HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/16/05_AGENDA_PACKET_SPCL
BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
NOVEMBER 16, 2005
Council Chambers, City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue
Special Meeting - 5:15 p.m.
SPECIAL MEETING - 5:15 p.m.
1. ROLL CALL
2. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
3. CONSENT CALENDAR HEARINGS
(Ward 1)
a.
(Ward 1)
b.
(Ward 1)
c.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change 05-0412; South Enterprise Zone has applied for a
general plan amendment and zone change on 22.6 acres located at the northwest corner of
Pacheco Road and Cottonwood Road. (Staff recommends adoption of resolution
approving Negative Declaration, approving proposed general plan amendment and
give first reading to ordinance.)
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan
amendment changing the land use designation from HI (Heavy Industrial) to LMR
(Low Medium Density Residential) on 17.1 acres and from P (Public Facilities) to
LMR on 5.5 acres.
2. First Reading of Ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title
17 of the Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 124-17 from M-3 (Heavy Industrial) to
R-2 (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling) zone on 22.6 acres.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change 05-0414; Alfredo Hernandez has applied for a
general plan amendment and zone change on 40 acres located on the east side of
Cottonwood Road, between East White Lane and Brook Street. (Staff recommends
adoption of resolution approving Negative Declaration, approving proposed general plan
amendment and give first reading to ordinance.)
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan
amendment changing the land use designation from LI (Light Industrial) to LMR (Low
Medium Density Residential) on 9 acres and from HI (Heavy Industrial) to LMR on 31
acres.
2. First Reading of Ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title
17 of the Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 124-16 from M-1 (Light Manufacturing)
to R-2 (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling Zone) on 9 acres and from M-3 (Heavy
Industrial) to R-2 on 31 acres.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change 05-0417;Marino/Associates, representing
Magdaleno Duenas Barajas and Luisa Duenas, property owners, has applied for a general
plan amendment and zone change on 40 acres located on the north side of future East
White Lane, 1,320 feet east of Cottonwood Road. (Staff recommends adoption of resolution
approving Negative Declaration, approving proposed general plan amendment and give first
reading to ordinance.)
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan
amendment changing the land use designation from LI (Light Industrial) to LR (Low
Density Residential) on 2 acres, from HI (Heavy Industrial) to LR on 33 acres, and
from P (Public Facilities) to LR on 5 acres.
2. First Reading of Ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title
17 of the Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 124-16 from M-1 (Light Manufacturing)
to R-1 (One Family Dwelling Zone) on 2 acres and from M-3 (Heavy Industrial) to R-1
on 38 acres.
.--_.~..-._. ..- ..... ~-- ..-..----. . ....~.__.-
."..
3. CONSENT CALENDAR HEARINGS continued
(Ward 5)"
(Ward 4)"
(Ward 5)
. upon annexation
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change 05-0942; Mcintosh and Associates, representing
Lester D. Baroncini, Trustee of the Irene Baroncini Trust, property owner, has applied for
a general plan amendment on 80 acres, located at the northeast corner of McCutchen Road
and Buena Vista Road. (Staff recommends adoption of resolution approving Negative
Declaration, approving general plan amendment and give first reading to ordinance.)
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan
amendment changing the land use designation from R-IA (Resource -Intensive
Agriculture) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 80 acres.
2. First reading of ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title 17
of the Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 123-30 from A (Agriculture) to R-1 (One
Family Dwelling) zone on 80 acres.
Generai Plan Amendment/Zone Change 04-0420; SmithTech/USA Inc., representing
Elizabeth H. Pinnell, property owner, has applied for a general plan amendment on one
acre, located north of Snow Road, generally east of Calloway Drive.
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan
amendment changing the land use designation from R-IA (Resource - Intensive
Agriculture) to LR (Low Density Residential) on one acre.
2. First Reading of Ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title
17 of the Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 134-05 from A (Agriculture) to R-1
(One Family Dwelling) zone on one acre.
Staff recommends adoption of resolution approving Negative Declaration, approving general
plan amendment and give first reading to ordinance.
d.
e.
f.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change 05-0476; The Lusich Company, Inc., representing
LENNAR, MacLeu, LLC and David P. Antongiovanni Family Trust, property owners, has
applied for a general plan amendment, zone change, and cancellation of a Williamson Act
land use contract on 76 acres located on the west side of Old River Road, north side of
Berkshire Road (future), and east side of Mountain Vista Drive (future), approximately 1,400
feet south of Panama Lane.
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan
amendment changing the land use designation from R-IA (Resource-Intensive
Agriculture) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 76 acres.
2. First Reading of Ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title
17 of the Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 123-30 from County A (Agriculture) to
R-1 (One Family Dwelling Zone) on 76 acres.
3. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and approving the cancellation of a
Williamson Act land use contract on 76 acres.
Staff recommends adoption of resolution approving Negative Declaration, approving proposed
general plan amendment, approving proposed cancellation of a Williamson Act land use contract,
and give first reading to ordinance.
2
--. - -,'..~'-"-'-'----'" .---.-.
(Ward 5)"
3. CONSENT CALENDAR HEARINGS continued
(Ward 3)
(Ward 6)"
(Ward 5,6)
. upon annexation
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change 05-0743; Marino Associates, representing Del Ray
Development LLC, property owner, has applied for a general plan amendment on 86.37
acres, located north of Taft Highway, generally east of Buena Vista Road.
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration, adopting the general plan
amendment changing the land use designation from R-IA (Resource-Intensive
Agriculture) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 86.37 acres.
2. First Reading of Ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title
17 of the Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 123-31 from A (Agriculture) to R-1
(One Family Dwelling) zone on 86.37 acres.
Staff recommends adoption of resolution approving Negative Declaration, approving general
plan amendment and give first reading to ordinance.
g.
General Plan Amendment 05-0976; City of Bakersfield has proposed an amendment to the
Circulation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan and a Specific Plan Line for
Panorama Drive from Morning Drive to Vineland Road.
Staff recommends adoption of resolution approving negative declaration and approving general plan
amendment and Specific Plan line.
h.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change 04-1765; Smith Tech/USA Inc., representing
Thomas Mitchell Ashe, property owner, has applied for a general plan amendment on
approximately 43 acres, located south of McCutchen Road, east of Ashe Road.
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration, adopting the general plan
amendment changing the land use designation from R-IA (Resource-Intensive
Agriculture) to GC (General Commercial) on 28 acres and LI (Light Industrial) on
15 acres.
2. First Reading of Ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title
17 of the Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 126-05 from A (Agriculture) to C-1/
PCD (Neighborhood Commercial/Planned Commercial Development) on 28 acres
and M-1 (Light Manufacturing) on 15 acres.
Staff recommends adoption of resolution approving Negative Declaration, approving general
plan amendment and give first reading to ordinance.
i.
j.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 04-1012; Global Investment & Development,
LLC, c/o Aaron Rivani, has proposed a general plan amendment with a concurrent zone
change for property located north and south of McCutchen Road, east and west of Progress
Road.
1. Resolution making findings approving and certifying Final Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) for GPAlZC No. 04-1012/Annexation No. 468 (McCutchen 110).
2. Resolution approving a general plan element amendment changing the land use
designation from R-IA (Resource-Intensive Agriculture) to LR (Low Density
Residential) on 110 acres and circulation element amendment to eliminate the
collector designation of Progress Road south of McCutchen Road.
3. First Reading of Ordinance amending Title 17 of the Municipal Code and changing
Zoning Map Nos. 123-29 and 123-32 from A (Agriculture) to R-1 (One Family
Dwelling) on 110 acres.
Staff recommends adoption of resolutions and give first reading to ordinance.
3
4. HEARINGS
(Ward 5)
(Ward 5.6)
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change 05-0943; Mcintosh & Associates for Centex Homes,
Inc., representing the Frazier Trust et ai, property owners, has applied for a general plan
amendment and zone change on 80 acres located at the southeast corner of South Allen
Road (future) and Pensinger Road.
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan
amendment changing the land use designation from R-IA (Resource-Intensive
Agriculture) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 80 acres.
2. First Reading of Ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title
17 of the Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 122-24 from A-20A (Agricultural 20-
Acre Minimum Lot Size) to R-1 (One Family Dwelling) on 80 acres.
Staff recommends adoption of resolution approving Negative Declaration, approving proposed
general plan amendment and give first reading to ordinance.
a.
b.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change 03-1528; PB Ventures LLC, property owner, has
applied for a general plan amendment and zone change on 1,833 acres and cancellation of a
Williamson Act land use contract on 316.5 acres within the project area generally bounded
by Panama Lane to the north, Old River Road to the east, South Allen Road (unimproved) to
the west, and Taft Highway (State Route 119) to the south. A number of outparcels under
separate ownership within the above-described boundary are not part of the proposal.
Annexation of the project area into the City is proposed.
1. Resolution making findings approving and certifying the Final Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) for GPAlZC No. 03-1528/Annexation No. 498, known as the Old River
Ranch Project.
2. Resolution adopting the general plan amendment changing the land use designation
from R-1A (Resource -Intensive Agriculture) to LR (Low Density Residential) on
1310.08 acres, to HMR (High-Medium Density Residential) on 86.31 acres, to
GC (General Commercial) on 86.36 acres; and from R-MP (Resource-Mineral and
Petroleum) to LR on 320.22 acres, to HMR on 23.22 acres, and to GC on 6.77 acres.
3. First Reading of Ordinance amending Title 17 of the Municipal Code by prezoning
the project area to R-1/PUD (One Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development) on
1,630.34 acres, to R-2/PUD (Limited Multiple-Family Dwelling/Planned Unit
Development) on 109.53 acres, to C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) on 9.66 acres, to
C-2 (Regional Commercial) on 22.09 acres, and to C-2/PCD (Regional Commercial/
Planned Commercial Development) on 61.38 acres; and approving a Development
Agreement.
4. Resolution approving cancellation of Williamson Act land use contract on 316.5
acres.
Staff recommends adoption of resolution certifying the Final EIR, adoption of resolution approving
proposed general plan amendment, adoption of resolution approving proposed cancellation of
Williamson Act land use contract, and give first reading to ordinance approving proposed prezoning
and Development Agreement.
4
_".__~__ _____n_
(Ward 4)"
4. HEARINGS continued
c.
. upon annexation
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 04-0671; Project Design Consultants,
representing Rosedale Ranch, property owner, has proposed a general plan amendment
and zone change on 1,655 acres bounded by 7'h Standard Road to the north, Jenkins Road
to the east, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad to the west and Kratzmeyer
Road/Olive Drive to the south. Annexation into the City is proposed. A Development
Agreement is also proposed.
1. Resolution making findings approving and certifying the Final Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) for GPAlZC No. 04-0671/Annexation No. 499, known as the Rosedale
Ranch Project.
2. Resolution approving a general plan amendment to change the land use designation
from LMR (Low Medium Density Residential); LI (Light Industrial); and SI (Service
Industrial) to LR (Low Density Residential); LMR (Low Medium Density Residential);
HMR (High Medium Density Residential); GC (General Commercial); MUC (Mixed
Use Commercial); and LI (Light Industrial) on 1,655 acres; and approving a general
plan amendment to change the Circulation Element alignment of the future West
Beltway through the project boundaries, and the realignment of Kratzmeyer
Road/Olive Drive to the south of the site to create a new interchange with the West
Beltway.
3. First Reading of Ordinance amending Title 17 of the Municipal Code by prezoning to
R-1 (One-Family Dwelling); R-1/PUD (One-Family Dwelling/Planned Unit
Development); R-2 (Limited Multiple-Family Dwelling); R-2/PUD (Limited Multiple-
Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development); C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial); C-2
(Regional Commercial); C-2/PCD (Regional Commercial/Planned Commercial
Development); and M-1 (Light Manufacturing) on 1,655 acres; and approving a
Development Agreement.
Staff recommends adoption of resolution certifying Final EIR, adoption of resolution approving
proposed general plan amendment, and give first reading to ordinance approving proposed
prezoning and Development Agreement.
5. ADJOURNMENT
11/9/057:50am
6[tl3Sl:- fr A1
Alan Tandy
City Manager
5
~
-~,-~_._----~---"--- --,_.~~._..^_._--_.__.,,,-_._-_.
AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS
NOVEMBER 16, 2005 SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING 5:15 D.m.
CONSENT CALENDAR HEARINGS
Items 3a., 3b., and 3c. General Plan Amendments and Zone Chances on 1\ 22.6 Acres Located at the
Northwest Corner of Pacheco Road and Cottonwood Road (Aoolicant: South Enterorise Zone\: 2\ 40
Acres Located on the East Side of Cottonwood Road. between East White Lane and Brook Street
(Aoolicant: Alfredo Hernandez\: and 3\ 40 Acres Located On The North Side Of Future East White Lane.
1.320 Feet East Of Cottonwood Road (Aoolicant: Marino/Associates on behalf of Macdaleno Duenas
Baraias and Luisa Duenas\. The proposed general plan amendments and zone changes would permit
the development of residential uses on sites that are, for the most part, presently designated and zoned
for industrial land uses. Long-term industrial land needs can be met through existing vacant industrial
lands in other portions of the City, as well as through current and future master planned community
proposals that include industrial components. The Planning Commission conducted public hearings on
these proposals and recommended City Council approval on September 15, 2005. No one was in
opposition to the requests and the applicants agreed to all conditions and mitigation for the projects.
Conditions of approval recommended by the Planning Commission address residential/industrial
interface issues and the compatibility of proposed development with the nearby Bakersfield Municipal
Airport.
Item 3d. General Plan Amendment on 80 Acres. Located at the Northeast Corner of McCutchen Road
and Buena Vista Road. This amendment is proposed by Mcintosh and Associates on behalf of Lester
D. Baroncini, trustee of the Irene Baroncini Trust to permit the development of single-family residential
units. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this GPAlZC and recommended City
Council approval on September 15, 2005. No one was in opposition to the request and the applicant
agreed to all conditions and mitigation for the project. Annexation has been requested by the property
owner.
Item 3e. General Plan Amendment on One Acre. Located North of Snow Road. Generallv East of
Callowav Drive. This amendment is proposed by Elizabeth H. Pinnell to permit the development of
residential uses. The general area is transitioning from agriculture to urban type development. The
Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this GPAlZC and recommended City Council
approval on September 15, 2005. No one was in opposition to the request and the applicant agreed to
all conditions and mitigation for the project. Annexation has been requested by the property owner.
Item 3f. General Plan Amendment. Zone Chance. and Cancellation of a Williamson Act Land Use
Contract on 76 Acres Located on the West Side of Old River Road. North Side of Berkshire Road
(future\~ and E~st Side of Mountain Vista Drive (future\. Aooroximatel1/1.400 feet south of Panama Lane.
The Lusich Company, Inc., representing LENNAR and MacLeu, LLC and the David P. Antongiovanni
Family Trust propose to develop approximately 282 single-family residential units subsequent to
annexation into the City.
The project site is part of a larger, 433-acre land area which has been under a Williamson Act land use
contract since 1971. Because notices of non-renewal were filed by the property owners in 2003 and
2004, the contract on the subject property is set to expire in less than eight years. Cancellation of the
land use contract can be accomplished by paying the deferred taxes to the County Treasurer as a
cancellation fee. Council may tentatively approve the cancellation of a land use contract if it finds that
the cancellation is consistent with the purposes of the Williamson Act.
Agenda Highlights
November 16, 2005
Page 2
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this GPAlZC and recommended approval to
the City Council on September 15, 2005. The Sierra Club wrote a letter that addressed numerous
issues. Staff responses are contained in the backup material for this project.
Item 3g. General Plan Amendment on 86.37 Acres. Located North of Taft Hiahwav. Generallv East of
Buena Vista Road. Marino Associates, representing Del Ray Development LLC., proposes to develop
single-family residential units. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this GPAlZC
and recommended City Council approval on September 15, 2005. The Sierra Club spoke regarding air
quality, loss of prime agricultural land, traffic and schools. The applicant agreed to all conditions and
mitigation for the project. Annexation has been requested by the property owner.
Item 3h. Amendment to the Circulation Element of the Metrocolitan Bakersfield General Plan and a
Scecific Plan Line for Panorama Drive from Mornina Drive to Vineland Road. The City of Bakersfield
requested a change in the alignment of Panorama Drive to reduce the impacts to several proposed
projects in northeast Bakersfield. This area has seen some tentative tract activity and it is necessary to
set the exact alignment for Panorama Drive at this time in order to ensure orderly development. This
segment of Panorama Drive is approximately 5,400 feet in length and does not follow the typical grid
pattern. That is the reason a specific plan line is necessary to delineate the exact centerline of the road
for planning purposes. No one spoke in opposition to the proposal at the Planning Commission hearing
on September 15, 2005 and the project was approved by unanimous vote of the Commission.
Item 3i. General Plan Amendment on Acmoximatelv 43 Acres. Located South of McCutchen Road. East
of Ashe Road. SmithTech/USA Inc., representing Thomas Mitchell Ashe, proposes commercial and
industrial uses for the site. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this GPAlZC and
recommended City Council approval on September 15. 2005. No one was in opposition to the request
and the applicant agreed to all conditions and mitigation for the project. Because of the nearby sewer
treatment plant (less than 14 mile), no odor sensitive uses are permitted. Both commercial and industrial
uses are appropriate within 14 mile of the sewer treatment plant. Annexation has been requested by the
property owner.
Item 3j. General Plan Amendment and Zone Chanae for Procertv Located North and South of
McCutchen Road. East and West of Proaress Road. Global Investment & Development, LLC, c/o Aaron
Rivani proposes this amendment to the Land Use Element to allow for development of single-family
development. The Circulation Element eliminates Progress Road south of McCutchen Road as a
collector. The proposal complies with the General Plan's criteria. The general area north of Panama
Lane contains residential developments. Immediately across McCutchen Road is the recently approved
"Gosford Panama" project with 300 acres of residential, light industrial south of the concrete batch plant
east of Progress Road, and commercial development.
The conversion of more than 100 acres of land designated R-IA and the fact the project proposes nearly
500 units are reasons to require an EIR. Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined that the
project could have a significant environmental effect. Both the Planning Commission and staff
conducted several hearings on the EIR.
There were transportation and aesthetic issues raised throughout the EIR process related to the two
industrial property owners adjacent to the project site (south of McCutchen Road between Progress
Road and Gosford Road). The applicant and the industrial property owners have come to an
agreement to add additional conditions to the project which will alleviate the concerns. The EIR was
recommended for adoption and certification by the Planning Commission on October 6. 2005.
Agenda Highlights
November 16, 2005
Page 3
Although all possible compliance and mitigation measures were incorporated into the project as
conditions of approval, agricultural and aesthetic impacts cannot be reduced to less than significant.
The EIR proposes a Statement of Overriding Considerations for these issues.
HEARINGS
Item 4a. General Plan Amendment and Zone Chanae on 80 Acres Located at the Southeast Corner of
South Allen Road (future) and Pensinaer Road. Mcintosh & Associates for Centex Homes, Inc.,
representing the Frazier Trust et ai, proposes development of approximately 275 single-family residential
units. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this GPAlZC and recommended
approval to the City Council on September 15, 2005. The Sierra Club wrote a letter that addressed
numerous issues. The Department of Oil and Gas and Geothermal Resources commented on potential
problems citing residential development with the Canfield Ranch Oilfield. Staff responses are contained
in the backup material for this project.
Item 4b. General Plan Amendment and Zone Chanae on 1.833 Acres known as Old River Ranch.
Cancellation of a Williamson Act Land Use Contract on 316.5 Acres within the Proiect Area. and
ADoroval of a DeveloDment Aareement. Annexation of the project area into the City is proposed. The
project area is generally located within the area bounded by Panama Lane to the north, Old River Road
to the east, South Allen Road (unimproved) to the west, and Taft Highway (State Route 119) to the
south. A number of parcels under separate ownership within the above-described boundary are not a
part of the proposal.
PB Ventures, LLC proposes development of a new master planned community featuring a balance of
residential, retail, employment, recreation, and public facilities. The proposal consists of approximately
6,000 single-family and 1,000 multi-family residential units, and approximately 900,000 square feet of
retail and office development. A Development Agreement which sets forth the developer's financial
responsibilities in return for the ability to proceed with the project in accordance with the existing policies,
rules, and regulations is proposed. The benefits to the City are that the developer will pay additional park
development fees for acquisition and/or development of a regional park, additional fees for police and fire
equipment and apparatus, and support establishment of a Community Facilities District to provide
financing, operation and maintenance of public facilities and services to support the project.
Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined that the project could have a significant
environmental effect, so an EIR was prepared. The Planning Commission and staff conducted several
hearings on the EIR. The Final EIR was recommended for certification by the Planning Commission on
October 6, 2005. It was determined that the conversion of the project site to urban land uses would
result in a significant loss of farmland pursuant to CEQA. Determinations regarding the appropriateness
of agricultural conversion proposals are at the discretion of the City Council.
Of the 1,833 acres comprising the project site, 316.5 acres are subject to Williamson Act land use
contracts. Cancellation of the land use contract can be accomplished by paying the deferred taxes to the
County Treasurer as a cancellation fee. Council may tentatively approve the cancellation of a land use
contract if it finds that the cancellation is consistent with the purposes of the Williamson Act. The
mandatory findings for the cancellation of the land use contract are contained in the draft resolution.
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this GPAlZC and recommended approval to
the City Council on October 6, 2005. The Sierra Club voiced their usual concerns at the hearing.
Thomas Fallgatter, representing Darcy Marshall and Barbara Grimm-Marshall, requested that the
proposed multipurpose trail system within the project area and to the east be comprehensively planned
through the future preparation of a Master Trails Plan, and that all affected property owners be notified of
associated workshops and public meetings. The Planning Commission deleted former condition #61,
Agenda Highlights
November 16. 2005
Page 4
which identified the trail location and precise dimensions, and recommended adoption of current
condition #61 in response to Mr. Fallgatter's request. At the time of the Planning Commission hearing,
the applicant agreed to all conditions and mitigation measures for the project.
Although all possible compliance and mitigation measures were incorporated into the project as
conditions of approval, agricultural resources, air quality (odor only), and transportation/traffic impacts
would remain significant. Staff recommends certification of the Final EIR, approval of the General Plan
Amendment, adoption of the resolution approving the proposed cancellation of a Williamson Act land use
contract, and first reading of the ordinance approving the proposed prezoning and Development
Agreement.
Item 4c. General Plan Amendment and Zone Chance on 1.655 Acres known as Rosedale Ranch
Bounded bv 7'h Standard Road to the North. Jenkins Road to the East. the Burlincton Northern Santa Fe
(BNSF\ Railroad to the West. and Kratzmever Road/Olive Drive to the South. Project Design
Consultants representing Rosedale Ranch propose development of a new master planned community,
including single- and multi-family residential, recreational, school, commercial, and industrial land uses
on approximately 1,655 acres of land.
A Development Agreement is also proposed for this project under the same terms and with the same
benefits as the previous item. This item was continued from the September 7'h and September 28th
meetings to permit resolution of issues regarding the Development Agreement.
Urban development of the project site has been planned for many years, beginning with the adoption of
the Rosedale Community General Plan and the Western Rosedale Specific Plan (WRSP) by the County
of Kern in 1980 and 1994, respectively, with an amendment in 1996. These plans were subsequently
incorporated into the County of Kern General Plan, and most recently into the Metropolitan Bakersfield
General Plan adopted jointly by the County and the City. It is notable that the adopted land use plan for
the project area is significantly more intense than the current proposal.
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this proposal and recommended approval to
the City Council on July 7, 2005. Supportive testimony was provided at the hearing. Gordon Nipp
representing the Sierra Club, provided opposing testimony regarding traffic and the loss of farmland.
Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined that the project could have a significant
environmental effect. Therefore, in accordance with CEQA, an EIR was prepared. The Planning
Commission and staff conducted several hearings on the EIR. The Final EIR was recommended for
certification by the Planning Commission on July 7, 2005. Staff has subsequently received letters in
regarding the inadequacy of the EIR related to mineral extraction. The law firm representing Rosedale
Ranch submitted a letter in response that adequately addresses the issue. The proposed project is less
intense than current approvals, and the EIR addresses known petroleum resources and is not required to
speculate on unproven or potential resources.
Although all possible compliance and mitigation measures were incorporated into the project as
conditions of approval, agricultural resources, air quality (odor only), and transportation/traffic impacts
would remain significant. Staff recommends certification of the Final EIR, approval of the General Plan
Amendment, and first reading of the ordinance approving the proposed prezoning and Development
Agreement.
Approved:
John W. Stinson, /J "fC...
Assistant City Manager Ü {¡() ./
cc: Department Heads
Rhonda Smiley, Public Relations
City Manager's File
City Clerk's Office
News Media File
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 9,2005
AGEN~A SECTION: Hearings
ITEM: I). C\.
DATE:
Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED
Stanley C. Grady, Development Services Director DEPARTMENT HEAD ;;-z.--
October 19, 2005 CITY ATTORNEY ,!8'Jnj
CITY MANAGER a JS
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment/Zone Chanae 05-0412 (Ward 1)
South Enterprise Zone, the property owner, has applied for a general plan amendment and zone
change on 22.6 acres located at the northwest corner of Pacheco Road and Cottonwood Road.
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan amendment
changing the land use designation from HI (Heavy Industrial) to LMR (Low Medium Density
Residential) on 17.1 acres and from P (Public Facilities) to LMR on 5.5 acres.
2. First reading of ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title 17 of the
Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 124-17 from M-3 (Heavy Industrial) to R-2 (Limited
Multiple Family Dwelling Zone) on 22.6 acres.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of a resolution approving the Negative Declaration, approving
proposed general plan amendment and first reading of an ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
The proposed general plan amendment and zone change would permit the development of
residential uses on a 22.6-acre site that is, for the most part, presently designated and zoned for
industrial land uses. An abundant supply of vacant industrial land has been available within the
general vicinity of the project area for many years; the City and others have actively marketed
much of this land for industrial development with very limited success. Long-term industrial land
needs can be met through existing vacant industrial lands in other portions of the City as well as
through current and future master planned community proposals that include industrial
components. The lack of demand for industrial land in this area is an opportunity to accommodate
the development of affordable, for-sale housing. Given the rapid increase in the cost of for-sale
housing in the major growth areas of the City, the need to facilitate the creation of more affordable
housing options for those who can no longer afford to enter Bakersfield's current housing market is
becoming increasingly apparent. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this
proposal and recommended City Council approval on September 15, 2005. No one was in
opposition to the request and the applicant agreed to all conditions and mitigation for the project.
There were no agencies in opposition to the request. Conditions of approval recommended by the
-_... _..-~..". ,--~-_.. ---.-. .~.....---_.._~.-....,- ..- ...
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Page 2
Planning Commission address residential/industrial interface issues and the compatibility of
proposed development with the nearby Bakersfield Municipal Airport.
Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined that the project would not have a significant
effect on the environment. Therefore, a negative declaration was prepared and posted on August
19,2005, in accordance with CEQA.
PH
Admin\11-9-0412
+..,--'-
---~_._-~..._....-_._..- ~--"'-" ._-----.~-- -~._._--
,---~- --",."..-,-.--
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 9,2005
AGENDA SECTION: Hearings
ITEM: Ô. b.
TO:
FROM:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Stanley C. Grady, Development Services Director DEPARTMENT HEAD
DATE:
October 19, 2005
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY MANAGER
APPROVED
ýt/
!2h;4
Xkñ
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment/Zone Chanae 05-0414 (Ward 1)
Alfredo Hernandez, the property owner, has applied for a general plan amendment and zone change
on 40 acres located on the east side of Cottonwood Road, between East White Lane and Brook
Street.
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan amendment
changing the land use designation from LI (Light Industrial) to LMR (Low Medium Density
Residential) on 9 acres and from HI (Heavy Industrial) to LMR on 31 acres.
2. First reading of ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title 17 of the
Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 124-16 from M-1 (Light Manufacturing) to R-2 (Limited
Multiple Family Dwelling Zone) on 9 acres and from M-3 (Heavy Industrial) to R-2 on 31
acres.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of a resolution approving the Negative Declaration, approving
proposed general plan amendment and first reading of an ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
The proposed general plan amendment and zone change would permit the development of
residential uses on a 40-acre site that is presently designated and zoned for industrial land uses.
An abundant supply of vacant industrial land has been available within the general vicinity of the
project area for many years; the City and others have actively marketed much of this land for
industrial development with very limited success. Long-term industrial land needs can be met
through existing vacant industrial lands in other portions of the City as well as through current and
future master planned community proposals that include industrial components. The lack of
demand for industrial land in this area is an opportunity to accommodate the development of
affordable, for-sale housing. Given the rapid increase in the cost of for-sale housing in the major
growth areas of the City, the need to facilitate the creation of more affordable housing options for
those who can no longer afford to enter Bakersfield's current housing market is becoming
increasingly apparent. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this proposal and
recommended City Council approval on September 15, 2005. No one was in opposition to the
request and the applicant agreed to all conditions and mitigation for the project. There were no
~ ~_......,-----_.._..- ...._,- ,.--. .,_.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Page 2
agencies in opposition to the request. Conditions of approval recommended by the Planning
Commission address residential/industrial interface issues and the compatibility of proposed
development with the nearby Bakersfield Municipal Airport.
Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined that the project would not have a significant
effect on the environment. Therefore, a negative declaration was prepared and posted on August
12,2005, in accordance with CEOA.
PH
Admin\11-9-0414
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 9,2005
AGENDA SECTION: Hearings
ITEM: ~.e".
TO:
FROM:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Stanley C. Grady, Development Services Director DEPARTMENT HEAD
DATE
October 20, 2005
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY MANAGER
APPROVED
o
~W
,
nhrs
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment/Zone Chance 05-0417 tyVard 1)
Marino/Associates, representing Magdaleno Duenas Barajas and Luisa Duenas, the property owners,
has applied for a general plan amendment and zone change on 40 acres located on the north side of
future East White Lane, 1,320 feet east of Cottonwood Road.
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan amendment
changing the land use designation from LI (Light Industrial) to LR (Low Density Residential)
on 2 acres, from HI (Heavy Industrial) to LR on 33 acres, and from P (Public Facilities) to
LR on 5 acres.
2. First reading of ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title 17 of the
Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 124-16 from M-1 (Light Manufacturing) to R-1 (One
Family Dwelling Zone) on 2 acres and from M-3 (Heavy Industrial) to R-1 on 38 acres.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of a resolution approving the Negative Declaration, approving
proposed general plan amendment and first reading of an ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
The proposed general plan amendment and zone change would permit the development of
residential uses on a 40-acre site that is. for the most part, presently designated and zoned for
industrial land uses. An abundant supply of vacant industrial land has been available within the
general vicinity of the project area for many years; the City and others have actively marketed
much of this land for industrial development with very limited success. Long-term industrial land
needs can be met through existing vacant industrial lands in other portions of the City as well as
through current and future master planned community proposals that include industrial
components. The lack of demand for industrial land in this area is an opportunity to accommodate
the development of affordable, for-sale housing. Given the rapid increase in the cost of for-sale
housing in the major growth areas of the City, the need to facilitate the creation of more affordable
housing options for those who can no longer afford to enter Bakersfield's current housing market is
becoming increasingly apparent. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this
proposal and recommended City Council approval on September 15, 2005. No one was in
opposition to the request and the applicant agreed to all conditions and mitigation for the project.
~.
..~,_..__. .__...___..~_,.,_._~ u._.,,·_
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Page 2
There were no agencies in opposition to the request. Conditions of approval recommended by the
Planning Commission address residential/industrial interface issues and the compatibility of
proposed development with the nearby Bakersfield Municipal Airport.
Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined that the project would not have a significant
effect on the environment. Therefore, a negative declaration was prepared and posted on August
11, 2005, in accordance with CEQA.
PH
Admin\11-9-0417
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 9,2005
AGENDA SECTION: Hearings
ITEM: Q .d.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
APPROVED
DEPARTMENT HEAD ~
CITY ATTORNEY Øn4
CITY MANAGER ¡(l;JS
Stanley C. Grady, Development Services Director
October 12, 2005
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment/Zone Chance 05-0942 CNard 5 upon annexation)
Mcintosh and Associates, representing Lester D. Baroncini, Trustee of the Irene Baroncini Trust, the
property owner, has applied for a general plan amendment on 80 acres, located at the northeast
corner of McCutchen Road and Buena Vista Road.
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan amendment
and changing the land use designation from R-IA (Resource - Intensive Agriculture) to LR
(Low Density Residential) on 80 acres.
2. First reading of ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title 17 of the
Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 123-30 from A (Agriculture) to R-1 (One Family
Dwelling) zone on 80 acres.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of resolution approving the Negative Declaration, approving the
general plan amendment and first reading of the ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
This amendment to the general plan would permit the development of single family residential units
on the 80 acre site. The general area is transitioning to be developed with urban development.
The Planning Commission conducted public hearing(s) on this General Plan Amendment/Zone
Change and recommended City Council approval on September 15, 2005. No one was in
opposition to the request and the applicant agreed to all conditions and mitigation for the project.
There were no agencies in opposition to the request.
Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined that the project would not have a significant
effect on the environment. Therefore, a negative declaration was prepared and posted on August
16,2005, in accordance with CEQA.
MO
Admin\11-9-0942
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 9,2005
AGEND~ SECTION: Hearings
ITEM: _""J.(,..
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
APPROVED
Stanley C. Grady, Development Services Director DEPARTMENT HEAD '/'t.¡---
October 12, 2005 CITY ATTORNEY ß)y;/
.
CITY MANAGER <51 y:;
SUBJECT:
General Plan Amendment/Zone Chanae 04-0420 0Nard 4 upon annexation)
SmithTech/USA Inc., representing Elizabeth H. Pinnell, the property owner, has applied for a general
plan amendment on one acre, located north of Snow Road, generally east of Calloway Drive.
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan amendment
and changing the land use designation from R-IA (Resource - Intensive Agriculture) to LR
(Low Density Residential) on one acre.
2. First reading of ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title 17 of the
Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 134-05 from A (Agriculture) to R-1 (One Family
Dwelling) zone on one acre.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of resolution approving the Negative Declaration, approving the
general plan amendment and first reading of the ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
This amendment to the general plan would permit the development of residential uses on the one
acre site. The general area is transitioning from agriculture to urban type development. The
Planning Commission conducted public hearing(s) on this General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
and recommended City Council approval on September 15, 2005. No one was in opposition to the
request and the applicant agreed to all conditions and mitigation for the project. There were no
agencies in opposition to the request.
Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined that the project would not have a significant
effect on the environment. Therefore, a negative declaration was prepared and posted on August
9, 2005, in accordance with CEQA.
MO
Admin\11-9-0420
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 9,2005
AGENDA SECTION: Hearings
ITEM ~.f.
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
CITY MANAGER
APPROVED
o
iJ?rz4
61.17
FROM:
Stanley C. Grady, Development Services Director DEPARTMENT HEAD
DATE:
October 19, 2005
CITY ATTORNEY
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment/Zone Chanqe 05-0476 (Ward 5)
The Lusich Company, Inc., representing LENNAR and MacLeu, LLC and the David P. Antongiovanni
Family Trust, the property owners, has applied for a general plan amendment, zone change, and
cancellation of a Williamson Act land use contract on 76 acres located on the west side of Old River
Road, north side of Berkshire Road (future), and east side of Mountain Vista Drive (future),
approximately 1 ,400 feet south of Panama Lane.
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan amendment
changing the land use designation from R-IA (Resource-Intensive Agriculture) to LR (Low
Density Residential) on 76 acres.
2. First reading of ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title 17 of the
Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 123-30 from County A (Agriculture) to R-1 (One
Family Dwelling Zone) on 76 acres.
3. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and approving the cancellation of a
Williamson Act land use contract on 76 acres.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of a resolution approving the Negative Declaration, approving
proposed general plan amendment, approving proposed cancellation of a Williamson Act land use
contract, and first reading of an ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
The proposal would allow for the development of approximately 282 single-family residential units
on the 76-acre project site subsequent to annexation into the City of Bakersfield.
Policy C.14. of the Conservation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan requires the
decision making body to evaluate ten factors to determine the appropriateness of agricultural
conversion proposals. These factors have been analyzed in an Agricultural Conversion Study
prepared for this project by The Lusich Company. Staff and the Planning Commission concur with
the conclusion of the assessment that conversion of the property to urban uses is a less than
significant impact.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Page 2
The project site is part of a larger, 433-acre land area which has been under a Williamson Act land
use contract since 1971; because notices of non-renewal were filed by the property owners in 2003
and 2004, the contract on the subject property is set to expire in less than eight years.
Cancellation of the land use contract can be accomplished by paying the deferred taxes to the
County Treasurer as a cancellation fee, which the Kern County Assessor's Office has calculated to
be $598,575. Pursuant to Government Code Section 51282, the City Council may tentatively
approve the cancellation of a land use contract if it finds that the cancellation is consistent with the
purposes of the Williamson Act. The mandatory findings for the cancellation of the land use
contract are contained in the attached draft resolution.
Conditions of approval and mitigation measures requiring payment of the Williamson Act land use
contract cancellation fee and addressing air quality, transportation, and cultural resources impacts
are included as part of project approval.
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this general plan amendment/zone
change and recommended approval to the City Council on September 15, 2005. Gordon Nipp and
Arthur Unger, both representing the Sierra Club, provided testimony to the Planning Commission
during the hearing. Mr. Nipp and Mr. Unger referred to the Sierra Club's comment letter dated
September 15, 2005, which addresses numerous issues including agricultural land conversion, air
quality, biological resources, traffic, and public services and utilities, and requests the preparation
of an EIR for the project; the Sierra Club's letter and staff responses are contained in the backup
material for this project.
Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined that the project would not have a significant
effect on the environment. Therefore, a negative declaration was prepared and posted on August
16,2005, in accordance with CEQA.
PH
Admin\11-9-0476
.-..-.-.. ...----.-.-.-. _._._-_._-~- _.._~-_.__.__.~
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 16,2005
AGENDA SECTION: Hearings
ITEM:
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED
Stanley C. Grady, Development Services Director DEPARTMENT HEAD ~
November 8,2005 CITY ATTORNEY,k il)-'v'¿i11:;
CITY MANAGE~ ~
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment/Zone Chance 05-0743 tyVard 5 upon annexation)
Marino Associates, representing Del Ray Development LLC., the property owner, has applied for a
general plan amendment on 86.37 acres, located north of Taft Highway, generally east of Buena Vista
Road.
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan amendment
and changing the land use designation from R-IA (Resource - Intensive Agriculture) to LR
(Low Density Residential) on 86.37 acres.
2. First reading of ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title 17 of the
Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 123-31 from A (Agriculture) to R-1 (One Family
Dwelling) zone on 86.37 acres.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of resolution approving the Negative Declaration, approving the
general plan amendment and first reading of the ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
This amendment to the general plan would permit the development of single family residential units
on the 86.37 acre site. The Planning Commission conducted public hearing(s) on this General
Plan AmendmenUZone Change and recommended City Council approval on September 15, 2005.
The applicant agreed to all conditions and mitigation for the project. There were no agencies in
opposition to the request. Gordon Nipp of the Sierra Club spoke on the following issues: Air
quality, loss of prime agricultural land, traffic and schools. Staff response is attached.
Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined that the project would not have a significant
effect on the environment. Therefore, a negative declaration was prepared and posted on August
22. 2005, in accordance with CEQA.
MO
Admin\11-16-0743
".._....~_..-.. -,.~ .~.._~.~--._--.~ .._~-_._----~-
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 9,2005
AGENDA SECTION: Hearings
ITEM: Ô. h.
TO:
FROM:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
APPROVED
DEPARTMENT HEAD ~
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY MANAGERÁ1ù5
Stanley C. Grady, Development Services Director
DATE:
October 12,2005
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment 05-0976 (VJard 3)
The City of Bakersfield has proposed an amendment to the Circulation Element of the
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan and a Specific Plan Line for Panorama Drive from Morning
Drive to Vineland Road.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of the resolution adopting the negative declaration and approving the
general plan amendment and Specific Plan line.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Bakersfield requested a change in the alignment of Panorama Drive to reduce the
impacts to several proposed projects in northeast Bakersfield. Panorama Drive is a collector
street and will ultimately be a 90 foot wide four lane facility. The current and proposed alignment
provides east to west circulation in an area slated for significant urbanization.
This area has seen some tentative tract activity and it is necessary to set the exact alignment for
Panorama Drive at this time in order to ensure orderly development. This segment of Panorama
Drive is approximately 5,400 feet in length and does not follow the typical grid pattern. That is the
reason a specific plan line is necessary to delineate the exact centerline of the road for planning
purposes.
All property owners along the alignment were notified of the change and none were in opposition
to the project. No one spoke in opposition to the proposal at the Planning Commission hearing on
September 15, 2005 and the project was approved by unanimous vote of the Commission.
MG
Admin\11-9-0976
~-
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 9,2005
AGEND~ S~CTION: Hearings
ITEM: 6.1.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED
Stanley C. Grady, Development Services Dir. DEPARTMENT HEAD
October 10, 2005 CITY ATTORNEY
CITY MANAGER ()/JS
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment/Zone Chanae 04-1765 (Ward 6 upon annexation)
SmithTech/USA Inc., representing Thomas Mitchell Ashe, the property owner, has applied for a
general plan amendment on approximately 43 acres, located south of McCutchen Road, east of Ashe
Road.
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan amendment
and changing the land use designation from R-IA (Resource - Intensive Agriculture) to GC
(General Commercial) on 28 acres and LI (Light Industrial) on 15 acres.
2. First reading of ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title 17 of the
Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 126-05 from A (Agriculture) to C-1/PCD
(Neighborhood Commercial/Planned Commercial Development) on 28 acres and M-1 (Light
Manufacturing) zones on 15 acres.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of resolution approving the Negative Declaration, approving the
general plan amendment and first reading of the ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
This amendment to the general plan would permit the development of commercial and industrial
uses on the 43 acres. The general area is transitioning from agricultural to typical urban
development. The Planning Commission conducted public hearing(s) on this General Plan
Amendment/Zone Change and recommended City Council approval on September 15. 2005. No
one was in opposition to the request and the applicant agreed to all conditions and mitigation for
the project. There were no agencies in opposition to the request. Because of the nearby sewer
treatment plant (less than Y. mile), no odor sensitive uses are permitted. Both commercial and
industrial uses are appropriate within Y. mile of the sewer treatment plant.
Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined that the project would not have a significant
effect on the environment. Therefore, a negative declaration was prepared and posted on August
22, 2005, in accordance with CEQA.
MO
Admin\ 11-9-1765
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 9,2005
AGEND~ S~CTION:
ITEM: '). I.
V
Hearings
TO:
FROM:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
APPROVED
DEPARTMENT HEADV
CITY ATTORNEYß'JJN
CITY MANAGER <:S1Ys
Stanley C. Grady, Development Services
DATE:
October 13, 2005
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment/Zone Chanae No. 04-1012. (Ward 5 and 6).
Global Investment & Development, LLC, c/o Aaron Rivani has proposed a general plan
amendment with a concurrent zone change for property located north and south of McCutchen
Road. east and west of Progress Road.
1. A Resolution making findings approving and certifying the Final Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) for General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 04-1012/Annexation No. 468,
known as McCutchen 110.
2. A Resolution approving a general plan element amendment to change the land use
designation from R-IA (Resource-Intensive Agriculture) to LR (Low Density Residential) on
110 acres and circulation element amendment to eliminate the Collector designation of
Progress Road south of McCutchen Road.
3. First Reading of the ordinance approving an amendment to Title 17 of the Bakersfield
Municipal Code and changing Zoning Map No. 123-29 and 123-32 by changing the zoning
from A (Agriculture) to an R-1 (One Family Dwelling) zone on 110 acres.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adopting the Resolutions and first reading of the Ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
The amendment to the Land Use Element permits the development of single family development
on 110 acres. The Circulation Element eliminates Progress Road south of McCutchen Road as a
collector.
The concurrent zone change will be consistent with the proposed land use amendment noted
above and will change to zone districts to an R-1 zone on 110 acres.
The proposal provides for a logical extension of development in southwest Bakersfield. The
general plan encourages the orderly outward expansion of new urban development that maintains
continuity of existing development and allows the incremental expansion of infrastructure and
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Page 2
public services. The proposal complies with the general plan's criteria. The general area north of
the site, north of Panama Lane, has been developed with Silver Creek, Gosford Village and other
residential developments. Immediately across McCutchen Road is the recently approved
"Gosford Panama" project with 300 acres of residèntial and commercial development.
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the case and recommended approval to
the City Council on October 6, 2005. There were issues raised throughout the EIR process
related to the two industrial property owners adjacent to the project site (south of McCutchen
Road between Progress Road and Gosford Road). McCutchen Road is designated as an Arterial
segment and will have an eventual width of 110 feet of right-of-way (with 6 lanes of traffic) and the
requirement of a six foot high masonry block wall along the street. In addition, the mitigation
measures for the proposal also provide for a block wall between the development and the
industrial uses along the south side of McCutchen Road. Also, the applicant and the industrial
property owners have come to an agreement to add additional conditions to the project which will
alleviate the concerns from the industrial property owners.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements have been followed by staff and
the planning commission for the project. Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined
that the project could have a significant environmental effect. Both the conversion of more than
100 acres of land designated R-IA and the fact the project proposed nearly 500 units are the
reasons that an EIR was required. The Planning Commission and Staff conducted several
hearings on the EIR including a public scoping meeting on April 7, 2005, an adequacy hearing to
receive comments on the Draft EIR on July 21, 2005, and a hearing on the EIR on October 6,
2005. The EIR was recommended for adoption and certification by the Planning Commission on
October 6, 2005.
Although compliance with local ordinances, state laws, construction to the Uniform Building Codes
and mitigation measures incorporated into the project as conditions of approval, there are two
impacts that are still significant. (These mitigation measures, along with the entire EIR are
contained on a disk within the Council Binders, available in the City Clerk's Office, the
Development Services Department and the City's webpage.) Unavoidable impacts which cannot
be reduced to less than significant levels through mitigation are: agriculture and aesthetic issues.
The EIR proposes a Statement of Overriding Considerations for these issues. Staff recommends
approval of the Final EIR, with mitigation measures and accompanying mitigation monitor plan
and the adoption of CEQA findings per Section 15091 and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations per Section 15093.
MO
Admin\11-9-1012
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 16, 2005
AGEND~ SECTION: Hearings
ITEM: I. . 0..
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED
Stanley C. Grady, Development Services Director DEPARTMENT HEAD ~
November 8,2005 CITY ATTORNEY ¡k Þ Æ/yz S
CITY MANAGER n1u5
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment/Zone Chance 05-0943 (Ward 5)
Mcintosh & Associates for Centex Homes, Inc., representing the Frazier Trust et ai, the property
owners, has applied for a general plan amendment and zone change on 80 acres located at the
southeast corner of South Allen Road (future) and Pensinger Road.
1. Resolution approving the Negative Declaration and adopting the general plan amendment
changing the land use designation from R-IA (Resource-Intensive Agriculture) to LR (Low
Density Residential) on 80 acres.
2. First reading of ordinance approving the Negative Declaration and amending Title 17 of the
Municipal Code and Zoning Map No. 122-24 from A-20A (Agricultural 20-Acre Minimum Lot
Size) to R-1 (One Family Dwelling Zone) on 80 acres.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of a resolution approving the Negative Declaration, approving
proposed general plan amendment and first reading of an ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
The proposal would allow for the development of approximately 275 single-family residential units
on the 80-acre project site, which is located within the City limits.
Policy C.14. of the Conservation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan requires the
decision making body to evaluate ten factors to determine the appropriateness of agricultural
conversion proposals. These factors have been analyzed in a Farmland Conversion Study
prepared for this project by Mcintosh & Associates. Staff and the Planning Commission concur
with the conclusion of the assessment that conversion of the property to urban uses is a less than
significant impact.
Conditions of approval and mitigation measures which address air quality, transportation,
hazardous materials, and cultural resources impacts are included as part of project approval.
Department of Oil and Gas and Geothermal Resources commented on potential problems siting
residential development with the Canfield Ranch Oilfield. Staff's response is part of the backup
material.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Page 2
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this general plan amendment/zone
change and recommended approval to the City Council on September 15, 2005. Gordon Nipp
representing the Sierra Club provided testimony to the Planning Commission during the hearing.
Mr. Nipp referred to the Sierra Club's comment letter dated September 15, 2005, which addresses
numerous issues including agricultural land conversion, air quality, biological resources, traffic, and
public services and utilities, and requests the preparation of an EIR for the project; the Sierra
Club's letter and staff responses are contained in the backup material for this project.
Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined that the project would not have a significant
effect on the environment. Therefore, a negative declaration was prepared and posted on August
17, 2005, in accordance with CEQA.
PH
AdminI11-16-0943
-~-
^".>"^'_.._----~-~".- --_._-' ._..-.._.~~.-
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 16, 2005
AGENDA SECTION: Hearings
ITEM: Lt.b.
TO:
FROM:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
APPROVED
DEPARTMENT HEAD lfõ'/6t. 5Ä
CITY ATTORNEY t/c;.-
CITY MANAGER fJ.vs
Stanley C. Grady, Development Services Director
DATE:
November 9, 2005
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment/Zone Chance 03-1528 (Wards 5/6)
PB Ventures LLC, the property owner, has applied for a general plan amendment and zone change
on 1,833 acres for the Old River Ranch project and cancellation of a Williamson Act land use contract
on 316.5 acres within the project area. Annexation of the project area into the City is proposed. The
project area is generally located within the area bounded by Panama Lane to the north, Old River
Road to the east, South Allen Road (unimproved) to the west, and Taft Highway (State Route 119) to
the south; a number of out parcels under separate ownership within the above-described boundary are
not a part of the proposal.
1. Resolution making findings approving and certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
for General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 03-1528/Annexation No. 498, known as the Old
River Ranch Project.
2. Resolution adopting the general plan amendment changing the land use designations from R-IA
(Resource - Intensive Agriculture) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 1310.08 acres, to HMR
(High-Medium Density Residential) on 86.31 acres, and to GC (General Commercial) on 86.36
acres; and from R-MP (Resource-Mineral and Petroleum) to LR on 320.22 acres, to HMR on 23.22
acres, and to GC on 6.77 acres.
3. First reading of an ordinance amending Title 17 of the Municipal Code by prezoning the project
area to R-1/PUD (One Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development) on 1,630.34 acres, to R-2/PUD
(Limited Multiple-Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development) on 109.53 acres. to C-1
(Neighborhood Commercial) on 9.66 acres, to C-2 (Regional Commercial) on 22.09 acres, and to
C-2/PCD (Regional Commercial/Planned Commercial Development) on 61.38 acres; and
approving a Development Agreement.
4. Resolution approving the cancellation of a Williamson Act land use contract on 316.5 acres.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of a resolution certifying the Final EIR, adoption of a resolution
approving proposed general plan amendment, adoption of a resolution approving proposed
cancellation of a Williamson Act land use contract, and first reading of an ordinance approving the
proposed prezoning and Development Agreement.
__._.".._ ..Lh ^~_ ,_",,,.___«__ ___._~__"..
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Page 2
BACKGROUND:
The 1,833-acre Old River Ranch project area is located on the edge of new development in the
southwest sector of the City. The proposal would accommodate the development of a new master
planned community featuring a balance of residential, retail, employment, recreation, and public
facilities. A mixed-use Village Center is proposed as the focal point of the new community, linked
to residential neighborhoods by a system of multi-purpose trails and local streets. The proposal
consists of approximately 6,000 single-family and 1,000 multi-family residential units and
approximately 900,000 square feet of retail and office development. The proposal features a
variety of residential densities, with trails, retail facilities, schools, and parks to encourage a more
walkable community. The project includes a development agreement. The agreement provides
assurances to the applicant that the project can be built out under the rules and development
standards in effect at this time, subdivision map life is extended to coincide with the development
agreement, the property is protected from any future moratoriums, infrastructure capacity is
guaranteed and parity between agreements exists. The agreement benefits the city because the
developer will: pay additional park development fees for acquisition and/or development of a
regional park, additional fees for police and fire equipment and apparatus, and support the
establishment of a Community Facilities District to provide financing, operation and maintenance of
public facilities and services to support the project.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements have been followed by staff and
the Planning Commission for the project. Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined
that the project could have a significant environmental effect. Therefore, in accordance with
CEQA, an EIR was prepared. The Planning Commission and staff conducted several hearings on
the EIR including a public scoping meeting on March 31, 2005, an adequacy hearing to receive
comments on the Draft EIR on August 18, 2005, and a hearing on the Final EIR on October 6,
2005. The Final EIR was recommended for certification by the Planning Commission on October
6, 2005. Copies of the Final EIR on CD are contained in the Councilmember binders; hard copies
of the Final EIR are available in the City Clerk's Office.
Policy C.14. of the Conservation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan requires the
decision making body to evaluate ten factors to determine the appropriateness of agricultural
conversion proposals. These factors have been analyzed in a Conversion of Agricultural Land
Technical Report prepared for this project by Jones & Stokes. Based upon this analysis, it was
determined that the conversion of the project site to urban land uses would result in a significant
loss of farmland pursuant to CEQA. Determinations regarding the appropriateness of agricultural
conversion proposals are at the discretion of the City Council.
Of the 1,833 acres comprising the project site, 316.5 acres are subject to Williamson Act land use
contracts. Notices of nonrenewal were recorded for the affected parcels in March 2005 in
accordance with Government Code Section 51245. Cancellation of the land use contract can be
accomplished by paying the deferred taxes to the County Treasurer as a cancellation fee, which
the County Assessor's Office has calculated to be $3,560,625. Pursuant to Government Code
Section 51282, the City Council may tentatively approve the cancellation of a land use contract if it
finds that the cancellation is consistent with the purposes of the Williamson Act. The mandatory
findings for the cancellation of the land use contract are contained in the attached draft resolution.
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this general plan amendment/zone
change and recommended approval to the City Council on October 6, 2005. Arthur Unger,
representing the Sierra Club, and Thomas Fallgatter, representing Darcy Marshall and Barbara
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Page 3
Grimm-Marshall, provided testimony to the Planning Commission during the hearing. Mr. Unger
addressed several issues, including loss of agricultural land, cumulative air quality impacts, and the
need for greater usage of photovoltaic systems, which are addressed in the Sierra Club's comment
letter dated August 18, 2005; the Sierra Club's letter and staff responses are contained in the Final
EIR for this project. Mr. Fallgatter requested that the proposed multipurpose trail system within the
project area and to the east be comprehensively planned through the future preparation of a
Master Trails Plan and that all affected property owners be notified of associated workshops and
public meetings. The Planning Commission deleted former condition #61, which identified the trail
location and precise dimensions, and recommends adoption of current condition #61 (former
condition #60 modified in response to Mr. Fallgatter's request). At the time of the Planning
Commission hearing, the applicant agreed to all conditions and mitigation measures for the project.
Despite compliance with local ordinances, state laws, mitigation measures incorporated into the
project as conditions of approval, and construction in accordance with the Uniform Building Codes,
agricultural resources, air quality (odor only), and transportation/traffic impacts would remain
significant. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend certification of the Final EIR and
accompanying mitigation monitoring and reporting program and the adoption of CEQA findings and
a statement of overriding considerations as required pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections
15091 and 15093.
PH
Admin\11-16-1528
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 16, 2005
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
ITEM: L1 , c.. .
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
APPROVED
DEPARTMENT HEAD ~
CITY ATTORNEY /J~¡¿¡rµ
CITY MANAGER _ _ _
Stanley C. Grady, Development Services Dir.
November 8, 2005
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment/Zone Chanae No. 04-0671 (Ward 4)
Project Design Consultants representing Rosedale Ranch, the property owner, has proposed a
general plan amendment and zone change on 1,655 acres for which annexation into the City is
proposed. A Development Agreement is also proposed. The project site is bounded by 7th
Standard Road to the north, Jenkins Road to the east, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF)
Railroad to the west, and Kratzmeyer Road/Olive Drive to the south.
1. Resolution making findings approving and certifying the Final Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) for General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 04-0671/Annexation No.
499, known as the Rosedale Ranch Project.
2. Resolution approving a general plan amendment to change the land use designation
from LMR (Low Medium Density Residential); LI (Light Industrial); and SI (Service
Industrial) to LR (Low Density Residential); LMR (Low Medium Density Residential);
HMR (High Medium Density Residential); GC (General Commercial); MUC (Mixed Use
Commercial); and LI (Light Industrial) on 1,655 acres; and approving a general plan
amendment to change the Circulation Element alignment of the future West Beltway
through the project boundaries, and the realignment of Kratzmeyer Road/Olive Drive to
the south of the site to create a new interchange with the West Beltway.
3. First reading of an ordinance approving an amendment to Title 17 of the Municipal Code
by prezoning to R-1 (One-Family Dwelling); R-1/PUD (One-Family Dwelling/Planned
Unit Development); R-2 (Limited Multiple-Family Dwelling) R-2/PUD (Limited Multiple-
Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development) C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial); C-2
(Regional Commercial); C-2/PCD (Regional Commercial/Planned Commercial
Development); and M-1 (Light Manufacturing) on 1,655 acres; and approving a
Development Agreement.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of a resolution certifying the Final EIR, adoption of a resolution
approving the proposed general plan amendment, and first reading of an ordinance approving
the proposed prezoning and Development Agreement.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Page 2
BACKGROUND:
This project was continued from the September 28, 2005 meeting to permit resolution of issues
regarding the Development Agreement. Also attached is a letter from Klein-Denatale-Goldner
raising several issues regarding the EIR, a response to this letter will be forthcoming by
separate memo.
The proposed general plan amendment and prezoning would allow for the development of a
new master planned community, including single- and multi-family residential, recreational,
school, commercial, and industrial land uses on approximately 1,655 acres of land. A
Development Agreement which sets forth the developer's financial responsibilities in return for
the ability to proceed with the project in accordance with the existing policies, rules, and
regulations is proposed. This was continued from the September 7, 2005 meeting to work out
the final agreement between staff and the applicant on the proposed development agreement.
Any change to the development agreement will come via separate cover.
The development agreement provides assurances to the applicant that the project can be built
out under the rules and development standards in effect at this time, subdivision map life is
extended to coincide with the development agreement, the property is protected from any future
moratorium, and infrastructure capacity is guaranteed. The agreement benefits the city
because the developer will: pay additional park development fees for acquisition and/or
development of a regional park, pay additional fees for police and fire equipment and apparatus,
and support the establishment of a Community Facilities District to provide financing, operation
and maintenance of public facilities and services to support the project.
Urban development of the project site has been planned for many years, beginning with the
adoption of the Rosedale Community General Plan and the Western Rosedale Specific Plan
(WRSP) by the County of Kern in 1980 and 1994. respectively. Subsequently, an amendment
to the WRSP covering approximately 6,536 acres, inclusive of the project site, was adopted by
the County in 1996. These plans were subsequently incorporated into the County of Kern
General Plan, and most recently into the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan adopted jointly
by the County and the City. It is notable that the adopted land use plan for the project area is
significantly more intense than the current proposal.
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this proposal and recommended
approval to the City Council on July 7, 2005. Gordon Nipp representing the Sierra Club
provided testimony to the Planning Commission during the hearing. Mr. Nipp's primary issues
of concern were the loss of farmland and traffic; the Sierra Club's comment letter on the Draft
EIR and staff responses are contained in the Final EIR. Others who provided testimony to the
Planning Commission during the hearing were in support of the proposal. The city received
several pieces of correspondence (attached) regarding the adequacy of the EIR related to
mineral extraction. A November 7, 2005 letter was provided by the law firm representing
Rosedale Ranch in response to the EIR adequacy issue and oil exploration access. The
response adequately addresses the primary issue regarding the finding that the project would
not have a significant impact to mineral resources. The proposed project is less intense than
current approvals, and the EIR addresses known petroleum resources and is not required to
speculate on unproven or potential resources.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Page 3
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements have been followed by staff and
the Planning Commission for the project. Staff conducted an initial study and it was determined
that the project could have a significant environmental effect. Therefore, in accordance with
CEQA, an EIR was prepared. The Planning Commission and staff conducted several hearings
on the EIR including a pUblic scoping meeting on January 25, 2005, an adequacy hearing to
receive comments on the Draft EIR on May 5, 2005, and a hearing on the Final EIR on July 7,
2005. The Final EIR was recommended for certification by the Planning Commission on July 7,
2005. Copies of the Final EIR on CD are contained in the Council member binders; hard copies
of the Final EIR are available in the City Clerk's Office.
Despite compliance with local ordinances, state laws, mitigation measures incorporated into the
project as conditions of approval, and construction in accordance with the Uniform Building
Codes, agricultural resources, noise, and transportation/traffic impacts would remain significant.
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend certification of the Final EIR and accompanying
mitigation monitoring plan and the adoption of CEQA Findings and a Statement of Overriding
Considerations as required pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15093.
PH
Admin\11-16-0671