HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/05/01 AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Council Chamber, City Hall
Thursday, April 5, 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 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 THESECRETARY 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 If all appeals are withdrawn prior to the City Council hearing, it
wilinot 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If no appeal is received within the specified time period or if all appeals filed are withdrawn, the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 -April 5, 2001
Page 2
(Ward 4)
(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 anagreement 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 andthe items acted on as a group.
3.9)
3.10)
3.1) Agenda Item 4) - EOT for Vesting Tentative Map 5667 (The Lusich Co.)
3.2) Agenda Item 5.1) - EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5430 Phase A (Castle. & Cooke)
3.3) Agenda Item 5.2) - EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5936 Phases A-E (Castle & Cooke)
3.4) Agenda Item 5.3) - EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5946 Phases A,B,C & D
(Castle & Cooke)
3.5) Agenda Item 5.4) - EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5954 Phases A & B (Castle & Cooke)
3.5) Agenda Item 5.5) - EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5955 Phase A (Castle & Cooke)
3.6) Agenda Item 5.6) - EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5955 Phase B (Castle & Cooke)
3.7) Agenda Item 5.7) - EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5928 Phases A,B,C & E
(Castle & Cooke) ~
3.8) Agenda Item 5.8) - EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5928 Phases D,F & H (Castle &
Cooke)
Agenda Item 5.9) - EOT Vesting Rights'for PM 10617 Phase A (Castle & Cooke)
Agenda Item 8) - Administrative RevieW (Northwest Target, LLC)
PUBLIC HEARING - EXTENSION OF TIME for Vesting Tentative Map 5667 (The
Lusich Company, Inc.) Containing 95 lots for single family residential purposes and
one church Iot'on 24.9 acres, zoned R-1 (One Family Dwelling); located at the
northeast corner of Campus Park Drive and Mountain Vista Drive. (Negative
Declaration on file)
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
Group Vote.
EXTENSIONS OF TIME - Vesting Rights
5.1)
Tract 5430 Phase A (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
Generally located on the northwest corner of Old River Drive and Ridge Oak
Drive.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
GrouP Vote.
Agenda, PC, Thursday - April 5, ~2001
Page 3
(Ward 4)
(Ward 4)
(Ward 4)
(ward
5.2)
5.3)
5.4)
5.5)
Tract 5936 Phases A, B, C, D & E (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
.Located on the sou(hwest corner of Buena Vista Road and Ming Avenue
(extended).
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
Group Vote.
Tract 5946 Phases A, B C & D (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
Located on the northwest corner of Buena Vista Road and Chamber Blvd.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
Group Vote.
Tract 5954 Phases A & B (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
Generally located 800 feet west of Buena Vista Road, approximately 500 feet
north of Chamber Blvd. (extended).
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
Group Vote.
Tract 5955 Phase A (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
Generally located between Ming Avenue and White Lane, BuenaVista Road
and Allen Road.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
Group Vote.
~Vard 4)
5.6)
Tract 5955 Phase B . (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
Generally located between Ming Avenue and White Lane, Buena Vista Road
and Allen Road.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
Group Vote.
Agenda, PC, ThUrsday -April 5, 2001
Page 4
(Ward 4)
(Ward 4)
~Vard 4)
5.7)
5,8)
5.9)
Tract 5928 Phases A, B, c & E (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
Generally located at the northwest corner of Buena Vista Road and White Lane.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
Group Vote.
Tract-5928 phases D, F, & H (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
Generally located at the northwest corner of Buena Vista Road and White Lane.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
Group Vote.
Parcel Map 10617 Phase A(Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
Generally located south of Ming Avenue between South Allen Road and Buena
Vista Road, north of White Lane.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
Group Vote.
(Ward 4 )
(Ward 1)
PUBLIC HEARING - Tentative Parcel Map
6.1)
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
requesting deferral of improvements until development of the 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) (Continued from February 15, 2001 and March 15,
2001)
RECOMMENDATION:
'Approve
Group vote
6.2)
Tentative Parcel Map 10746 (Marino and Associates)
containing two parCels on 15.52 acres zoned M-2 (General Manufacturing).
The applicant is also requesting deferral of improvements until development of
the parcels through :site plan review; located at the northwest corner of EaSt
Brundage Lane andiOswell Street. (Exempt from CEQA)
Agenda,-PC, Thursday -April 5, ~2001
Page 5
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
(Ward 5)
6;3).
Group vote
Tentative Parcel Map 10788 (Commerce Drive Partners)
Containing four parcels on 2.92 acres zoned C-2 (Regional Commercial).. The
applicant is also requesting deferral of improvements until development of the'
parcels through site plan review; located at the terminus of Commerce Drive
south'°f Truxtun Avenue. (Exempt from CEQA)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
*Group vote
(Ward 3)
-Tentative Tract 6000 "Optional Design" (Porter-Robertson)
Containing 311 buildable 10ts, five landscape lots, three open space Iots,~ one sump lot
'and one water well lot on 2i19.92 acres for' single family residential purposes, zoned R-1
(One Family Dwelling) and:R-1 HD (One Family Dwelling-Hill Side Development
~Combining); located on the northeast corner of Alfred Harrell Highway and Highway
178.
The optional design applies to non-radial, non-perpendicular lot lines, double
frontage lots, private street's, reverse corner lots, centerline radius less than 500 feet,
and block lengths in excess of 1,000 feet. The applicant proposes to obtain waiver of
surface.entrY or signatureslfrom all parties prior to the final map being recorded. In
addition, the location and use of a Class III Bike Route through the subdivision will also
be considered at the hearing. (Negative Declaration on file) (Continued from March
15, 2001)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
Group Vote
8.
(Ward 4)
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW FOR NORTHWEST TARGET, LLC
Planning Director's report regarding Modification to PCD Final Development Plan for
· Northwest Promenade Shqpping Center (Parcel Map No. 10726, Parcel 1).
(CategoriCally eXempt.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file report
Group vote
Agenda, PC, Thursday -April 5, 2001
Page 6
(Ward 4)
PCD UPDATE ON ZONE CHANGE 5646 (Water Park) (Ron Froehlich Jr.)
Status report in accordance with BMC 17.54.080 for project located south of Brimhall
Road, approximately 700 feet west of Coffee Road, (Exempt from CEQA)
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file report
Group vote
10.
COMMUNICATIONS
A) Written
B) Verbal
11.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
A) Committees
12. DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THE
NEXT PRE-MEETING.
13. ADJOURNMENT
March 2Q 2001
AGENDA (Amended)
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Council Chamber, City-Hall
Thursday, April .5, 2001
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 TI(AC
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..
2. 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 subject ito 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 ~s received within,.the specified time period or if ail appeals filed are withdrawn, the
action of the Planning Commission shall become final.
Agenda, PC, Thursday.-April 5, 2001
Page 2
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS - (marked by asterisk )
These items will be acted on as a group without individua 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 o_r 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) Agenda Item 4) - EO; for Vesting Tentative Map 5667 (The Lusich Co.)
3.2) Agenda Item 5.1). EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5430 Phase. A (Castle & Cooke)
3.3) Agenda Item 5.2) - EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5936 Phases A-E (Castle & Cooke)
3.4) Agenda Item 5:3) - EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5946 'Phases A,B,C & D
(Castle & CoOke)
3.5) Agenda Item 5.4). EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5954 Phases A & B (Castle & Cooke)
3.5) Agenda Item 5.5) - EOT Vesting Rights. Tract 5955 Phase A (Castle & Cooke)
3.6) Agenda Item 5.6). EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5955 Phase B (Castle &'COoke)
3.7) Agenda Item 5.7) - EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5928 Phases A,B,C & E
(Castle &'Cooke)
3..8)- Agenda Item 5.8) - EOT Vesting Rights TraCt 5928 Phases D,F & H (castle &
Cooke)
3.9) Agenda Item 5.9) --EOT Vesting Rights for PM 10617 Phase A (Castle & Cooke)
3.10) Agenda Item 6.1) - Tentative Parcel Map 10763 (Delmarter and Deifel)
3.11) Agenda Item 6.2) - Tentative Parcel Map 10746 (Marino and Associates)
3.12) Agenda-I~em 6.3) - Tentative Parcel Map 10788 (Commerce Drive Partners)
3.13) Agenda Item 8) - Administrative Review (Northwest Target, LLC)
PUBLIC HEARING - EXTENSION OF TIME for Vesting Tentative Map 5667 (The
Lusich Company,'lnc.) Co~taining 95 lots for single family residential purposes and
one church lot on 24~9 acres, zoned R-1 (One Family Dwelling); located at the
northeast Corner of Campus Park Drive and Mountain Vista Drive. (Negative
Declaration on file)
(Ward 4)
(Ward~-4)
RECOMMENDATION: ' Approve
G ro u p* Vote.
EXTENSIONS OF TIME - Vesting Rights
5.1)
Tract 5430 Phase A (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
Generally located on the northwest corner of Old River Drive and Ridge Oak
Drive.. -
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
Group VOte:
Agenda, PC, Thursday -April 5, 2001
Page 3
(Ward 4)
"(ward 4)
(Ward 4)
(Ward 4)
(ward 4).
(Ward 4)
-5.2)
5.3)
5.4)
5.5)
5.6)
5.7)
Tract 5936 Phases. A, B, C, D & E (Castle & Cooke CA~ Inc.)
Located on the southwest corner of Buena Vista Road and Ming Avenue
(extended).
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
Group Vote.
Tract 5946-Phases;A, B C & D (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
Located or~ the northwest corner of Buena Vista Road and Chamber Blvd.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
.Group Vote.
Tract 5954 PhasesiA & B (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
Generally located 800 feet west of Buena Vista Road, approximately 500 feet
north of Chamber Blvd. (extended).
RECOMMENDATION: Approve
Group Vote.
Tract.5955 Phase A (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
Generally located between Ming Avenue and White Lane, Buena Vista Road
and Allen Road.
- RECOMMENDATION': Approve
Gr0upVote.
Tract 5955 Phase B (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc,)
Generally located between-Ming Avenue and White Lane,-Buena Vista Road
and Allen Road.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
Group Vote.
Tract 5928 Phases;A, B, C & E (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
Generally located at-the northwest corner of Buena Vista Road and White Lane.
REC'0MMENDATION: Approve
GrOup Vote.
Agenda, PC; Thursday -April 5, 2001
Page 4
(Ward 4)
(Ward 4)
5.8)
5.9)
-Tract 5928 Phases D, F, & H (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
· Generally located at the northwest corner of Buena Vista Road and White Lane.
_ RECOMMENDATION: Approve
G~:oup Vote.-
Parcel Map 10617 Phase A (Castle & Cooke CA, Inc.)
Generally located south of Ming Avenue between South Allen Road and Buena
Vista Road, north of White Lane.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
Group Vote.
6. PUBLIC HEARING - Tentative Parcel Map
(Ward 4 )
-6.1)
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
requesting deferral of improvements until development-of the 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) (Continued from February 15, 2001 and March 15,
2001)
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
Group vote'
(Ward 1)
6.2)
Tentative Parcel Map 10746 (Marino and Associates).
Containing two parcels on 15.52 acres zoned M-2 (General Manufacturing).
The applicant is also requesting deferral of improvements until development of
the parcels through site plan review; located at the northwest corner of East .
Brundage Lane and Oswell Street. (Exempt from CEQA)
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
Groupvote
Agenda, PC, Thursday; April 5, 2001 Page 5
(Ward 5)
(Ward 3)
. (Wa_rd4)
6.3)
Tentative Parcel Map 10788 (Commerce Drive Partners)
containing four parcels on 2.92 acres zoned C-2 (Regional Commercial). The
applicant is als0 requesting deferral of improvements until development of the
parcels through site. plan review; located at the terminus of Commerce Drive-
south of Truxtun Avenue. (Exempt from CEQA)
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve
Group vote
Tentative Tract 6000 "Optional Design" (Porter-Robertson)
Containing 311 buildable lots, five landscape lots, three open space lots, one sump lot
and one water well lot on 2t 9.92 acres for single family residential purposes, zoned R-1
(One Family Dwelling) and R-1 HD (One Family Dwelling-Hill'Side Development
Combining); located on the, northeast corner-of Alfred Harrell Highway and Highway
178. The Optional design applies to' non-radial, non-perpendicular lot lines, double
fl:ontage lots,-private streets, reverse corner lots, centerline radius less than 500 feet,
and block lengths in excess of 1,000 feet. The applicant proposes to obtain waiver of
surface entrY or signatures,from all parties prior to the final map being recorded. In
addition, the location and use of a Class III Bike. Route through the subdivision will also
be considered at the hearing. (Negative Declaration on file). (Continued from March
15, 2001) ..
RECOMMENDATION:.. ' APprove
Group vote
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW FOR NORTHWEST TARGET, LLC
Planning Director's report regarding Modification to PCD Final Development Plan for
Northwest Promenade Shopping Center (Parcel Map No. 10726, Parcel 1).
(categorically exempt.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file report
Group vote
-9.
PCD UPDATE ON ZONE CHANGE 5646 (Water Park) (Ron Froehlich Jr..)
Status report .in accordance with BMC 17.54.080 for project located south of Brimhall
Road, approximately 700 feet west of Coffee Road. (Exemptfrom CEQA)
(Ward 4)
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file report
Group vote': __ .
Agenda, PC, Thursday --April 5, 2001
Page 6
10. ~' COMMUNICATIONS
A) Written -
B) Verbal
11. COMMISSION COMMENTS
A) Committees
12. DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THE
NEXT PRE-MEETING.
13.
ADJOURNMENT
April 2, 2001
Planning Director
Held
Thursday, April 5, 2001
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
'FOM MCGINNIS
MARTI MUNIS-KEMPER
RON SPRAGUE
JEFFREY TKAC
ADVISORY MEMBERS:
Present:
· CARL HERNANDEZ, Assistant City Attorney
DENNIS FIDLER, Building Director
MARIAN SHAW, Engineer IV
Staff:
Present:
STANLEY GRADY, Planning Director
JAMES MOVIUS, Principal Planner
PATRICIA HOCK, Recording Secretary
PUBLIC STATEMENTS
Chairman Dhanens read the Notice of the Right to Appeal.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
3.1)
3.2)
3.3)
Agenda Item 4) - EOT for Vesting Tentative Map 5667 (The Lusich Co.)
Agenda Item 5.1) - EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5430 Phase A (Castle & Cooke)
Agenda Item 5.2) -'EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5936 Phases A-E (Castle & Cooke)
Minutes~ PC,- Thursday, April'5, 2001
Page 2
3.4) Agenda Item '5.3)
(Castle & Cooke)
3.5) Agenda Item 5.4)
3.5) Agenda Item 5.5)
3.6) Agenda Item 5.6)
3.7) Agenda Item 5.7)
(Castle & Cooke)
3.8) Agenda Item 5.8)
Cooke)
3.9) Agenda
3.10) Agenda
3.11) Agenda
3.12) Agenda
3.13) Agenda
- EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5946 Phases A,B,C & D
EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5954 Phases A & B (Castle & Cooke)
EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5955 Phase A (Castle & Cooke)
EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5955 Phase B (Castle & Cooke)
EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5928 Phases A,B,C & E
- EOT Vesting Rights Tract 5928 Phases D,F & H (Castle &
Item 5.9) - EOT Vesting Rights for PM 10617 Phase A (Castle & Cooke)
Item 6.1) -Tentative Parcel Map 10763 (Delmarter and Deifel)
Item 6.2) - Tentative Parcel Map 10746 (Marino and Associates)
Item 6.3) -Tentative Parcel Map 10788 (Commerce Drive Partners)
Item 8) - Administrative Review (Northwest Target, LLC)
o
(Ward 5
CommissiOner McGinnis stated that he has several questions regarding agenda item 6.3
and requested that it be taken off the Consent Agenda.
Motion made by CommiSsioner Boyle to approve the Consent Agenda with the
exception of Agenda Item 6.3. Seconded by Commissioner McGinnis.
Group vote: Motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - Tentative Tract Maps
6.3)
Tentative Parcel Map 10788 (Commerce Drive Partners).
Containing four parcels on 2.92 acres zoned C-2 (Regional Commercial). The
applicant is also requesting deferral of improvements until development of the
parcels through site plan review; located at the terminus of Commerce Drive
south of Truxtun Avenue. (Exempt CEQA).
Staff stated that this is just a subdivision map to provide for eventual
development of this~ property along Truxtun. Staff is recommending approval
with conditions outlined in the Staff Report.
PubliC portiOn of the hearing is opened for those in opposition or support of
Staff's recommendation.
FrankSlinkard representing the developer announces his presence.
The public portion of the hearing was closed.
Hearing opened forCommission discussion and action.
MinUtes, PC, Thursday, April 5, 2001
Page 3
Commissioner McGinnis stated his concern for traffic accessibility, ingress and
egress to Truxtun, on the east boundary, and that it was his understanding that
there was going to be a left hand turn lane coming off of Truxtun into the
property, to which Ms. Shaw responded in the affirmative. There will also be turn
out lanes on the eastbound side going into the property. Ms. Shaw responded
that the plans, while not approved, currently show right in, right out access, and a
left in. Therefore,. there is a right turn lane off of Truxtun Avenue into the
property. They will construct a median on that portion of Truxtunwhich will
restrict turns to left in only; No one will be able to turn left out of the property.
Commissioner McGinnis inquired if there has been any consideration that
vehicles will use the Healthsouth facility as a shortcut back onto Truxtun and
therefore cross the ~property, to which Ms. Shaw responded that-there has been
no consideration made to that issue. Ms. Shaw responded that she cannot say
that this issue would be a problem. The local street.system in that area is
adequate to handle whatever traffic is generated by those commercial and
industrial parcels.
Commissioner McGinnis stated that he is not in favor.of the project. He does not
.believe that there should be access to Truxtun Avenue coming off the project
He also stated a concern with the zoning because the developer is requesting
office buildings on the property, but it is zoned C-2, and there are no restrictions
_to putting a fast food restaurant there, which he believes would be inappropriate
in that area, and create a traffic problem on Truxtun Avenue.
Ms.. ShaW'does not ~know whether the traffic engineer considered. whether all of
the traffic from the medical office would be utilizing the property' as a short cut.
Commissioner McGinnis inquired if Mr. Slinkard had any comments regarding
the potential for a short cut through the property, to which Mr. Slinkard
responded that he really did not have any comment, but would like the parcel
map approved so they can continue with the project, road or no road.
Commissioner McGinnis inquired what Mr. Slinkard's feelings were on vehicles
accessing the property to which Mr. Slinkard responded that it was his
understanding that they had to have a secondary fire access to the property.
Ms. Shaw responded that the access onto Truxtun was not put in for secondary.
emergency access, but was granted because the developer of the property felt
that some sort of access to that commercial parcel was necessary for marketing
purposes. In her early discussions with representatives of Bynum's office, they
were not even sure at the time that they would pursue this connection to Truxtun.
Mr. Slinkard responded that he was not privy to that information.
Commissioner Brady commented that Mr. Walker previously felt that there was
adequate clearance. He does not see a problem. He does not think that the
Minutes, PC, Thursday, April 5,,2001
Page 4
vehicles using the Property as a short cut is unique to this project and that speed
bumps can be put in to help deter this type of action by vehicles. Commissioner
Brady stated that he would support the applicant. ·
Commissioner Boyle inquired of Mr. Grady if they could condition the property so
that at site plan review they lay out the parcel with speed bumps or the way the
buildings are laid out so there is not a direct route through the property to reduce
the likelihood that vehicles would use it as an access. Mr. Grady responded that
if the Commission made findings that would support it as a condition they could
do this because it is a subdivision map that had certain requirements.
The applicant can Consent to this condition without the Commission making a
findings to support the condition. Mr. Slinkard responded that this type of
condition may be a problem because of the PG&E easements running down the
center of the property, and the owner has utilized that area as parking lot and
drive-outs, therefore they could not build buildings in that area. The only
buildable area is onithe north side and south side of the property. Mr. Slinkard
stated there would be no problems with putting in speed bumps, but putting
buildings in the way would not be feasible.
Commissioner Boyle would like it to be a combination or either orl to which the
Mr. Slinkard stated they could stipulate to that.
Commissioner Boyle suggested that they address the concern by adding that
stipulation to the map.
Commissioner McGinnis stated that with Commissioner Boyle's pi'oposal, with
the cooperation of the applicant, he would support the project. -
Commissioner Boyle moved to approve the Vesting Parcel Map 10788 with
findings and conditiOns set forth in the attached Resolution, and with the
additional supplement that the applicant will design either the siting of the
buildings and/or speed bumps to restrict direct access from the cul-de-sac to
Truxtun Avenue, and incorporating Ms. Shaw's memorandum of March 22, 2001,
and the memorandum of April 5, 2001.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Tkac.
Group Vote: Motion carried.
Tentative Tract 6000 "Optional Design" (Porter Robertson)
Containing 311 buildable lots, five landscape lots, three open space lots, one sump lot
and one water well lot on 219.92 acres for single family residential purposes, zoned R-1
(One Family Dwelling) and R-1 HD (One Family Dwelling-Hill Side Development
Combining); located on the northeast corner of Alfred Harrell Highway and Highway 178.
The optional design applies to non-radial, non-perpendicular lot lines, double frontage
Minutes, PC, ThUrsday, APril 5,~2001 Page
(Ward 3 )
lots, private streets, reverse corner lots, centerline radius less than 500 feet, and block
lengths in excess of 1,000 feet. The applicant proposes to obtain waiver of surface
entry or signatures from all parties prior to the final map being recorded. In addition, the
location and use of a Class III Bike Route through the subdivision will also be
considered at the hearing. (Negative Declaration on file) (Continued from March '15,'
200'1) ~
Commission Sprague stated a conflict of interest on this item.
Mr. Grady stated this matter was continued to provide the applicant with an opportunity
to review the revisions to the conditions of approval. The applicant has done so, and is'
in agreement with the conditions with the exception of one, dealing with the radius on
streets. Applicant would like this to be modified. It does reflect the condition as
approved by the City Council for a trail system to traverse through this subdivision. Staff
recommends for approval.
Public portion of the hearing opened for comments.
Harold Ro§ertson with Poder Robertson Engineering and Surveying, representing Kyle
Carter HomeS the applicant, stated they have reviewed the 'conditions for approval,
including those modified previoUsly and they concur with the modified conditions dated
March 15th, in addition to the original Staff Report. They would like a reduction in the
centerline radius require due to the terrain in this area.
The public portion of the hearing was closed.
Hearing open:ed for Commission discussion and action.
Commissioner Brady requested Staff give a background on the requirement for the 500
foot radius to which Ms. Shaw responded that standards require a 500 foot radius that
allows for an adequate lineiof site, when there is parking on both sides of the street. If it
goes below that certain criteria have to be met, and good reasons have t° be presented
to go below the standard. The 500 foot radius is the standard of care. In this instant
case, because of the terrain, they might be allowing it down to a 300 foot radius. When
it was presented to Staff, there was no reason. Staff would need to see some
engineering information before allowing it to go down to 300 feet.
Ms. Shaw explained that a radii means that the centerline of the street follows a 500 foot
radius curve. So it is the centerline of the street. As the radi gets Smaller the turn gets
tighter, and you have less time to see what's coming around the corner. The speed of
traffic, amount of parking and terrain would affect the radii number.
Minutes, PC, Thursday, April 5,12001
Page 6
As of this date Public Works has had nothing presented to them to allow the radii to go
lower than 500 feet. The app!icant has to make a justification to the engineer.
Mr. Robertson stated that this modification would be acceptable to the applicant.
Commissioner Brady said with the modification he would support the application.
Commissioner McGinnis inquired about streets and signal lights.
Commissioner Dhanens inquired about the deletion of a sidewalk in a memorandum,
and substituted walk-ways for sidewalks to which Ms.. Shaw responded that sidewalks
mean concrete, and walk-ways means an alternative surfacing which could be turf or
gravel. This would be in the improvement plans. Ms. Shaw responded that this is a
private, development and they tried to take into consideration the non-urban
characteristic of the development.
Commissioner Dhanens inquired of Mr. Fidler about what accessibility guidelines would'
have an impact on this issue to which Mr. Fidler responded that there are no
requirements per the codes that would require sidewalks. The issue is that it is a private
community.
Commissioner Dhanens inquired of double frontage lots on Alfred Harrel, HighWay and
eliminating the masonry wall which is not consistent with the wall and landscape plan,
why would there be a plan in this environment to which Mr. Grady responded that
because it is in rural environment does not mean that you abandon all the standards.
We are willing to discuss With a developer why they want to refrain from meeting some
of the standards, ..when they can show that there is some physical constraint keeping
them from complying with the standards.
Commissioner Dhanens inquired of Ms. Shaw where the drainage waters will be if it is
not in the street, to which Ms. Shaw responded that the applicant has submitted a
preliminary grading and drainage plan showing the majority of the storm Water that will
come off of the private lots ,will be carried on small channels behind the lots, Which
channels would be maintained by the homeowner's association.
Commissioner Boyle inquired if bike paths should be adjacent to Highway 178, given the
speed on the highway, to which Mr. Grady responded that currently the road is not wide
enough. However, when the' road is widened to accommodate the bike path, with a
wider shoulder and wider travel lanes the trail could be accommodated there.
Commissioner Boyle inquired if there will be a Class III bike path through the subdivision
to which Ms. Shaw responded in the affirmative, and there will be public access even
though it is a privately gated community.
Commissioner Brady moved to approve and adopt a Negative Declaration and to
approve Tentative Tract Map 6000 "Options Design" with findings and conditions set
Minutes, PC, Thursday, April 5,~2001
Page 7
10.
forth, and inclUde the March 15, 2001 memorandum from Marian Shaw to the Planning-
Commission with the new Resolution, and incorporate the language regarding the radius
being less than 500 based,on justification by the applicant with the approval of the City
Engineer.
Motion Seconded by Commissioner Boyle.
Group vote: Motion carriedi
PCD UPDATE ON ZONE CHANGE 5646 (Water Park) (Ron Froehlich, Jr.)
Status Report in accordance with'BMC 171.54.080 for project located south of Brimhall
Road, approximately 700 feet west of Coffee Road..(Exempt from CEQA)
Mr. Grady stated Staff's Report is provided as an informational update to the Planning
Commission as to the progress of the status regarding the construction of the water
park. Five years has elapsed since the April 5, 1996 effective date of the PCD. The
property owner/developer has submitted a letter requesting that the PCD zone remain in
place. The developer/owner states that delay in construction continues to be uncertain
due tO the uncertainty of the location for the Kern River Freeway, and the impact of
CalTrans purchase of adjacent property. The Commission determined that changed
circumstances justify an action to rescind the existing PCD then they should have Staff
initiate a zone change. However, Staff was recommending at the time that the
Commission take not action. A report is to be received and filed. -
Commissioner Boyle inquired if notice had gone out to the public regarding tonight's
meeting for an extension, to which Mr. Grady responded that no, because a notice
would only go out if the Commission decides to initiate a change. Tonight it is an
administrative review to determine if there is changes in the circumstances that would
warrant rescinding the PCD.
Commissioner Boyle stated that he is not prepared to rescind the PCD. The developer
can only build what was approved on the PCD, he is comfortable approving.
Commissioner Boyle moved to receive and file the Report.
Motion seconded by Commissioner Kemper.
Group vote: Motion Carried.
COMMUNICATIONS
Mr. Grady stated that he will not be at the next meeting, but he wanted t° thank
Commissioners Dhanens and Kemper for their service.
Minutes, PCi ThurSday, April $, 200t Page 8
11.
12.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
None.
DISCUSSION AND ACTION REGARDING POSSIBLE CANCELLATION OF THE
NEXT PRE-MEETING.. -
Mr. Grady stated that the next meeting will have four items for vesting tentative maps,
and does not see any itemS that would have any public controversy assoCiated with
them in that they are typical subdivision maps.
13.
Commissioner Brady requested a Monday pre-meeting because of the public hearing to
receive comments of the Draft EIR for the River Walk project.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further~business to come before the Commission, the meeting was
adjourned at 6:24 p.m.
April 17, 2001
Patricia Hock, Recording Secretary