Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout21/02/99 AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Council Chamber, City Hall 1. ROLL CALL Thursday, December 2, 1999 5:30 p.m. JEFFREY TKAC, Chairman MICHAEL DHANENS, Vice-Chairman STEPHEN BOYLE MA THEW BRADY MARTI MUNIS-KEMPER TOM MCGINNIS RON SPRAGUE NOTE: Agendas may be amended up to 72 hours prior to the Planning Commission meeting. A final agenda may be obtained from the Planning Department 72 hours prior to the meeting. = PUBLIC STATEMENTS ANY PERSON WHOSE NAME APPEARS ON THE AGENDA OR WISHES TO SPEAK REGARDING A PUBLIC HEARING NEED NOT FILL OUT A SPEAKER'S CARD. ALL OTHERS WISHING TO SPEAK BEFORE THE COMMISSION MAY FILL OUT A SPEAKER'S CARD AND PRESENT IT TO THE SECRETARY PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF THE MEETING. NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Planning Commission decisions on Zone Changes, Parcel Maps and Tentative Subdivision maps are subject to appeal by any person aggrieved. No permit shall be issued for any use involved in an application until after the final acceptance date of appeal. Such appeal must be filed in writing within 10 days from date of hearing, addressed to the City Council, c/o Office of the City Clerk, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301. A $334 non-refundable filing fee must be included with filing of the initial appeal for those appeals filed by the applicant or any person outside the notice area. All appeals filed on land divisions will require a $334 non-refundable filing fee. If all appeals" are withdrawn prior to the City Council hearing, it will not be conducted and the decision of the Planning Commission will stand. If no appeal is received within the specified time period or if all appeals filed are withdrawn, the action of the Planning Commission shall become final. Agenda, PC, Thursday- December 2, 1999 Page 2 CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS - (marked by asterisk (*) These items will be acted on as a group without individual staff presentations if no member of the Planning Commission or audience wishes to comment or ask questions on a case. The items are recommended for approval by staff. The applicant has been informed of any special conditions and has signed an agreement to conditions of approval and requested to be placed on the consent agenda. If anyone wishes to discuss or testify on any of the consent items the item(s) will be taken off consent and will be considered in the order on the agenda. If not, the public hearing will be opened and the items acted on as a group. 3.1) 3.2) 3.3) 3.4) Agenda Item 5.1 - Extension of Time for Vesting Rights TT 5827 Phase A (Castle & Cooke, CA) Agenda Item 5.2 - Extension of Time for Vesting Rights TT 5827 Phase B (Castle & Cooke, CA) Agenda Item 5.3 - Extension of Time for Vesting Rights TT 5827 Phase C (Castle & Cooke, CA) Agenda Item 9 - General Plan Consistency Finding - Acquisition of a 3-ace parcel Ward4) Ward 4) SOUTHERN BELTWAY STATUS UPDATE RECOMMENDATION: Refer to committee PUBLIC HEARINGS- Extensions of Time 5.1) Extension of Time for Vesting Rights - Tentative Tract 5827, Phase A (Castle & Cooke, CA) consisting of nine residential lots and one landscape Ioti' located south of Brimhall Road approximately 800 feet east of Jewetta Avenue. (Negative Declaration on file) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Group vote. 5.2) Extension of Time for Vesting Rights - Tentative Tract 5827, Phase _R (Castle & Cooke, CA) consisting of twenty-six residential lots, located south of Brimhall Road approximately 800 feet east of Jewetta Avenue. (Negative Declaration on file) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Group vote. Agenda, PC, Thursday - December 2, 1999 Page 3 Ward4) 5.3) Extension of Time for Vesting Rights - Tentative Tract 5827, Phase c. (Castle & Cooke, CA) consisting of thirteen residential lots, located south of Brimhall Road approximately 800 feet east of Jewetta Avenue. (Negative Declaration on file) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Group vote. Se (Ward 4) PUBLIC HEARING -Tentative Parcel Map 10633 (Porter-Robertson) consisting of 6 parcels on 444.23 acres for single family residential purposes, zoned R-1 (One Family Dwelling) located between Snow Road, Calloway Drive, Norris Road, Reina Road and Jewetta Avenue. (Negative Declaration on file) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Roll call vote. (Ward 3) (Ward 3) PUBLIC HEARING - Vesting Tentative Tract 5929 (Porter-Robertson Engineering) subdivision to create 88 lots on 22 + acres zoned R-1 (One Family Dwelling) for single family residential purposes, generally located north of Panorama Drive, west of Thorner Street. (Negative Declaration on file) (Continued from October 21 and November 16, 1999) Recommendation: Approve Group vote PUBLIC HEARING - Zone Change P99-0743 (Carlos Parrolivelli) consisting of a zone change from a PUD (Planned Unit Development) to an R-1 (One Family Dwelling) on 4.63 acres, generally located on the south side of State Route 178, approximately 300 feet east of Miramonte Drive. (Negative Declaration on file) (Continued from November 18, 1999) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Roll call vote. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDING (City of Bakersfield) acquisition of a three acre parcel at the southwest corner of Coffee Road and Norris Road for a water tank site. (Exempt from CEQA) Recommendation: Approve Group vote Agenda, PC, Thursday - December 2, 1999 Page 4 10. COMMUNICATIONS A) Written B) Verbal 11. 12. COMMISSION COMMENTS A) Committees DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THE NEXT PRE-MEETING. 13. ADJOURNMENT November 22, 1999 Held m December 2, 1999 5:30 p.m. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: Present: City Council Chamber, City Hall 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, California. Absenh JEFFREY TKAC, Chairperson MICHAEL DHANENS, Vice Chairperson MATHEW BRADY TOM MCGINNIS MARTI MUNIS-KEMPER RON SPRAGUE STEPHEN BOYLE ADVISORY MEMBERS: Present: Staff: Present: CARL HERNANDEZ, Deputy City Attorney DENNIS FIDLER, Building Director MARIAN SHAW, Engineer IV STANLEY GRADY, Planning Director JENNIE ENG, Associate Planner PAM TOWNSEND, Recording Secretary PUBLIC STATEMENTS None Chairman Tkac read the Notice of the Right to Appeal CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 3.1) 3.2) 3.3) 3.4) Agenda Item 5.1 - Extension of Time for Vesting Rights TT 5827 Phase A (Castle & Cooke, CA) Agenda Item 5.2 - Extension of Time for Vesting Rights TT 5827 Phase B (Castle & Cooke, CA) Agenda Item 5.3 - Extension of Time for Vesting Rights TT 5827 Phase C (Castle & Cooke, CA) Agenda Item 9 - General Plan Consistency Finding - Acquisition of a 3-ace parcel Minutes, PC, December 2, 1999 Page 2 o A motion was made by Commissioner Sprague, seconded by Commissioner Kemper to approve the Consent Agenda items. Motion carried. SOUTHERN BELTWAY STATUS UPDATE Stanley Grady, Planning Director, stated that staff had a discussion with several Commissioners whether it would be worthwhile to place this item on the agenda so that it could be referred to a committee so that discussion could be made on whether or not the city had adequately responded tothe direction the Commission gave when the alternative alignments were looked at. That way at the meeting on December 16, 1999, discussion could be confined to the environmental issues or get direction to go. back and do something different. StafFs recommendation is that a committee be appointed to meet next week for discussion on the alternative alignments. Commissioner Kemper made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Sprague, to refer this item to a committee. Motion carried. Chairman Tkac said that he would appoint the committee later on the agenda during Commissioner Comments. PUBLIC HEARINGS- Extensions of Time 5.1) Extension of Time for Vesting Rights - Tentative Tract 5827, Phase A (Castle & Cooke, CA) (Ward 4) See Consent Agenda 5.2) Extension of Time for Vesting Rights - Tentative Tract 5827, Phase B (Castle & Cooke, CA) (Ward 4) See Consent Agenda 5.3) Extension of Time for Vesting Rights - Tentative Tract 5827, Phase C (Castle & Cooke, CA) (Ward 4) See Consent Agenda PUBLIC HEARING -Tentative Parcel Map 10633 (Porter-Robertson) (Ward 4) Staff report given recommending approval with conditions attached to resolution and change in Public Works Condition 6.14 per memorandum from Marian Shaw dated December 2, 1999. Public portion of the meeting was opened. No one spoke in opposition. Harold Robertson representing the applicant spoke in favor. He requested deletion of Planning Department Conditions 12.2 and 12.3. Public portion of the meeting was closed. Minutes, PC, December 2, 1999 Page 3 = Commissioner Kemper asked staff what their position is on the request to delete -Planning Department Conditions 12.2 and 12.37 Mr. Grady stated that staff worked with Mr. Robertson on this and those conditions were no longer applicable with the changing of Parcels 5 and 6 becoming "Not a Part" of the project. Commissioner Kemper asked about Item 9 in Exhibit "1" which says in the last sentence "covenants shall be provided to each new property owner through escrow proceedings." Commissioner Kemper asked if the Commission could request that this be provided to the customer before escrow opens. Perhaps at the time of purchase. Mr. Robertson said that he did not think it had a big impact on the sale of homes. Commissioner Kemper said that it would be her preference that this be provided up front. Commissioner Sprague stated that there is a requirement on sales of residential real estate that you disclose special assessments and there is a form that the builders, Realtors and escrow companies use to disclose to the buyers of any special district assessments or maintenance districts. This should be a part of the sales material presented to the buyer. That should cover the problem. Commissioner Brady asked staff.that if Conditions 12.2 and 12.3 come out at this time if the requirement for fencing will be deferred until some other time in which there is an application to do something with Parcels 5 and 6? Mr. Grady said "yes." Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Dhanens, to approve and adopt the negative declaration and to approve Tentative Parcel Map 10633 with findings and conditions set forth in attached resolution Exhibit "A" and incorporate the memorandum from Marian P. Shaw to the Planning Commission dated December 2, 1999, with the following changes and additions that paragraphs 12.2 and 12.3 of Exhibit "1" be eliminated and that Parcels 5 and 6 be shown as designated remainders. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING - Vesting Tentative Tract 5929 (Porter-Robertson Engineering) (Ward 3) Staff report given recommending approval with alternate layout and conditions attached to resolution. Public portion of the meeting was opened. No one spoke in opposition. Renee Nelson spoke in favor: She likes the idea of the alternate layout of the street. Mr. Robertson spoke in favor and presented the Commission with another alternative layout that staff had not seen which included a change in Gull Street where the lots backed up to the north boundary of the school and for the lots along the west boundary to extend the lot lines to the centerline of the Southern Cai Edison easement. This way the property owners could maintain the easement from weeds. Mr. Robertson also asked for deletion of Planning Department Condition No. 3. Public portion of the meeting was closed. Minutes, PC, December 2, 1999 Page 4 Commissioner Sprague asked Mr. Robertson if on the sales of those lots if the sale package could include the homeowner taking care of the maintenance of the easements? Mr. Robertson said it would be at the sale of the lot. The owner would not be allowed to construct swimming pools or build storage sheds on the easements. Commissioner Sprague said that he wanted to make sure that the property owner is' aware he must maintain this easement. Commissioner Sprague also asked Mr. Robertson if the towers were collapse able in the event of an earthquake? Mr. Robertson said that if any kind of emergency happened the towers would not fall over but would collapse. Commissioner McGinnis asked Mr. Robertson if the property lines on the western parcels is the back line for that property and would be for the use of the property owner and if it goes into the easement or adjacent to the easement? Mr. Robertson said that the property lines goes 75 feet into the easement. Commissioner McGinnis asked how far away the tower was from the adjacent lot line? Mr. Robertson said about 40 feet. Commissioner McGinnis also asked how far the home site is from the tower? Mr. Robertson said 100 feet. Commissioner Dhanens asked staff if they had seen a copy of the layout prior to the meeting? Ms. Shaw said she had seen it but did not have a copy. Commissioner Dhanens asked if Gull Street should terminate into a temporary turn around before the land to the west is subdivided. Ms. Shaw said "yes." Ms. Shaw said that it would be handled at the improvement plan stage. Commissioner Dhanens said that with respect to the lots being extended to the centerline of the easements, he remembers that a year or two ago a committee of the Planning Commission tried to come up with ways to handle the land beneath the easements. He asked staff if this would relate to that? Mr. Grady said that there was some language added to the subdivision ordinance that provided for some incentives in the way of lot size reductions or some improvements if the applicant included in some formal way those easements into an open space element or a park element of some sort. Commissioner Dhanens said that this seems to be an 'unusual condition. He does not remember seeing one like this recently where you have lots extend into an easement? Mr. Grady said that staff is not recommending this proposal. This is not something you would see commonly in a subdivision where we would be recommending the easement be subdivided. This is not the map that was submitted for public review. This is a map the applicant submitted tonight. This map was not submitted to Southern Cai Edison for their review. Commissioner Dhanens asked Mr. Robertson if Southern Cai Edison had seen this map? Mr. Robertson said "no" that Southern California Edison would not prefer this type of lofting arrangement and went on to give an argument to approve this project. Commissioner Dhanens asked Mr. Robertson if Southern California Edison had any ability to prevent the Commission or the city from allowing that lotting condition to exist? Mr. Robertson said that to his understanding "no" but does not know the legal aspect. Minutes, PC, December 2, 1999 Page 5 Commissioner Dhanens asked Mr. Hernandez if he knew the answer from a legal standpoint? Mr. Hernandez said that we don't know the extent of the easement and have no way of knowing and that's why the subdivision map is sent out for circulation to . all the affected public agencies. It is a concern to staff that no one has seen the new layout to make comment on it. Dennis Fidler, Building Director, stated that just south of this tract what the applicant is proposing is exactly what they have done there. Everyone of the lots are split down the center. They have a 30 foot area where they cannot build even a fence in because of Southern Cai Edison's easement but they have to maintain it. The rest of it can go in the back yard. No pools or structures can be built but maintaining is done better. Code Enforcement can require the lots to be completely cleaned along with the next 30 feet. Commissioner Brady stated that he liked the idea because he disliked the brown belts throughout the city caused by the utility easements. Commissioner. Brady asked staff if Gull Street is a collector or a local street? Ms. Shaw said that it was a local with a speed limit of 25 mph. Commissioner Brady asked about the intersection of Thorner and Gull and if there was a problem with traffic. He was afraid the corner house at lot 39 might be subject to cars crashing through it. Steve Walker, Traffic Engineer, stated that this is a typical "T" intersection. It is a local street 45 feet wide with 25 mph and he does not feel there will be a problem. Commissioner Brady asked Jim Shapazian, Fire Marshal, if he thought there would be a problem with getting fire equipment around the intersection. Mr. Shapazian said it would not be a problem. Commissioner Brady asked if Gull Street would be a half street and if so, when would the other half be built. Ms. Shaw 'stated that it would be built when the property on the other side is developed. Commissioner Brady asked Mr. Grady if he understood correctly that staff is not recommending approval of the map as proposed by Mr. Robertson. Mr. Grady said that is correct. Commissioner Brady then asked Mr. Grady the reasons why staff is not supporting the item. Mr. Grady said that one reason is because it is not the map submitted for review. It has not been circulated to the utility companies and other agencies. The other reason is we have not proposed subdividing these easements anywhere else in the city that he is aware of. He does not know about the property to the south. It might have been done later as a lot line adjustment. He does not recall it as being part of the original subdivision. It is not the standard method of handling utility easements. We have them held as open space for the utility companies. Commissioner Brady asked Mr. Hernandez if we were subjecting ourselves to some kind of legal liability from the utility company if the Commission approved this item tonight? Mr. Hernandez said that it would be a major concern with regards to the utility company. Staff has had no communication with the utility company with regards to this change and the map act requires that the adjacent property owners be given notice of what's being proposed. Commissioner Brady asked if the Commission continued this item until the next meeting and put the utility company on specific notice, if that would satisfy the requirement? Mr. Hernandez said "yes." Mr. Brady asked Mr. Robertson for a response. After some Minutes, PC, December 2, 1999 Page 6 = discussion Mr. Robertson and Mr. Heise agreed to a two week continuance until December 16, 1999. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Kemper, to continue this project to the next Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING - Zone Change P99-0743 (Carlos Parrolivelli) (Continued from November 18, 1999) (Ward 3) Commissioner Sprague declared a conflict of interest on this item. Staff report given recommending approval with conditions attached to resolution and memo from the Planning Department dated December 1, 1999. Public portion of the meeting was opened. No one spoke in opposition. John Wilson, speaking for the applicant Carlos Parrolivelli, stated that he agreed with staff's recommendation. Public portion of the meeting was closed. Commissioner Dhanens stated that the memorandum from the Planning Department was a very thorough approach to solving the problems with the project and based on research and meeting the general plan document, staff has done a good job. Commissioner Dhanens stated that on Page 2 of the memo under revision to Condition No. 7, the last sentence states "that accessory buildings such as garages and carports may be constructed within the sixty feet area." Commissioner Dhanens asked that since the noise contour line is 30 feet south of the north property line, would that .sentence allow a garage or carport or accessory structure be built within the area? Mr. Grady said that when they looked at the noise study, the setback reference was to the habitable structure, not the accessory structures. Motion was made by Commissioner Kemper, seconded by Commissioner Dhanens, to approve and adopt the negative declaration and approve Zone Change P99-0743 with the findings and conditions set forth in attached resolution Exhibit "A" and also including the agreements on the memorandum dated December 1 from Stanley Grady. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Brady, Dhanens, Kemper, McGinnis, Tkac NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Boyle, Sprague Minutes, PC, December 2, 1999 Page 7 10. 11. 12. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDING (City of Bakersfield) acquisition of a three acre parcel at the southwest corner of Coffee Road and Norris Road for a water tank site. (Exempt from CEQA) (Ward4) See Consent Agenda COMMUNICATIONS There wei'e no written or verbal communications. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Sprague reported that the committee met regarding the Buena Vista Road shopping center with Coleman Homes. They had a couple meetings and asked several questions and there was very good cooperation with the applicant. Several items were changed on the site plan and they explained all the items that the Commissioners had concern with. They resolved most of the problems and he thinks the applicant will return soon with a site plan that everyone will be happy with. Commissioner Dhanens asked what the next step was in moving forward with the project? Mr. Grady said they would submit a formal application for a P.C.D. (Planned Commercial Development) zone change and the zone change would contain the site plan. Commissioner Tkac appointed the following members to the committee to review the South Beltway: Commissioners Sprague and Dhanens with Commissioner McGinnis as Chairman. DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF NEXT PRE-MEETING Since it is a general plan cycle, it was decided to hold a pre-meeting on December 13, 1999. 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Pam Townsend, Recording Secretary December 8, 1999