead'. They
aren't currently in the project description, but City staff is aware that is something that needs to be a part
of the project. I think it would be no problem to add that kind of detail to the project description to make
sure that the project is implemented and is actually in the record those elements of the project.
Commissioner Lomas asked about lighting sometimes helping and sometimes hurting, and inquired if Mr.
Chapman could address that in the project description. Mr. Chapman responded, "Yes we can."
Commissioner Lomas inquired if there is a difference between at, below or above grade with respect to
lighting in fog conditions. Mr. Chapman responded that fog is constantly changing. Commissioner
Lomas inquired if there are any plantings, landscaping that could help or worsen fog conditions. Mr.
Chapman responded that there probably is nothing that would worsen, and any plantings would probably
be neutral as to whether it created fog.
Commissioner Lomas inquired if each phase will be opened up for use, or if it will be unusable until
completion. Mr. Chapman responded that each phase would be opened to traffic as it is completed.
Commissioner Tragish commended the efforts of those who have put this project together.
Commissioner Blockley moved, seconded by Commissioner McGinnis, to adopt a Resolution making
CEQA findings Sections 15091 and 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines approving mitigation measures
and mitigation monitoring program and recommending certification of the Final EIR of the Westside
Parkway project and Specific Plan Line Amendment Number 03-1163 to the City Council. (See Exhibit A)
Motion carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Tkac, Tragish, Lomas.
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Spencer
Commissioner Blockley moved, seconded by Commissioner McGinnis, to adopt a Resolution approving
the requested Westside Parkway project and Specific Plan Line Amendment Number 03-1163 to the City
Council. (See Exhibit B)
Motion carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Tkac, Tragish, Lomas.
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Spencer
6. PUBLIC HEARING — Revised Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 11118 - Phased (McIntosh &
Associates) located at the southeast corner of Gosford Road and Pacheco Road. (Negative
Declaration on File)
Heard on consent calendar.
Planning Commission - November 2, 2006 Page 5
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS—Tentative Tract Maps
7.1 Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6755 (Hendricks Engineering) located north of East Hosking
Avenue between South Union Avenue and Cottonwood Road. (Negative Declaration on
file) (Continued from October 5, 2006 and Re-Advertised)
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 McGinnis inquired if there are
any pending maps for any of the surrounding agriculture in the area. Staff responded that there is
nothing to the east and southwest, however there are tracts adjacent to the northwest portion of
the property. He further inquired as to the calf operation in the area, to which Staff responded
that the calf operation is still ongoing, and that there is a pending code enforcement case against
that subject property. Staff responded that it is their understanding that this operation will be
moved to the "Houchin Ranch", however they are in the process of completing an EIR with the
county. Staff further pointed out that they are trying to decipher if the move will be done in a time
frame that is amenable with the city.
Commissioner McGinnis inquired as to the environmental impacts from the calf operation, to
which Mr. Ron Hunter responded that the vector control is based on current studies and
knowledge done by UC Davis.
Staff commented that there is a discrepancy as to the annexed use of the calf operation, and use
violations will be addressed at the code enforcement hearing and not manure clean up issues.
Commissioner Blockley stated he has a problem reconciling his personal experience of the
environmental issues with the conclusion in the report. Mr. Hunter stated that from a technical
standpoint he can present the data, but advised that Kathy Parker ran the model and she can
further explain it. Ms. Parker with Ensight Environmental Consultants commented that this is
generally an upwind source and odors are more concentrated the closer they are to the facility.
She stated they look at the worse case when the wind is not blowing and no actual dispersion.
Commissioner Johnson inquired about the hour and five minute study. Ms. Parker stated that it is
to build conservatism into the model. Commissioner Johnson further inquired about the uses of
the cattle ranch, and inquired when walking the site to the south of the proposed development
how the cattle were moving and where they were located. Mr. Hunter responded the calves tend
to move towards the top third of the built up rows, which keeps the cattle at higher dry ground,
and reduces the flow of fluids away from where they are standing. Mr. Hunter stated that the
manure management they saw appeared to be as though they were coming in with a flat blade
tractor and scraping, and pulling all the manure out away from the sheds and carting it back to
the southeastern corner of the property where it was tilled in. They believe that it may then be
used for fertilizer on the far western edge of the property where crops were being grown.
Commissioner Johnson inquired if the calf operation was sited for 15,000 calves. Staff
responded that it is their understanding that there are approximately 12,000 calves at the site.
Staff further stated that property to the south of the proposed project is zoned R-1.
Commissioner Johnson stated that he would like to see what the outcome of the code
enforcement meeting is with the southern property before the Planning Commission takes a vote
on the subject property, as it will impact this project.
Commissioner Tkac inquired as the southern property's R-1 CUP, to which Staff responded that
it does not have a CUP, but is zoned R-1. Commissioner Tkac stated he would be in agreement
to a continuance. He further inquired if the calf operation has a flush system. Ms. Parker
responded in the negative stating there is no lagoon or collection because it is not like a dairy
where things are being washed down.
Commissioner Lomas stated she has severe problems with the vector and odor reports, and the
fact that there's a discrepancy as to whether there is a CUP on the cattle operation to the south.
She further pointed out that she doesn't see a lot of value in the reports as the site was inspected
on the "best of the days". She commented that she thinks there are health and safety issues.
Planning Commission - November 2, 2006 Page 6
She inquired if there is a way to place a condition that this subdivision not be placed until the
facility is moved. Staff recommended against this, and that if there is a concern that the project
be denied. Commissioner Lomas further inquired how long a continuance should be. Staff
responded it would be very difficult to calculate a date based on the outcome of the code
violation meeting, but pointed out that a two week continuance could be sufficient.
Commissioner McGinnis stated he feels very uncomfortable with the information presented to
approve this project, and would recommend that this project be continued for two weeks.
Commissioner McGinnis moved, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to continue the vesting of
tentative tract map 6755 until November 16, 2006.
Motion carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Blockley, Johnson, McGinnis, Tkac, Tragish, Lomas.
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Spencer
7.2 Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6858 (SmithTech/USA, Inc.)
Heard on consent calendar.
7.3 Tentative Tract 6519 For Condominium Purposes (Pinnacle Civil Engineering, Inc)
Heard on consent calendar.
7.4 Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6860 (SmithTech/USA, Inc.)
Heard on consent calendar.
7.5 Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6919 Optional Design (Cornerstone Engineering)
Heard on consent calendar.
8. COMMUNICATIONS:
None. The next meeting is not going to be very long, so there will be another operational update.
9. COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Commissioner Johnson relayed his gratitude to staff for seeking a solution on the Old River Ranch Parks
and Trails Plan that was successfully approved at the last Planning Commission meeting.
10. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 7:08 p.m.
Dana Cornelius, Recording Secretary
JAMES D. MOVIUS, Secretary
Planning Director
December 14,2006