Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/15/01 AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Council Chamber, City Hall Thursday, February 15, 2001 5:30 p.m. 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 HE,~RING 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 subj&ct 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 acceptanqe 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 If all appeals are withdrawn prior to the City Council hearing, it will not be conducted and the 'decision of the Planning Commission will standl If no appeal is received withini the specified time period or if all appeals filed are withdrawn the action of the.Planning Commission shall become final. Agenda, PC, Thursday - February 15, 2001 page 2 e 5. (Ward 3) (Ward 4 ) 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) Agenda Item 4) - Approval of minutes for Dec. 18 & 21, Jan. 2,4,16 & 18. Agenda Item 5) - Extension of Time VTT 5923 - Porter-Robertson Agenda Item 9) - Consistency Finding - Disposition of Property APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of minutes of the regular meetings held December 18 and 21, January 2, 4, 16 and 18. PUBLIC HEARING -.EXTENSION OF TIME for Vesting Tentative Tract 6923 (Porter- Robertson) containing 152 lots on 44.54 acres for single family residential purposes, zoned R-l,(One' Family Dwelling); generally located at the southern terminus of Mesa Marin Drive, appreximately 1/4 mile east of SR 184 and about 3/4 of a mile south of SR 178. (Negative Declaration on file) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Group Vote, PUBLIC HEARING - Tentative Parcel Map 10763 (Delmarter and Deifel) Containing three.parcels on 88.04 acres zoned C-2 (Regional Commercial), E.(Estate) and R-2 (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling). The applicant is also request~ing deferral of improvements until development ofthe parcels through subdivision, planned commercial development and/or site plan review; located between Allen Road and Jenkins Road on the north Side of Brimhall Road. (Exempt from CEQA) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Group vote Agenda, PC, Thursday -.February 15, 2001 Page3 (Ward 4) PUBLIC HEARINGS - Tentative Tract Maps 7.1) 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 alternate street and lot design; and waiver of mineral rights signatures on the final map pursuant to BMC 16.2; generally located between Northshore Drive and Coffee Road, approximately 500 feet south of Olive Drive. (Negative Declaration on'file) (Continued from October 5 & 19, December 7, 2000 and January 18, 2001) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Group vote 7.2) (Wa~_ 4) Third Revised Vesting Tentative Tract 5882 (Mclntosh & Associates) Containing 652 lots on 246.69 net acres for single family residential purposes, zoned R-1 (One Family Dwelling) and R-1 Ch (One Family Dwelling-Church) and a request to allow alternate street improvements and lot design; located between Brimhall Road, the Kern River Freeway Specific Line, Jewetta Avenue and Allen Road. (Negative Declaration on file) 'RECOMMENDATION: Approve Group vote 7.3) (Ward 4 ) Revised Vesting Tentative Tract 5940 (Phased) (Mclntosh & Associates) Containing 178 lots ,on 78.9' acres for single family residential purposes and creation of a school~site, zoned R-1 (One Family Dwelling) and A (Agriculture) and a request to allow alternate street improvements and lot design; located on the south side of campus Park Drive, between Old River Road and Mountain Vista Drive. (Negative Declaration on file) · RECOMMENDATION: Approve Group vote (Ward 4 ) PUBLIC HEARING -Zone,Change P01-0007 (Mclntosh & Associates) Zone-Change from an A (Agriculture) to an R-1 (One Family Dwelling) zone on 10.07 acres; 'located on-the southeast corner of Campus Park Drive, and Mountain Vista Drive. (Negative Declaration on file) RECOMMENDATION: Approve Roll Call Vote Agenda, PC, Thursday - February 15, 2001 Page 4 (Ward 2) GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDING Avenue. (Exempt from CEQA) RECOMMENDATION: Make Finding Gr°u p Vote. for the disposition of 1600 East Truxtun 10. COMMUNICATIONS A) Written B) Verbal 11. COMMISSION COMMENTS A) Committees t2. DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THE NEXT PRE-MEETING. 13. ADJOURNMENT Jar~uary 30, 2001 Held .- 'Thursday, February 15, 2001 5:30 p.m. City Council Chamber, City Hall 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: Present: STEPHEN BOYLE, Vice Chairperson -. MATHEW BRADY TOM MCGINNIS ' MARTI MUNIS-KEMPER RON SPRAGUE JEFFREY TKAC Absent: MICHAEL DHANENS, Chairperson ADVISORY MEMBERS: Present: Staff: CARL HERNANDEZ, Deputy City Attorney JACK LEONARD, Assistant Building Director MARIAN SHAW, Engineer IV Present: STANLEY GRADY, Planning Director JAMES MOVIUS Principal Planner PAM TOWNSEND, Recording Secretary PUBLIC STATEMENTS None Vice Chairman Boyle read the Notice of the Right to Appeal CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 3.1) Agenda Item 4) - ApProval of minutes for Dec. 18 & 21, Jan. 2,4,16 & 18. 3.2) Agenda Item 5) - Extension of Time VTT 5923 - Porter-Robertson 3.3) Agenda Item 9) - Consistency Finding - Disposition of Property Minutes, PC, Thursday, February 15, 2001 Page 2 Commissioner Sprague stated that he had a conflict of interest on Agenda Item 3.2. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner McGinnis, to approve the consent agenda items. Motion carried. APPROVAL OF MINUTESi See Consent Agenda. PUBLIC HEARING - EXTENSION OF TIME for Vesting Tentative Tract 5923 (Porter- Robertson) (Ward 3) See Consent Agenda = PUBLIC HEARING -Tentative Parcel Map 10763 (Delmarter and Deifel) (Ward4) Commissioner Tkac seated at this time. Staff stated the applicant has asked for a continuance on this project until the next available meeting. Public portion of the hearing was opened. No one spoke for or against the.project. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Kemper, to continue this item until MarCh 15, 2001. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS - Tentative Tract Maps 7.1) Vesting Tentative Tract 6017 (Porter-Robertson) (Ward 4) Staff report given recommending approval. Public portion of the hearing-was opened. No one spoke against this project. 'Randy Bergquist, with Porter-Robertson Engineering, stated they agreed with all- the conditions except one that they wish to modify. They asked that they be allowed to construct; the sidewalks on one side of the street. He showed a map on the overhead demonstrating their request. Public portion of the; hearing was closed. Commissioner Sprague said that he is comfortable with the layout of the sideL walks but asked Fire Marshal Shapazian that in the event of a power blackout how the Fire Department would access the subdivision in an emergency without Minutes, PC, Thursday~* February 15, 2001 Page 3 a crash gate? Mr. Shapazian said that the power gates have a disconnect feature so that they can be moved manually. Commissioner Sprague asked if a crash gate could beI put in at the south end of the subdivision near the cul-de- sac area on North Shore Drive? Mr. Shapazian said that is a possibility but one of the reasons they :did not opt for that is the size of the development and they thoUght it could be mitigated with the extra lane required but if the Commission desires, they could do that. Commissioner Sprague said that if the Fire Department is fine .,With the plan he would be too. Mr. Shapazian said with the extra lane-he is satisfied that there would be less chance the intersection would be blocked. Commissioner BradY asked Ms. Shaw's response to the applicant's request for -sidewalks on one side. Ms. Shaw said that they had discussed this with the Traffic Engineer an~l after looking at the exhibit, they do not have a problem with it. Commissioner Brady asked what needs to be modified to put into effect the applicant's change~ Ms. Shaw said that there would be a modification to condition 1.3 and clarify that the combination sidewalks would be-on one side of the street only as per the exhibit which will be attached. Commissioner Brady said that he would support the application with that amendment. There were no other Commission comments or questions. Motion Was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Sprague, to approve and adopt the Negative Declaration and to approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 6017 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached Resolution Exhibit A with the change to Public Works-Condition 1.3 to allow sidewalks on one side per the exhibit proposed by the applicant. Motion carried. 7.2) Third Revised Vesting Tentative Tract 5882 (Mclntosh & Associates) (Ward 4) Staff report given recommending apProval. Public portion of the hearing was opened. Pat Preston, Assistant' Principal of Liberty High, spoke lin opposition to the project. He said their concern is the four cul-de-sacs that have been revised to empty onto Patrick Henry Way which is the nOrth boundary of their school. They are worried about the amount of traffic coming out of the cul-de-sacs onto the street adjacent to the school property. There is also a concern at Patrick Henry Way where it meets Jewetta. They were glad to see that Jewetta would go all the way through. There is a lot of congestion at certain times of day now without the houses being built. Roger Mclntosh, representing Castle and Cooke, CA Inc., said they have reviewed the staff report, the memorandum from the Planning Department dated February 15 and the memorandum from the Public Works Department amending conditions 1.4, 9, 14 and adding 12.a. Mr. Mclntosh said that they agree'with condition 9 but if they cannot work out the phased development of Minutes, PC, Thursday, February 15, 2001 Page 4 Brimhall Road, they, reserve the right to appeal that condition to the City Council. They will try to get it, resolved next week when Jacques LaRochelle returns. Mr. Mclntosh showed the Commission a copy of the original subdivision (VTT 5882)-map. He said that this is the third time it has come before the Commission and that at the time of the first hearing, they had a number of cul- de-sacs going off the north end of the street and a church site reserved at the · corner. The existing application is not much different than the original one. He said that the high school district has been aware of the single family subdivision going :in there for a long time. At the time of the second revised vesting map, the high school requested that a street be put in which they have done. Mr. Mclntosh said that if it is a concern of the Commission, he suggeSts that posting "no parking" or "parking by permit only" signs in that area to the north so that the residents can police the parking activity. Mr. Mclntosh said that he agrees with the staff report and conditions and is available to answer questions, Public portion of the hearing was closed. Commissioner Sprague asked staff what the width of the street is along the high school? Ms. Shaw Said it is a local street with a 60 foot right-of-way. Commissioner Sprague asked if there would be parking lanes available on one side of the street? Ms. Shaw said that there is parking available on both sides of the street. Commissioner Sprague asked if no parking signs were put up on both sides Of the street, could the street then be four lanes? Ms. Shaw said she would not recommend four lanes on a local street. Commissioner Sprague asked Mr. Walker, Traffic Engineer,~to comment on the request. Mr. Walker said that he concurs with Mr. Mclntosh's assessment of the situation. Commissioner Brady said that he sees there is a potential parking problem and wanted to know how restricted parking issues are put into effect to prevent this neighborhood being used as a parking lot during school hours and events? Mr. Walker said that he doesn't see the necessity of doing anything at this time. There is a residential parking permit process that has been done in other areas that has been successful. He suggested that with the tract development on the north side of Patrick. Henry that no parking signs be installed that says "no parking between the hours of 7:30 and 4:30." The residential parking permit process has to go in front of the City Council. The only suggestion Mr. Walker had at this time regarding the parking is that the Commission require the "no parking during...'! signs on the north side of Patrick Henry. Commissioner Brady asked Mr. Mclntosh if they would be agreeable to that? Mr. Mclntosh said that they wouldn't mind having "no parking at any time" signs. Mr. Walker said that he agrees that would be the best: Commissioner Brady asked Mr. Preston if this was agreeable .to him? Mr. Preston said that he agrees it would help but he still has a problem with the amount of traffic coming in and out and the congestion that-happens at Jewetta Minutes, PC, ThUrsday, February i5, 2001 Page5 and Brimhall. Commissioner Brady asked Mr. Preston if he'had any evidence that the vehicle trips generated by the residences as proposed are going to burden'the roadways beyond their design? Mr. Preston said that he knows what kind of problems they have now and he doesn't see how those problems are going to be alleviated when development occurs. Commissioner_ Brady asked Mr. Walker if he believes, in his review of the project, if the roadways are sufficient so as not to be overburdened as they are presently designed to be built? Mr. Walker said "yes." CommisSioner Brady asked Mr. Walker if the roadways in the area will actually be improved as a inormal part_ of development?. Mr. Walker said "yes." Commissioner Brady asked if Mr. Walker believes that those improvements will be sufficient to handle the traffic that will be placed in with this project? Mr. Walker said-"yes." Commissioner BradY said that he would be willing to support the project with the condition that there ibe no parking on the north side of Patrick Henry and it be 'posted accordingly with red curbing or the posting of signs. Commissioner Boyle asked Commissioner Brady if he means the no parking should be limited to Patrick Henry or all of the cul-de-sac streets also? Commissioner BradY said just Patrick Henry at this time but if it becomes a problem, later the neighborhood could have the problem addressed before the City Council. Commissioner McGinnis asked Mr. Walker if he thinks limiting the parking on . Patrick Henry will sblve the problem? Mr. Walker said that he is sure there will be some Problems but it is his hope that it doesn't become a major problem. Commissioner McGinnis asked how this is enforced? Mr. Walker said that it is enforced by the City traffic police. Commissioner Tkac asked Mr. Preston if Patrick Henry Drive is the only way to get out of the school? Mr. Preston said that right now it is. Commissioner Boyle asked how many trips Patrick Henry Drive is designed for as a Level of Service C per day? Mr. Walker said that theoretically it can handle 9 to 10,000 cars per day at capacity.. On a continuous basis it wOuld be 2 or 3,000 ibefore~they get complaints but here there will be times that it will be extremely busy but the peak times for the school are not the same as for the neighborhood. The~peak time that there would be more concern is the afternOon because they all leave at once. In the morning hours everyone is more spread out. Commissioner Boyle said that it is his understanding that they cannot require permitted parking on the cul-de-sac lots? Mr. Hernandez said that the City CounCil wOuld haveto make a finding that there is a traffic problem. The Planning CommissiOn does not have the authority to make thefinding to grant .the permit. Commissioner Boyle sees the parking as a huge potential problem and he thinks they ought to find a way to solve the problem rather than waiting. Minutes, PC, Thursda¥~ February 15, 2001 Page 6 until it-becomes a problem and the residents have to come back to the City Council to try to resolve the issue. Commissioner Boyle said that he understands they cannot condition the project that the developer obtain the permit but wanted to know if the Commission can condition that the developer make application to obtain such a permit? Mr. Hernandez said that the difficulty is that the City ordiqance does not provide for that process. He said that if the Commission feels there is a need for that then they need to go back and'amend the ordinance so it would give the Planning Commission the opportunity to do that. Mr. Hernandez said that the Commission cannot require the applicant to submit an application to obtain a permit at this point. Commissioner Brady wanted to know how many parking stalls they have at the high school? Mr._Mblntosh said the maximum amount of parking ~is around 700 cars. Commissioner Brady said that they seem to be putting the Problem solving on the applicant when they are not creating the problem. The school impacts the neighborhood and the neighborhood shouldn't have to fix it. Commissioner Brady feels that the applicant has done as much as he can to address the situation and still build it out. Commissioner Brady supports the application as it has been presented. Commissioner Sprague said that he supports placing the "no parking" signs On the north side of Patrick Henry Way. There were no other Commission comments or questions. -Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to approve the Third Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map 5882 with findings and conditions set forth in the attached Resolution Exhibit A and incorporate the Planning Director's memorandum dated February 15, 2001 as well as'the memorandum from Marian Shaw to the Planning Commission dated February ~ 15, 2001, with the additional condition that a condition be imposed that there will be no parking along the northern half of Patrick Henry Way. Motion carried. 7.3) Revised Vesting Tentative Tract 5940 (Phased) (Mclntosh & Associates) - (Ward 4 ) staff stated the applicant has asked for a continuance on this project to provide them with an opportunity to meet with the Panama-Buena Vista School District concerning a recommended condition by staff to make Jamison Drive a private street: Staff is recommending the project be continued until March 15, 2001. Public Portion of the hearing was opened. No one spoke either in opposition or in favor of this project. Motion was made b~/Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to continue this item until the March 15, 2001, Planning Commission meeting. 'Motion Carried. Minutes, PC, Thursday, February 15, 2001 Page 7 PUBLIC HEARING -Zone:Change P01-0007 (Mclntosh & Associates) (wa~4) Staff stated that this zone Change is tied to Tentative Tract 5940 that has just been Continued and will be required to be continued until March 15, 2001, as well. Public portion of the hearing was opened. No one spoke either for or against this . project. Motion was made by Commissioner Brady, seconded by Commissioner Tkac, to continue this item until the March 15, 2001, Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDING for the disposition of 1600 East Truxtun Avenue. (Exempt from CEQA) (Ward2) See Consent Agenda. 10. COMMUNICATIONS None 11. COMMISSION COMMENTS None 12. DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THE NEXT PRE-MEETING Because the next meeting is a general plan cycle, it was decided there would be a pre- meeting on March 12, 2001. 13. February 21. 2001 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 6:36 p.m. Pam Townsend, Recording Secretary Planning Director t ~,