>> GOOD MORNING. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL
[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:03]
THIS MEETING AND MERCED PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER.COULD WE START BY PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE? THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
>> THANK YOU. ROLL-CALL THE COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE.
>> WE HAVE A QUORUM FOR TODAY.
>> THANK YOU. APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
[4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
[NOISE] SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF MINUTES? [OVERLAPPING] WE HAVE A MOTION.>> AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR?
>> ALL OPPOSED? CHAIR VOTES AYE ALSO.
NOW IS THE TIME OF OUR MEETING FOR CITIZEN COMMUNICATION.
IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM THAT'S NOT ON OUR AGENDA, NOW WOULD BE YOUR TIME TO DO SO.
[NOISE] SEEING NONE, I'M GOING TO CLOSE CITIZEN COMMUNICATION AND OPEN PUBLIC HEARING,
[6.6.I. MINOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION No. MS20-019 ]
MINOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION, MS20-019, GRISSOM FAMILY AND LAND, CATTLE, AND STOP.>> SO THIS FIRST ITEM IS MINOR SUBDIVISION, MS20-019, THE GRISSOM FAMILY LAND AND CATTLE.
IT IS A REQUEST [NOISE] TO DIVIDE AN APPROXIMATE 371 ACRE PARCEL INTO TWO PARCELS.
PARCEL ONE WOULD BE A 193 ACRES AND THE REMAINDER PARCEL WOULD BE A 178 ACRES.
NO NEW HOMES OR STRUCTURES ARE PROPOSED.
THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION IS FOOTHILL PASTURE, AND IT IS ZONED A-2 EXCLUSIVE AGRICULTURAL.
[NOISE] OOPS, I'M GOING THE WRONG WAY.
[NOISE] THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST REGION OF THE COUNTY, IN AN AREA GENERALLY [NOISE] WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF THE FIVE AND STATE ROW 165 AS YOU CAN SEE HERE.
[NOISE] THIS IS A CLOSE-UP OF THE PROJECT SITE AS YOU CAN SEE [NOISE] IT IS UNDEVELOPED AND FAIRLY STEEP.
[NOISE] THIS IS AN IMAGE SHOWING THE PROPOSED PARCEL ONE, WHICH IS 193 ACRES, AND THE REMAINDER PARCEL, WHICH IS 178 ACRES.
[NOISE] STAFF FOUND AT THIS PROJECT IS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN, THE LAND USE ELEMENT GOAL LU-L2 AND POLICY LU-2.3.
AGRICULTURAL ELEMENT GOAL AG-2 AND POLICY AG-2.1.3.
STAFF ALSO FOUND IT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING CODE, THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, AND TITLE 17 OF THE COUNTY CODE.
[NOISE] STAFF ALSO FOUND THAT THE PROJECT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15183, PROJECTS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMUNITY PLAN OR ZONING, AND THAT NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162, SUBSEQUENT EIRS AND NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES.
A NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS PUBLISHED IN THE MERCED SUN-STAR ON JANUARY 1ST OF THIS YEAR, AND MAILED TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE PROJECT SITE ON DECEMBER 31ST OF 2020.
[NOISE] FINALLY, STAFF HAS TWO RECOMMENDATIONS: THE FIRST IS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION FIND THE PROJECT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF CEQA GUIDELINE SECTION 15183, PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMUNITY PLAN OR ZONING, AND THAT NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162, SUBSEQUENT EIRS AND NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES BASED UPON THE FINDINGS OF THE STAFF REPORT.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE MINOR SUBDIVISION NO.
MS20-019 BASED ON THE PROJECT FINDINGS INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER.
AT THIS POINT I'D LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO COME AND ASK A QUESTION OR GET SOME CLARITY, NOW WOULD BE THE TIME FOR THAT.
[00:05:01]
[NOISE]>> MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS.
[NOISE] I'M DUANE ANDREWS WITH GOLDEN VALLEY ENGINEERING, 405 WEST 19TH STREET.
I'M REPRESENTING THE GRISSOM FAMILY.
I'M JUST ASKING YOU TO APPROVE THIS.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL TRY TO ANSWER THEM.
>> DOES ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> WOULD ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC LIKE TO COME AND SPEAK ON THIS? SEEING NONE, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME AND BRING IT BACK TO COMMISSIONERS.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? SEEING NONE, WE'D ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THE CEQA DETERMINATION.
>> [NOISE] I'LL MAKE THE MOTION THAT THE COMMISSION FINDS THAT THE PROJECT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF CEQA GUIDELINE SECTION 15183, PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMUNITY PLAN OR ZONING, AND THEN NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENT REVIEWS ARE REQUIRED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162 SUBSEQUENT EIRS AND DECLARATIONS OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES BASED UPON THE FINDINGS AND STAFF REPORT.
>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION.
>> WE HAVE A SECOND. COULD WE HAVE A VOTE? ALL IN FAVOR?
NOW WE NEED A MOTION ON THE PROJECT DETERMINATION.
>> L'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVES MINOR SUBDIVISION NO.
MS20-019 BASED ON THE PROJECT FINDINGS, INCLUDING THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
>> I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR?
>> CHAIR VOTES AYE. OPPOSED? IT PASSES.
PROJECT DETERMINATION PASSES. THANK YOU.
MOVING ON, NOW WE HAVE ZONE VARIANTS,
[6.6.II. ZONE VARIANCE APPLICATION No. ZV20-002 / MINOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION No. MS20-018]
APPLICATION NUMBER ZV20-002. BRODY?>> GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
TODAY I'LL BE PRESENTING A PAIR OF RELATED APPLICATIONS IN ZONE VARIANCE NUMBER ZV20-002, AND MINOR SUBDIVISION NUMBER MS20-018 FOR THE APPLICANT, MR. PEREZ.
THERE ARE TWO REQUESTS INVOLVED WITH THESE APPLICATIONS.
THE FIRST OF WHICH IS A ZONE VARIANCE TO VARY FROM THE MINIMUM A-1 ZONE PARCEL SIZE REQUIREMENT, AND THE SECOND, WHICH IS A SUBDIVISION REQUEST TO DIVIDE AN 8.5 ACRE PARCEL INTO TWO PARCELS.
THE COMMISSION MUST APPROVE THE VARIANCE PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF THE SUBDIVISION, AS APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE IS REQUIRED TO ALLOW THE CREATION OF AN ADDITIONAL PARCEL UNDER THE MINIMUM 20 ACRE A-1 ZONE PARCEL SIZE.
HERE, WE SEE THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT SITE, WHICH IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PEACH AVENUE.
THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON IS LOCATED NEARBY TO THE EAST, SEEN SHADED ON THE RIGHT OF THE SCREEN.
HERE, WE HAVE A CLOSER AERIAL IMAGE OF THE PROJECT SITE, WHICH SHOWS THE EXISTING 8.5 ACRE PARCEL THAT'S BISECTED BY A CANAL.
THE WEST PORTION OF THE PROPERTY SEEN ON THE LEFT OF THE SCREEN CONTAINS ONE EXISTING DWELLING AND SOME ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, WHILE THE EAST PORTION OF PROPERTY SEEN ON THE RIGHT CONTAINS A PERMITTED AGRICULTURAL EQUIPMENT REPAIR BUSINESS.
THIS VARIANCE IS BEING REQUESTED DUE TO THE CANAL THAT BISECTS THE PROPERTY AS THE CANAL LIMITS THE LAND USES ACROSS THE ENTIRETY OF THE 8.5 ACRE PARCEL.
BY GRANTING THIS VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM A-1 ZONE PARCEL SIZE REQUIREMENT, IT WILL ALLOW THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THE APPLICANTS MINOR SUBDIVISION REQUEST, WHICH WOULD CREATE TWO NON-CONFORMING PARCELS FROM THE ONE NON-CONFORMING PARCEL THAT'S EXISTING.
I WANTED TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THE PROJECT SITE RELEVANT TO THE TWO APPLICATIONS BEING CONSIDERED TODAY.
IN 1996, THE PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERED A SIMILAR REQUEST FOR A ZONE VARIANCE AND ASSOCIATED MINOR SUBDIVISION.
IN THAT CASE, THE ZONE VARIANCE WAS DENIED ON THE GROUNDS THAT IT WOULD HAVE RESULTED IN INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE COUNTY'S GENERAL PLAN POLICIES AT THE TIME AS APPROVAL OF THAT REQUEST WOULD HAVE ALLOWED A DWELLING BY RIGHT ON THE PROPOSED PARCEL THAT DID NOT CONTAIN A DWELLING.
THE INCREASE BY RESIDENCIES WOULD HAVE RESULTED IN POTENTIAL CONFLICTS BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL AND AGRICULTURAL USES.
SINCE 1996, THE COUNTY'S GENERAL PLAN HAS BEEN UPDATED WITH THE COUNTY CURRENTLY IMPLEMENTING THE 2030 GENERAL PLAN.
THE 2030 GENERAL PLAN AND ASSOCIATED EIR ANALYZE THE VIABILITY OF SMALLER PARCELS AND AGRICULTURAL ZONES, AND EVEN ADDRESS POTENTIAL CONFLICTS BETWEEN AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS IN THE RESIDENCIES.
THE GENERAL PLAN EIR SETS FOURTH A MITIGATION MEASURE THAT WOULD APPLY TO THIS PROJECT, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE ANY NEW DWELLINGS ON THE SUB-DIVIDED PARCELS TO OBTAIN A DISCRETIONARY CUP, GIVING THE COUNTY A FURTHER OPPORTUNITY TO ANALYZE THE NEW DWELLINGS FOR COMPATIBILITY.
[00:10:02]
ADDITIONALLY, THE COUNTY NOW IMPLEMENTS A 200 FOOT AGRICULTURAL BUFFER POLICY BETWEEN NEW DWELLINGS AND AGRICULTURE OPERATIONS.THESE ANALYSIS AND POLICIES WERE NOT PRESENT WHEN THE COMMISSION CONSIDERED THE PREVIOUS VARIANCE REQUEST IN 1996.
HERE, WE SEE THE PROPOSED TENTATIVE MAP FOR THE SUBDIVISION WHICH COULD BE CONSIDERED SHOULD THE COMMISSION APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST.
THE SUBDIVISION PROPOSES TO DIVIDE ONE EXISTING PARCEL INTO TWO PARCELS, WITH THE TWO POTENTIAL PARCELS SEEN HERE OUTLINED IN BLUE AND RED.
THE CURRENT LAND USES OF THE PROPERTY WOULD NOT BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
THE EXISTING 8.5 ACRE PARCELS CURRENTLY SUBSTANDARD IN SIZE, AND THE CANAL THAT BISECTS THE PROPERTY ALREADY LIMITS LAND USES TO SUPPORT OPERATIONS.
THE VARIANCE REQUEST ADDRESSES THE 20 ACRE MINIMUM PARTIAL SIZE REQUIREMENT IN AREAS DESIGNATED AGRICULTURAL.
SHOULD THE VARIANCE REQUEST BE APPROVED PURSUANT TO THE PROCESS SET FORTH IN THE ZONING CODE AND BEING HEARD TODAY, THE PROJECT GIVES CONSISTENT WITH ALL APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CODE POLICIES.
STAFF HAS FOUND THAT NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENT REVIEWS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162, SUBSEQUENT EIRS AND NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES, AND THE ANALYSIS THAT HELPED MAKE THIS DETERMINATION CAN BE FOUND IN THE CEQA FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS PROVIDED AS AN ATTACHMENT TO THE STAFF REPORT AND APPLIES TO BOTH THE VARIANCE AND SUBDIVISION REQUEST.
NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE PROJECT SITE ON DECEMBER 31ST, 2020, AND PUBLISHED IN THE SUN-STAR ON JANUARY 1ST, 2021.
NO COMMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AS OF THIS MORNING.
THE MERCED COUNTY ZONING CODE, AS WELL AS THE GOVERNMENT CODE, BOTH REQUIRE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO MAKE THESE FINDINGS PART OF THE APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE, AND POTENTIAL JUSTIFICATION FOR THESE FINDINGS CAN BE FOUND IN THE STAFF REPORT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
SO WITH THAT, STAFF HAS SEVERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE COMMISSION.
STAFF FIRST RECOMMENDS THAT THE COMMISSION DETERMINE THAT NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENT REVIEWS REQUIRED.
STAFF THEN RECOMMENDS THAT THE COMMISSION MAKE EITHER OF THE FOLLOWING MOTIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE VARIANCE: EITHER THAT DETERMINE THAT THE PROJECT MEETS THE REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR VARIANCE AND APPROVE ZV20-002, OR DETERMINE THE PROJECT DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR VARIANCE AND DENY ZV20-002.
I'M GOING TO GO INTO THE NEXT SLIDE REAL QUICK TO SHOW THE POTENTIAL DETERMINATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION, AND THEN I'LL COME BACK TO THIS SLIDE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
SHOULD THE COMMISSION DENY THE VARIANCE REQUEST, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE COMMISSION TAKE NO ACTION ON THE MINOR SUBDIVISION.
IN THE CASE THE COMMISSION APPROVES THE VARIANCE, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE COMMISSION ALSO APPROVE MS20-018.
I'LL NOW GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS SLIDE FOR YOU TO MAKE A CEQA DETERMINATION AND CONSIDER THE VARIANCE, AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER THOSE AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU. IS ANYBODY, MEMBER WANT TO ASK QUESTIONS BEFORE WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE CAN ASK QUESTIONS AFTERWARDS, OR DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR BRODY RIGHT NOW?
>> THANK YOU, BRODY. AT THIS TIME, WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANY MEMBER FROM THE PUBLIC IS WELCOME TO COME SPEAK ON THIS ISSUE.
DUANE ANDREWS, I'M HERE WITH THE LANDOWNER, MR. PEREZ.
ALL I WANT TO DO IS ON PAGE 5 OF 9, THE FINDINGS FOR THE VARIANCE, AND AS I READ THOSE I'M THANKING STAFF BECAUSE THEY LAID IT OUT VERY NICELY.
I BELIEVE YOU CAN FIND AND CONSIDER THAT THESE JUSTIFY THE VARIANCE.
I'M HOPING YOU CAN DO THAT, APPROVE THE VARIANCE AND APPROVE THE MAP, AND I'D ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTION.
THAT CANAL IS 60 FEET WIDE, IT'S CONCRETE LINED, IT'S OWNED BY THE DISTRICT, SO IT DOES SEPARATE THE PARCELS VERY CLEARLY.
>> DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> WOULD ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC LIKE TO COME AND SPEAK ON THIS? SEEING NONE, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSIONERS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE. IS THERE A CEQA DETERMINATION MOTION THAT WOULD LIKE TO BE MADE? WHAT'S THE WILL OF THIS COMMISSION?
>> [NOISE] I'LL MOVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINES THAT NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS REQUIRED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162, SUBSEQUENT EIRS AND NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS OF THIS CEQA GUIDELINES [NOISE] BASED ON THE ANALYSIS OF
[00:15:02]
THE 2030 MERCED COUNTY GENERAL PLAN PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND THE ATTACHED CEQA SECTION 15162, FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS.>> IS THERE A SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ALL OPPOSED? PASSES. NOW FOR A PROJECT DETERMINATION.
>> I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINE THAT THE PROJECT MEETS THE REQUIRED FINDING FOR VARIANCE BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND THE STAFF REPORT, AND APPROVE ZONE VARIANCE APPLICATION NUMBER ZV20-002.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR?
>> CHAIR VOTES AYE. ALL OPPOSED? PASSES. MOVING ON.
>> WE NEED TO MAKE AN ACTION ON THE SUBDIVISION ITSELF, I BELIEVE.
>> OH, THERE WE GO. IT'S THE THIRD TIME A CHARM HERE.
SO NOW WE NEED TO MAKE A PROJECT DETERMINATION ON THE SUBDIVISION.
>> I WANT THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVES MINOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION NUMBER, MS20-018, BASED ON THE FINDINGS IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR?
>> CHAIR VOTES AYE. ARE WE ALL THE WAY THROUGH THIS ONE OR THIS IS [LAUGHTER] A TRIPLE HERE?
>> WE ARE. THANK YOU. MOVING ON.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN, NOTHING ADDITIONAL THIS TIME.
[8. DIRECTOR'S REPORT]
>> ONLY TO WISH EACH OF YOU A VERY HAPPY NEW YEAR, AND JUST AGAIN, ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO STAY SAFE AND KEEP THOSE WHO WERE NOT DOING WELL IN YOUR THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS.
>> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS? SEEING NONE, WE WILL MOVE FOR ADJOURNMENT. THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.