[Call to Order]
[00:00:02]
WELCOME TO THE JANUARY 8 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND LET'S HAVE THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, PLEASE.
A ROLL CALL OF COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE.
WE HAVE A FULL QUORUM FOR TODAY'S MEETING.
ALL RIGHT. SEE HERE, I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING ANY MINUTES THAT WE NEED TO APPROVE.
[Item 4]
WELL, YEAH, THEY'RE UP.THERE'S SOME GRAPH MADE FROM THE 18TH OF DECEMBER.
IT'S GOING TO GET A MOTION FOR THE APPROVAL.
JUST TRYING TO HELP YOU OUT. [LAUGHTER] DON'T JUMP THE GUN HERE.
SO YOU'RE MOVING THAT WE ACCEPT THE MINUTES, ANY GOT GOT A SECOND? SECOND. I HAD TO LEAVE HANGING A LITTLE BIT.
I GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM DECEMBER THE 18TH OF 2019. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
THE POINT IN THE AGENDA FOR CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS AND TO ADDRESS ANY ITEM THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA, AND COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
I SEE NONE SO I'LL CLOSE THE CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS AND JUMP RIGHT INTO THE PUBLIC HEARINGS.
[Item 6]
THE FIRST ITEM, NINTH EXTENSION TO EXTENSION EXT19012 TO MAJOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION NUMBER MAS05-006, RED ROCK INDUSTRIAL PARK. TAKE IT AWAY.GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
AS STATED, THIS IS EXTENSION APPLICATION NUMBER EXT19-012.
THIS IS THE NINTH EXTENSION TO MAJOR SUBDIVISION MAS05-006, RED ROCK INDUSTRIAL PARK.
THE REQUEST IS TO EXTEND THE EXPIRATION DATE OF THE IMPROVED TENTATIVE MAP FOR THE MAJOR SUBDIVISION BY ONE YEAR, FROM DECEMBER 21ST, 2019 TO DECEMBER 21ST, 2020.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTED THE MND AND IMPROVE THE MAJOR SUBDIVISION ON DECEMBER 21ST, 2005.
THE MAJOR SUBDIVISION WAS APPROVED TO DIVIDE A 20.8 ACRE PARCEL INTO 17 LOTS.
THERE HAD BEEN FOUR PREVIOUS AUTOMATIC EXTENSIONS BY THE STATE, AND FOUR PREVIOUS DISCRETIONARY EXTENSIONS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A TIMELY LETTER DATED 11-26-2019, REQUESTING A FIFTH DISCRETIONARY EXTENSION OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED MAP.
THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED ON THE EAST OF THE CITY OF MERCED, SAID ON HIGHWAY 140 TOWARDS PLANADA.
THE PROJECT SITE OUTLINED IN RED HERE IN THIS IMAGE IS DESIGNATED TOTAL RURAL CENTER INDUSTRIAL LAND USE IN THE GENERAL PLAN AND ITS OWN M1 LIGHT MANUFACTURING.
HERE WE SEE THE TENTATIVE MAP, WHICH SHOWS THE 17 LOTS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FOR THE MAJOR SUBDIVISION.
THIS PICTURE WAS TAKEN FROM ARBOLEDA DRIVE LOOKING WEST AT THE PROJECT SITE.
THE SITE IS CURRENTLY BEING FARMED IN ROW CROPS.
AS WE CAN SEE IN THE IMAGE, NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE ADOPTION OF THE MND AND APPROVAL OF THE MAJOR SUBDIVISION.
THERE HAVE BEEN NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE PRODUCT SITE OR SURROUNDING AREAS SINCE THE PROJECT WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON DECEMBER 21ST, 2005.
THE PROJECT REMAINS CONSISTENT WITH THE 2030 GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CODE, AS WELL AS THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND TITLE 17.
IN TERMS OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, THERE HAVE BEEN NO CHANGES TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTER OF THE SITE OR THE SURROUNDING AREAS SINCE THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTED THE MND.
STAFF HAS FOUND THAT NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162 OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES.
NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET AND PRINTED IN THE SUNSTAR ON DECEMBER 27TH, 2019.
FINALLY, STAFF HAS TWO RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE COMMISSION THIS MORNING.
THE FIRST IS TO DETERMINE NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162, AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE MAP EXTENSION BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND SUBJECT TO THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS POINT? NOTHING? YES, I HAVE ONE.
IT'S NOT BECAUSE I DON'T SUPPORT GOING FORWARD. I'M JUST CURIOUS.
THIS WILL BE THE NINTH EXTENSION. WHAT IS NORMAL? HOW MANY EXTENSIONS?
[00:05:02]
WHEN DOES IT RUN OUT OR DOES IT EVER? SO NOW, IT SOUNDS HIGH ONLY BECAUSE DURING THE RECESSION, THE STATE GRANTED A BUNCH OF AUTOMATIC EXTENSIONS.SO TYPICALLY, A MAP WILL GET SIX AT THE MOST.
THIS WILL BE THE NINTH OVERALL EXTENSION FOR THIS MAP, BUT THIS WILL BE ONLY THE FIFTH PLANNING COMMISSION OR DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL OR EXTENSION.
SO THEY GET ONE MORE, SUBSEQUENTLY, FOR DISCRETIONARY ACTION.
UNLESS THE STATE, OF COURSE, DECIDES TO GRANT AUTOMATIC EXTENSIONS AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE ALSO, BUT TECHNICALLY, THEY ONLY HAVE THIS ONE AND THEN ONE MORE, A SIXTH EXTENSION POSSIBLE.
ANYBODY ELSE? WE'LL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC COMMENTARY ON THIS ITEM.
IF THERE'S ANYONE WANTS TO COME FORWARD AND ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR A MOTION ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL OR TO DISCUSS.
YES, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION DETERMINED.
NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162.
SUBSEQUENT EIRS AND NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES BASED ON THE FINDINGS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
OKAY. I'VE GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ON THIS MATTER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
CHAIR VOTES AYE, ANY OPPOSED? THAT PASSES. NOW ON THE PROJECT.
I'D ALSO MAKE A MOTION APPROVING THE MAP EXTENSION EXT19-012 BASED ON THE FINDINGS INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT, SUBJECT TO THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
I GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE PROJECT DETERMINATION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.
CHAIR VOTES AYE, OPPOSED? THAT ITEM PASSES.
NUMBER TWO, THE ZONE VARIANTS APPLICATION NUMBER ZV19-001 FOR JANICE SOTELO TO VARY FROM A MINIMUM R-1 PARCEL SIZE 6,000 FEET, AND PARTIAL WIDTH FROM 60 TO APPROXIMATELY 35.
WE'VE GOT A LETTER HERE FROM CONSTANT FERRIS THAT SHE HAS A PROBLEM WITH THAT, BUT GO AHEAD.
GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU.
THIS PROJECT IS ZONE VARIANCE NUMBERS ZV19-001 FOR JANICE SOTELO.
AS FOR THAT COMMENT LETTER, I WILL BE REFERENCING THAT LATER IN MY PRESENTATION.
THE REQUEST IS TO VARY FROM THE MINIMUM R-1 PARCEL SIZE FROM 6,000 SQUARE FEET TO APPROXIMATELY 5,130 SQUARE FEET, AND THE MINIMUM R-1 PARCEL WIDTH FROM 60 FEET TO APPROXIMATELY 35 FEET.
THIS VARIANCE WILL FACILITATE A FUTURE PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT AND SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LOBO AVENUE, 70 FEET EAST OF BEACH WOOD DRIVE IN THE FRANKLIN BEACHWOOD COMMUNITY.
THE PROJECT SITE IS DESIGNATED FRANKLIN BEACHWOOD URBAN COMMUNITY, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE, AND ZONED R-1, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
HERE'S THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT SITE, WHICH IS LOCATED WITHIN THE FRANKLIN BEACHWOOD URBAN COMMUNITY.
THE SITE IS SURROUNDED BY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES WITH LOBO AVENUE BORDERING THE SITE TO THE SOUTH.
HERE WE SEE AN AERIAL OF THE PROJECT SITE OUTLINED IN RED.
THE PROJECT SITE IS CURRENTLY VACANT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A PORTION OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTS THAT OVERLAPS THE PROJECT SITES WESTERN PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS CIRCLED IN BLUE.
BOTH THE PROJECT SITE AND THE ADJACENT PARCEL WITH OVERLAPPING RESIDENTS ARE OWNED BY THE APPLICANT.
THIS VARIANCE IS BEING REQUESTED DUE TO AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTS OVERLAPPING THE PROJECT SITES WESTERN PROPERTY LINE.
THIS OVERLAPPING RESIDENTS PREVENTS CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENTS ON THE PROPERTY.
THE OVERLAPPING RESIDENTS WAS CONSTRUCTED BY PREVIOUS PROPERTY OWNER.
BY GRANTING THIS VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM R-1 PARCEL AREA AND PARCEL WIDTH, IT WILL ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO APPLY FOR A PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT TO RECTIFY THE ISSUE, THE OVERLAPPING RESIDENCE.
ONCE THE PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT IS COMPLETE AND THE NEW PROPERTY LINE IS REROUTED AROUND THE EXISTING RESIDENTS, THE NON-CONFORMITY WILL BE CORRECTED AND A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY HOME WILL BE ALLOWED ON THE PROJECT SITE PARCEL WITH APPROVAL OF A BUILDING PERMIT.
HERE WE SEE THE FUTURE SITE PLAN FOR THE PROJECT SITE AS PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT.
THE RED LINE INDICATES THE CURRENT PROPERTY LINE AND THE STRUCTURE HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW INDICATES THE EXISTING RESIDENTS THAT OVERLAPS THE PROPERTY LINE.
THE BLUE LINE INDICATES THE PROPERTY LINE THE APPLICANT WOULD PROPOSE WITH THE FEATURE PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT SHOULD THE VARIANCE BE APPROVED.
THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM REQUIRED PARCEL WIDTH AND
[00:10:01]
PARTIAL SIZE WOULD ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO APPLY FOR THIS PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT, WHICH WOULD ULTIMATELY FACILITATE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE.THE LOCATION OF THE RESIDENT'S APPLICANT WOULD PROPOSE IS SHADED IN GREEN.
WITH THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE, ALL OTHER APPLICABLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WILL BE MET BASED ON THE PROPOSAL SEEN IN THIS SLIDE.
THIS IMAGE OF THE PROJECT SITE SHOWS THE EXISTING OVERLAPPING RESIDENTS ON THE LEFT AND THE PARCEL FOR WHICH THE VARIANCE IS PROPOSED ON THE RIGHT.
THE AREA BEHIND THE FENCE, WHICH CAN BE SEEN CIRCLED, IS GENERALLY, WHERE THE APPLICANT WILL CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTS SHOULD THIS VARIANT BE APPROVED AND UPON COMPLETION OF A PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT.
THIS IMAGE OF THE EXISTING RESIDENTS IN THE PROJECT SITE WAS TAKEN FROM THE INTERSECTION OF LOBO AVENUE AND BEACHWOOD DRIVE.
THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO ENCOURAGING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND CREATING NEW HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN ESTABLISHED URBANIZED AREAS.
OTHER THAN THE TWO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS INVOLVED IN THIS VARIANCE REQUEST, THE PROPOSAL IS ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE MERCED COUNTY ZONING CODE.
THE PROJECT CAN BE FOUND EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO SECTION 15305, MINOR ALTERATIONS IN LAND USE LIMITATIONS OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES.
THE ANALYSIS AT WHOLE MAKE THIS DETERMINATION CAN BE FOUND IN THE CEQA SECTION OF THE STAFF REPORT.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING WAS MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE PROJECT SITE ON DECEMBER 27TH, 2019, AND PUBLISHED IN THE SUN-STAR ON DECEMBER 27TH, 2019.
A COMMENT LETTER WAS RECEIVED FROM A NEARBY PROPERTY OWNER VIA E-MAIL ON JANUARY 7TH, 2020 AND A HARD-COPY OF THOSE COMMENTS ARE ON THE DICE.
THE COMMENTS EXPRESS CONCERNS SUCH AS NARROW INGRESSING EGRESS, AND AS I SAID YOU HAVE BEEN PROVIDED A HARD-COPY OF THESE COMMENTS.
SECTION 18.126.050 OF THE MERCED COUNTY ZONING CODE AND SECTION 65906 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE, BOTH REQUIRE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO MAKE FINDINGS PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE.
BASED ON THE ANALYSIS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT FINDINGS ONE THROUGH FOUR SEEN IN THIS SLIDE CAN ALL BE MADE, MADE IN THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 18.126.050 OF THE MERCED COUNTY ZONING CODE AND SECTION 65906 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE.
STAFF HAS TWO RECOMMENDATIONS, MOTION TO ADOPT A CEQA FINDINGS FOR EXEMPTION AND MOTION TO APPROVE ZONE VARIANCE NO.
THAT NOW CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
OKAY. THANK YOU. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? JUST A QUICK ON BRODY.
IT'S THE LETTER FROM THE NEIGHBOR ADDRESS.
NO SEWER CONNECTIONS AVAILABLE.
IF THAT'S THE CASE, I WOULD ASSUME THEY WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO GET A PERMIT UNTIL THE SEWER CONNECTIONS ARE AVAILABLE. WOULD THAT BE CORRECT? RIGHT. THAT WOULD BE CORRECT BUT FOR THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED CAN AND WILL SERVE LETTERS FOR BOTH WATER CONNECTION AND SEWER CONNECTION SO THAT PART IS ALREADY BEEN DONE.
SO IF THIS VARIANCE IS APPROVED, THEN THE APPLICANT WOULD DO A PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT TO RECTIFY THE NON-CONFORMITY AND THEN AT THAT POINT WITH THOSE CAN AND WILL SERVE LETTERS, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO APPLY FOR A BUILDING PERMIT FOR A NEW HOME.
SO BASICALLY, YOU JUST HAD TWO LOTS AND ONE GUY ON BOTH OF THEM AND YOU BUILT PART OF HIS HOUSE ON THE SECOND LOT AND NOW THIS PRECIPITATED THIS PROBLEM.
OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
IF THERE'S ANYONE WHO WANTS TO ADDRESS THIS SITUATION, COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
MY NAME IS JANICE SOTELO AND I'M THE PROPERTY OWNER.
I'VE OWNED THE PROPERTY FOR 33 YEARS.
CURRENTLY THERE'S A RULE 20 PROJECT ON LEVEL AVENUE WHERE THEY'RE PUTTING IN ALL NEW SIDEWALK AND THEY'RE UNDER-GROUNDING ALL ELECTRICITY.
THAT SPURRED ME TO PUT THROUGH THIS VARIANCE BECAUSE THAT LAW HAS BEEN VACANT FOR YEARS AND I WANTED TO BE ABLE TO PUT A HOME THERE.
I HAD APPLIED YEARS BACK FOR THE SEWER PERMIT AND HAVE BEING PAYING IT ANNUALLY BECAUSE I KNEW THAT EVENTUALLY IN MY RETIREMENT YEARS, I WILL BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO BUILD ON THAT PROPERTY.
SO WITH THIS NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT'S GOING ON WITH THE RULE 20 PROJECT, THEY ARE ON LEVEL AVENUE, I'M GOING AHEAD AND TAKING THE TIME RIGHT NOW TO START THAT PROJECT AND SO I APPROACHED THE COUNTY AND FOUND OUT THAT I NEEDED TO PUT A VARIANCE THROUGH AND SO THAT'S WHAT BRINGS ME HERE TODAY.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM?
[00:15:03]
SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND BRING IT BACK TO US FOR DISCUSSION OR THE MOTION ON THE CEQA.OKAY. I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT THE COMMISSION DETERMINES A PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO SECTION 153005, MINOR ALTERATIONS AND LAND USE LIMITATIONS OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES.
OKAY. I'VE GOT A MOTION TO A SECOND.
I'VE GOT MOTION TO SECOND ON THE CEQA FOR THIS ITEM. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE CHAIR RULES, AYE, OPPOSED? AND SEEING NONE, THAT PASSES AND NOW FOR THE PROJECT.
OKAY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVES ZONE VARIANCE NO.
ZV19-001 BASED ON THE FINDINGS IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.
I GET A MOTION THE SECOND ON THE PROJECT DETERMINATION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.
CHAIR RULES, AYE, AND OPPOSED? AND SO THIS ITEM PASSES.
MOVING ON TO OUR NUMBER LAST MINOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION NO.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. AS STATED, THE PROJECT IS MINOR SUBDIVISION NO.
MS19 -014 FOR PARMINDER SIDHU.
THE REQUEST IS TO SUBDIVIDE AN 8.6 ACRE PARCEL INTO FOUR PARCELS AND A REMAINDER RESULTING IN NET PARCEL SIZES OF 1.18 ACRES, 1.07 ACRES, 1.08 ACRES, ANOTHER 1.08 ACRE PARCEL, AND A 2.69 ACRE REMAINDER.
THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF LAKE ROAD, 650 FEET SOUTH OF E.DUNN ROAD IN THE MERCED AREA.
PROJECT SITE IS DESIGNATED IN MERCED RURAL RESIDENTIAL CENTER-AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL LAND USE IN THE GENERAL PLAN ZONED R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL).
HERE'S THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT SITE.
THE SITE IS SURROUNDED BY VACANT LAND AND SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES ON THE NORTH AND WEST SIDES, AND VACANT LAND BORDERING THE SITE TO THE SOUTH WITH LAKE ROAD BORDERING THE SITE TO THE EAST.
THIS IS THE TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP WITH THE PROPOSED PARCELS HIGHLIGHTED.
A PROPOSED PRIVATE ACCESS ROAD CAN BE SEEN ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROJECT SITE WHICH WOULD PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE PROPOSED PARCELS ONE THROUGH FOUR OFF OF LAKE ROAD.
HERE WE SEE AN AERIAL OF THE PROJECT SITE LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF LAKE ROAD NEAR MERCED.
THE PARCEL IS CURRENTLY OCCUPIED BY ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE LOCATED ON THE PROPOSED REMAINDER PARCEL.
THEY AREAS WHERE PARCELS ONE THROUGH FOUR PROPOSED ARE CURRENTLY VACANT.
THIS IMAGE OF THE PROJECT SAY IT WAS TAKEN FROM LAKE ROAD LOOKING EAST OF THE PROJECT SITE.
THE EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTS CAN BE SEEN ON THE RIGHT AND THE EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE CAN BE SEEN ON THE LEFT.
HERE WE HAVE ANOTHER IMAGE OF THE PROJECT SITE WITH THE CIRCLED AREA BEING THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PROPOSED PARCELS ONE THROUGH FOUR.
THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES RELATED TO RURAL RESIDENTIAL CENTERS.
THE PROJECT IS ALSO CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE MERCED COUNTY ZONING CODE AS WELL AS A SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND TITLE 17.
THE PROJECT CAN BE FOUND EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO SECTION 15315- "MINOR LAND DIVISIONS" OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES.
THE ANALYSIS THAT HELP MAKE THIS DETERMINATION CAN BE FOUND IN THE CEQA SECTION OF THE STAFF REPORT.
NOTICE THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE PROJECT SITE ON DECEMBER 27TH, 2019, AND PUBLISHED IN THE SUN-STAR ON THE SAME DATE.
NO COMMENTS ON THE SUBDIVISION WERE RECEIVED.
AN ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL WAS ADDED TO THIS PROJECT AFTER PLANNING COMMISSION PACKETS WERE COMPLETED.
THIS CONDITION IS RELATED TO THE SITE PLAN AND DESIGN REVIEW REQUIREMENTS OF THE RECENTLY ADOPTED ZONING CODE UPDATE.
THE CONDITION THAT STAFF IS ADDED TO THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CAN BE SEEN ON THIS SLIDE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
STAFF HAS TWO RECOMMENDATIONS.
MOTION TO ADOPT THE CEQA FINDINGS FOR EXEMPTION AND MOTION TO APPROVE MINOR SUBDIVISION NO.
THAT NOW CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
HEY, ANYBODY GOT ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. I'LL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM AND ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO COMMENT, COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD PLEASE.
SEEING NONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR THIS ITEM AND BRING IT BACK FOR MOTION ON DISCUSSION OR ON THE CEQA.
YOU HAPPY TO MAKE THE MOTION, THE PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINES THAT THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO SECTION 15315, "MINOR LAND DIVISIONS" OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES.
OKAY. I GET A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ON THE CEQA, EXCUSE ME.
[00:20:02]
AYE.CHAIR RULES AYE, OPPOSED?, AND NOW ON THE PROJECT PLEASE.
I'D ALSO LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE MINOR SUBDIVISION NO.
MS19-014 BASED ON THE FINDINGS IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDATION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
GOT A MOTION IN A SECOND ON THE PROJECT DETERMINATION.
MR. CHAIRMAN SHOULD MAKE THE MOTION JUST FOR A STAFF'S CLARITY THAT'S ALSO INCLUSIVE OF THE RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL CONDITIONAL APPROVALS AS WELL, CORRECT? YES, THAT WOULD BE PART OF IT. THANK YOU.
OKAY. WITH THAT CLARIFICATION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.
CHAIR RULES AYE, OPPOSED? AND THAT ITEM PASSES. OFFICER.
I THOUGHT YOU HAD SOMETHING UP. COMMISSIONER ACTION ITEMS. NOTHING ADDITIONAL, SIR.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT? NOTHING AT THIS TIME.
ANY COMMISSIONERS WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? WE'RE ADJOURNED. [BACKGROUND]
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.