Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout21/07/00 AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Council Chamber, City Hall Thursday, December 7, 2000 5:30 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL NOTE: MICHAEL DHANENS, Chairman STEPHEN BOYLE, Vice-Chairman MA THEW BRADY MARTI MUNIS-KEMPER TOM MCGINNIS RON SPRAGUE JEFFREY TKAc 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 interested person adversely affected by the decision of the Commission. No permit shall be issued for any use involved in an application until after the final acceptance date of appeal. The appeal shall include the appellant's interest in or relationship to the subject property, the decision or action appealed and shall state specific facts and reasons why the appellant believes the decision or action of the Commission should not be upheld. Such appeal must be filed in writing within 10 days from date of hearing, addressed to the City Council, cio 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 If all appeals are withdrawn prior to the City Council hearing, it will not be conducted and the decision of the Planning Commission will stand. If no appeal is received within the specified time period or if all appeals filed are withdrawn, the action of the Planning Commission shall become final.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 7, 2000 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) 3.5) Agenda Item 4) - Extension of Time for TPM 10347 Agenda Item 5.4) -Tentative Parcel Map 10748 -(Porter-Robertson) Agenda Item 6.1) - Vesting Tentative Map 6017 - Continue to 1118/01 Agenda Item 6.4) - Vesting Tentative Tract 6033 (SmithTech USA) Agenda Item 7) - GP Consistency Finding for the acquisition of property (Ward 1) PUBLIC HEARING - Extension of Time for Tentative Parcel Map 10347 (Alta Engineering/Hughes Surveying) containing two parcels on 40 acres on property zoned M-3 (Heavy Industrial) for purposes of industrial development, located at the northwest corner of Cottonwood Road and East Pacheco Road. (Categorically Exempt) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Group vote (Ward 6) (Ward 6) PUBLIC HEARINGS - Tentative Parcel Maps 5.1 Revised Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 10465 (Mclntosh & Associates) Containing 29 lots on 148.77 acres for medium industrial uses, zoned M-2 (General Manufacturing); located at the southwest corner of Pacheco Road and Gosford Road. (Negative Declaration on file) (Continued from November 16, 2O00) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Group vote 5.2 Tentative Parcel Map 10719 (Porter/Robertson) Containing 4 parcels on 5 acres for purposes of light manufacturing use, zoned M-1 (Light Manufacturing). The applicant is also requesting to vacate the abandonment of direct access to White Lane; located between White Lane and Schirra Court, about 300 feet west of Mexicali Drive. (Exempt from CEQA) Agenda, PC, Thursday December 7, 2000 Page RECOMMENDATION: Group vote Approve (Ward 5) (Ward 5) 5.3 5.4 Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 10723 (Mclntosh & Associates) Containing 5 parcels on 12.31 acres for purposes of continued shopping center use, zoned C-2 (Regional Commercial); located at the n~)rthwest corner of California Avenue and Stockdale Highway. (Exempt from CEQA) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Group vote Tentative Parcel Map 1074{{ (Porter/Robertson) Containing 3 parcels on 4.51 acres for commercial purposes, zoned PCD (Planned Commercial Development); located on the north side of Stockdale Highway at Village Lane. (Negative Declaration on file) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Group vote (Ward 4) PUBLIC HEARINGS - Tentative Tract Map~ 6.1) Vesting Tentative Tract 6017 (Porter-Robertson) Containing 47 lots on 7.56 acres for single family residential purposes, zoned R-2 (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling); including a request for reduced lot area, non-radial and non-perpendicular lot lines, approval of vehicular access, double frontage lots separated from a local street with a masonry wall, and private gated streets with alternate street design improvements; generally located between Northshore Drive and Coffee Road, approximately 500 feet south of Olive Drive. (Negative Declaration on file) (Continued from November 16, 2000) RECOMMENDATION: Group vote Continue to January 18, 2001 6.2 Vesting Tentative Tract 603? (SmithTech USA, Inc) Containing 108 buildable lots, on. 26.67 net acres for single family residential purposes, zoned R-1 (One Family Dwelling). The applicant is also requesting a modification to standards to al. low reverse corner lots and a modification to allow a curve radius of less than 500 feet on a local street; located on the northeast comer of Ming Avenue and South Allen Road, on the west side of River Run Boulevard. (Negative Declaration on file) Agenda, PC, Thursday - December 7, 2000 Page 4 (Ward 4) RECOMMENDATION: Group vote Approve (Ward 4) 6.3) Vesting Tentative Tract 6034 (SmithTech USA) Containing 94 buildable lots on 26.24 net acres for single family residential purposes zoned R-1 (One Family Dwelling). The applicant is also requesting a modification to standards to allow a reverse corner lot; located approximately 680 feet north of Ming Avenue on the east side of South Allen Road. (Negative Declaration on file) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Group vote (Ward 4) (Ward 3 ) 6.4) Vesting Tentative Tract 6033 (SmithTech USA) Containing 38 lots on 17.86 acres for single family residential purposes, zoned C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) and R-2 (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling) to be rezoned E (Estate 10,000 square foot lot minimum) and a request for alternate street design and private gated streets; located on the southeast corner of Jenkins Road and Palm Avenue (extended). (Negative Declaration on file) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Group vote General Plan Consistency Finding for the acquisition of 3.86 acres at the northeast corner of Fairfax Road and Highway 178. (Exempt from CEQA) RECOMMENDATION: Make Finding Group vote COMMUNICATIONS A) Written B) Verbal Agenda, PC, Thursday - December 7, 2000 Page 5 9. COMMISSION COMMENTS A) Committees 10. DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THE NEXT PRE-MEETING. ADJOURNMENT December 4, 2000 STANLEY GRADY, Sec~~~ Planning Director Held December 7, 2000 5:30 p.m. City Council Chamber, City Hall 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: Present: MICHAEL DHANENS, Chairperson STEPHEN BOYLE, Vice Chairperson MATHEW BRADY TOM MCGINNIS MARTI MUNIS-KEMPER RON SPRAGUE JEFFREY TKAC ADVISORY MEMBERS: Present: Staff: Present: CARL HERNANDEZ, Assistant City Attorney DENNIS FIDLER, Building Director MARIAN SHAW, Engineer IV STANLEY GRADY, Planning Director JAMES MOVIUS, Principal Planner PAM TOWNSEND, Recording Secretary Commissioner McGinnis stated he did not attend Monday's pre-meeting but listened to a copy of the tape from the meeting and is prepared to participate in tonight's meeting. PUBLIC STATEMENTS None Chairman Dhanens read the Notice Of the Right to Appeal Minutes, PC, December 7, 2000 Page ? CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 3.1) 3.2) 3.3) 3.4) 3.5) Agenda Item 4) - Extension of Time for TPM 10347 Agenda Item 5.4) -Tentative Parcel Map 10748 - (Porter-Robertson) Agenda Item 6.1) - Vesting Tentative Map 6017 - Continue to 1/18/01 Agenda Item 6.4) - Vesting Tentative Tract 6033 (SmithTech USA) Agenda Item 7) - GP Consistency Finding for the acquisition of property A motion was made by Commissioner Boyle, seconded by Commissioner Kemper, to approve the Consent Agenda items. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING - Extension of Time for Tentative Parcel Map 10347 (Alta Engineering/Hughes Surveying) (Ward See Consent Agenda PUBLIC HEARINGS - Tentative Parcel Map-~ 5.1 Revised Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 10465 (Mclntosh & Associates) (Ward Staff responded to questions raised at Monday's pre-meeting by supplying the Commission with a memorandum including language that the applicant's representative supplied staff which has a restrictive covenant effecting permitted uses south of White Lane, east of Gosford to Ashe Road. If the Commission elects to use the language the applicant supplied, the Commission could still use the motion contained in the December 1 memorandum. A Planning Department condition would be added as conditiOn No. 3 with respect to the Commission's decision on how they want to treat the relationship between the industrial and residential for this particular parcel map. Public portion of the hearing was opened. No one spoke in opposition. Roger Mclntosh, representing Castle & Cooke CA, said that after the last hearing he did some research and what he found is that there are CC&R's that are recorded over Stockdale Industrial Park Phase 5 which is the area south of White Lane. He forwarded the language to Mr. Grady and the language in the December 6 memo to the Planning Commission basically spells out the restrictions that they would agree to imposing along the east and west 300 feet of the parcel map. Everything else beyond that would still be allowed to have an M-2 use. That would give them about a 500 foot buffer to the east and about a 400 foot buffer on the west. Mr. Mclntosh asked for the Commission's approval of this map along with the changes that were outlined in the conditions as had been discussed last time. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Minutes, PC, December 7, 2000 Parle 3 Commissioner Sprague asked if the CC&Rs were to be recorded and Mr. Mclntosh said "yes." Commissioner Kemper asked Mr. Mclntosh if condition No. 3 on the memo dated December 1 fits the situation the best in light of the December 6 memo? Mr. Mclntosh said they are agreeing to the conditions as spelled out in the December 6 memo. Commissioner Boyle asked Mr.i Hernandez if the Commission needs to build a record of evidence to support the findings since the applicant is agreeing to the conditions? Mr. Hernandez said that is correct, but, however, the memo from Stan Grady should be entered into the record as supporting evidence. Commissioner Boyle asked Mr. Hernandez if in his reading of the suggested language in the memorandum that he agrees that the language is broad enough to stop the types of uses that would otherwise be allowed on this property in terms of creating hazards for pedestrians and residences. Mr. Hernandez said that it is their opinion that it is broad enough. Commissioner Boyle said that for the record he concurs with the memo dated December 1 from Mr. Grady ~:egarding the items of evidence that could be discussed and he believes the CC&Rs are an appropriate way to address this item. Commissioner Brady said that he understands the December 6 memorandum suggests that the CC&Rs itemized in items 1 a., b., c., & d. on Pages 1 and 2 of the memo is language out of other CC&Rs and wanted to know if this was all of them? Mr. Grady said that there would be a set of CC&Rs and one of the items would have to be included is the language that would provide the restrictive covenant as to what uses could occur within the 300 feet. What the Commission is seeing is complete as far as identifying for the applicant what language as a condition of approval for his map would need to be placed in his CC&Rs once they are drafted and they would then be reviewed by the City Attorney's office for conformance to that condition. Commissioner Brady said that he concurs with the statements and memorandums presented to them that there is sufficient foundation and evidence to support the conditions. Commissioner Tkac was seated at this time (5:40 p.m.) and stated that he had listened to a copy of the tape of Monday's pre-meeting and was prepared to participate in tonight's meeting. Commissioner Boyle stated that normally CC&Rs are enforceable by property owners. He assumes that these CC&Rs will include a provision that they are enforceable by the city as well? Mr. Hernandez said they always require a condition that with respect to certain of the conditions contained in the CC&Rs are enforceable by the City of Bakersfield and/or cannot be modified without the written consent of the City of Bakersfield. Minutes, PC, December 7, 2000 Page 4 Commissioner Dhanens asked about several other items they were discussing at the November 16 hearing and wanted to know if Exhibit A and Exhibit 1 were to be put in the motion? Mr. Grady said "yes." Commissioner Dhanens said there was a memorandum dated November 16 that modified some Public Works conditions and wanted to know if Exhibit 1 reflected it. Ms. Shaw said "yes." Commissioner Dhanens said that with the proposed language and the proposed motion, that has been drafted by staff, he also concurs that this is an appropriate way to develop the property and would support a motion to approve the project. There were no other Commission comments or questions. Motion was made by Commissioner Boyle, seconded by Commissioner Brady, to approve Revised Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 10465 with findings set forth in attached resolution Exhibit "A" which was attached to the December 1 memorandum from the Planning Director and including a condition requiring CC&Rs to be placed on the east 300 feet and the west 300 feet of the parcel map and the CC&Rs are to be consistent with those that are contained in the December 6 memorandum from the Planning Director, specifically paragraph 1, a.b.c. & d. and the CC&Rs are subject to approval by the City Attorney specifically including, but not limited to, the right of the city to enforce the CC&Rs and the requirement of the city to consent to any amendment of the CC&Rs. Motion carried. 5.2 Tentative Parcel Map t 07t9 (PortedRobertson) (Ward 6) Mr. Grady stated that the Commission has a memorandum from Marian Shaw dated December 7 modifying some conditions of approval for this subdivision map. Staff is recommending approval with those changes contained in the memorandum. Public portion of the hearing was opened. No one spoke in opposition. · Fred Porter, representing the applicant, said they have revieWed and agree with all of the conditions and is available for questions. Public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner BoYle asked Ms. Shaw about Public Works Condition No. 1 which says: "dedicate and construct a right turn lane at the White Lane entrance into the site." He wanted to know if that also include room for a deceleration or what is intended by that? Ms. Shaw said that it is a right turn lane that is sometimes referred to as a deceleration lane. Minutes, PC, December 7, 2000 Parle 5 Commissioner Brady asked if there will be access out of the project to westbound White Lane. Ms. Shaw and Mr. Porter said "no." Commissioner Dhanens asked Ms. Shaw about Public Works condition 4.3 with respect to deferring a grading plan and allowing for cross drainage easements across the parcels in this subdivision. Commissioner Dhanens asked Ms. Shaw if one of the parcels is developed and a grading plan is submitted to the city for review and then sometime later another parcel is submitted for review, will the parcels drain properly? Ms. Shaw said that they have used the medium of CC&R's for cross drainage in the past. She was concerned with this particular site and she has had a discussion with her staff and the City Attorney's office and they feel like the use of CCR's to address cross drainage will enable the city · to take care of that. commissioner McGinnis asked Mr. Porter about condition 4.8 where the condition states that the landscaping costs for the median should be shared and wanted to know what he proposes for the landscaping itself on White Lane? Mr. Porter said that he is proposing to pay the fee to the city for the median island and as far as White Lane it would be the same type as what is there at the Big O site. Staff said that there would a specific landscape plan at the site plan review stage. There were no other Commission comments or questions. Motion was made by Commissioner Sprague, seconded by Commissioner McGinnis, to approve Tentative Parcel Map 10719 with findings and conditions set forth in attached resolution Exhibit "A" and memorandum from Marian Shaw dated December 7 from the Public Works Department. Motion carried. 5.3 Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 10723 (Mclntosh & Associates) (Ward5) Mr. Grady stated that the Commission should have a memorandum dated December 5 responding to some questions from the pre-meeting. With that they are recommending approval of the vested map. Public portion of the hearing was opened. No one spoke in opposition. Roger Mclntosh, representing the applicant, said that they concur with the staff report and the condition of approval. Public portion of the hearing was closed. There were no other Commission comments or questions. Minutes, PC, December 7, 2000 Page 6 Motion was made by Commissioner Kemper, seconded by Commissioner Sprague, to approve Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 10723 with findings and conditions set forth in attached resolution Exhibit "A" along .with the memorandum dated December 5 from Stanley Grady. Motion carried. 5.4 Tentative Parcel Map 10748 (PortedRobertson) (Ward 5) See Consent Agenda PUBLIC HEARINGS - Tentative Tract Maps 6.1) Vestina Tentative Tract 6017 (Porter-Robertson) (Ward4) See Consent Agenda 6.2 Vesting Tentative Tract 603~ (SmithTech USA, Inc) (Ward4) Mr. Grady said the applicant is requesting a continuance until January 4. They are still trying to work out some conditions of approval with the Public Works Department. Public portion of the hearing was opened. No one spoke in opposition. Commissioner Brady stated that he thought it was an agreement that the basis for a continuance should be put in writing. Commissioner Brady asked staff to revert back to the requirement in the future to have the request put in writing with a reason for the request. There were no other Commission comments or questions. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Boyle, to approve applicant's request for a continuance to the January 4, 2001, Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried. 6.3) Vesting Tentative Tract 6034 (SmithTech USA) (Ward 4) Commissioner Dhanens stated that SmithTech USA has requested a continuance on this project and that Mr. Brady's comments wOuld apply to this project also. There were no other CommisSion comments or questions. Minutes, PC, December 7, 2000 Page 7 Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Boyle, to approve applicant's request for a continuance. Motion carried. 6.4) Vestin~ Tentative Tract 603~. (SmithTech USA') (Ward4) See Consent Agenda General Plan Consistency Findin~ for the acquisition of 3.86 acres at the northeast corner of Fairfax Road and Highway 178. (Exempt from CEQA) See Consent Agenda 10. COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Grady stated that because of the discussions they have been having regarding the relationship between industrial and residential properties, our Hazardous Materials Specialist is willing to put on a workshop to help bring the Commission up to speed regarding some of the requirements that the users of those chemicals have to meet that has some relationship on whether or not they would be able to locate them next to a residential area. January 18 is a light meeting so the workshop will be held at that time. COMMISSION COMMENTS None DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THI- NEXT PRE-MEETING. Due to the size of the agenda, it was decided to hold a pre-meeting on December 18, 2000. 11. ADJOURNMENT January 3, 2001 There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 6:05 p.m. Pam Townsend, Recording Secretary Planning Director~ ' ~