The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05/21/2020 Staff: Committee Members: Jacqui Kitchen, Assistant City Manager Councilmember, Bruce Freeman – Chair Councilmember, Bob Smith Councilmember, Willie Rivera Special Meeting of the Planning and Development Committee of the City Council – City of Bakersfield Thursday, May 21, 2020 12:00 p.m. City Hall North, First Floor, Conference Room A 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield CA 93301 A G E N D A 1. ROLL CALL 2. ADOPT OCTOBER 8, 2019 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 4. NEW BUSINESS A. Committee Discussion and Recommendation Regarding Landscaping in Commercial Parking Lots – Boyle/Johnson B. Committee Discussion and Recommendation Regarding Vacant Building Ordinance – Boyle/Burns C. Committee Discussion and Recommendation Regarding Short-term Rental Ordinance – Boyle D. Discussion and Committee Recommendation Regarding Adoption of the 2020 Committee Meeting Schedule – Kitchen 5. COMMITTEE COMMENTS 6. ADJOURNMENT Committee Members Staff: Jacqui Kitchen Councilmember, Bruce Freeman Chair Assistant City Manager Councilmember, Willie Rivera Councilmember, Bob Smith REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Tuesday, October 8, 2019 12:00 p.m. City Hall North – Conference Room A 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT The meeting was called to order at 12:00 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL Committee members present: Councilmember, Bruce Freeman, Chair Councilmember, Willie Rivera Councilmember, Bob Smith City Staff: Alan Tandy, City Manager Jacqui Kitchen, Assistant City Manager Brianna Carrier, Administrative Analyst III Nathan Gutierrez, Management Assistant Ginny Gennaro, City Attorney Richard Iger, Deputy City Attorney II Phil Burns, Interim Development Services Director Kevin Coyle, Development Services Planning Director Paul Johnson, Development Services Principal Planner Dianne Hoover, Recreation and Parks Director Fidel Gonzalez, Park Construction & Facilities Planner Nick Fidler, Public Works Director Stuart Patteson, Assistant Public Works Director Additional Attendees: Members of the Public 2. ADOPT AUGUST 13, 2019 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT The report was adopted as submitted. /S/ Jacqui Kitchen DRAFT S:\Council Committees\2019\Planning and Development\10_October Page 2 JK:pa:mc 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS Home Builders Association (HBA) representative Dave Dmohowski thanked staff and the Committee for their efforts to streamline and reduce the plan check and permitting processing time. Sikh Community member Nason Singh Kooner stated that additional time was needed to discuss the renaming of a park subject among the community. 4. NEW BUSINESS A. Committee Discussion and Recommendation Regarding a Park Naming Policy – Tandy/Kitchen City Manager Tandy provided a brief summary of the information provided in the packet regarding Park Naming & Re-Naming policy. Mr. Dmohowski stated that the HBA continues to support that a developer have the option to name a park during the new development process. Ingrid Henderson, a resident near Stonecreek Park, stated that she is opposed to having a future park named “JSK” as it would be biased to other religious groups and could be considered preferential treatment. Committee member Rivera inquired if it would be Council determination to name a future park in vacant land when there is no developer. Assistant City Manager Kitchen stated the proposed park naming policy exhibits can be updated to include such a scenario. Committee Chair Freemen suggestion the policy be broaden to include consideration of contributors who make major funding contributions for development of a park. Committee member Smith requested the term “component” replace the term “developer” within the policy. Committee Chair Freeman agreed. Committee Chair Freeman requested staff continue to research the topic to refine the proposed policy and present the information to the Committee at a future meeting. Committee members Rivera and Smith concurred. 5. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. Committee Discussion and Recommendations Regarding Commercial Retail Standards – Kitchen/Burns Planning Director Coyle provided a PowerPoint presentation summarizing the referral made by Councilmember Freeman at the April 10, 2019 City Council meeting regarding Commercial Retail Standards and the recommended ordinance updates referencing the memorandum included in the agenda packet. Scott Thayer with Castle & Cooke inquired about the recommendations for Section C Design Standards and whether they would be applicable to all commercial retails. DRAFT S:\Council Committees\2019\Planning and Development\10_October Page 3 JK:pa:mc Assistant City Manager Kitchen stated that the recommended changes are to avoid disproportionate impacts on smaller projects as not all categories are applicable to smaller sites. Parties may request a variation like a zone modification within the current process thru the Board of Zoning Adjustments (BZA). Committee member Smith made a motion to present the proposed amendments to the existing design standards for retail developments ordinance to the Planning Commission for a public hearing, then present it to the City Council. The motion was unanimously approved. B. Committee Discussion and Recommendation Regarding Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) – Kitchen/Burns Planning Director Coyle provided a PowerPoint presentation summarizing the referral made by Councilmember Freeman at the April 10, 2019, City Council meeting regarding ways to improve the CUPs process to clarify and ensure appropriate use of CUPs including developing requirements to use on-site signage to provide the public with notice of an application for a CUP. Committee Chair Freeman made a motion to present the proposed amendments to the existing CUPs ordinance to the Planning Commission for a public hearing, then present it to the City Council. The motion was unanimously approved. 6. COMMITTEE COMMENTS None 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 1:04 p.m. DRAFT MEMORANDUM May 21, 2020 TO: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Bruce Freeman, Chair Bob Smith Willie Rivera FROM: Christopher Boyle, Development Services Director SUBJECT: Landscaping in Commercial Parking Lots This item is in response to a referral from Councilman Freeman at the February 19, 2020 City Council meeting for staff to develop a policy that provides specific guidance for developers on landscaping in commercial parking lots when there are changes to an approved landscape plan. BACKGROUND Landscape Standards In May 1998, City Council adopted Chapter 17.61, Landscape Standards of the Zoning Ordinance. Although the standards have been revised over the years, the stated purpose in establishing criteria, standards, and limits for landscaping is to provide a transition between and mitigate conflicts which may arise between adjacent land uses, to promote an attractive visual harmony between the landscape and development, reduce air, noise and visual pollution, produce a healthy, vibrant, sustainable urban forest, decrease temperatures, increase comfort, and promote commerce and socialization, while promoting water use efficiency. Landscape Requirements ‐ New Projects New multi‐family, commercial, and industrial development projects are subject to the site plan approval process. This process allows City staff to review projects to ensure development is constructed in accordance with city ordinances and standards. As part of the submittal, a landscape plan shall be included which demonstrates the project complies with the requirements set out in the zoning ordinance or specific plan for the project area. Landscape Requirements ‐ Improvements to Existing Projects All projects for which site plan approval is required shall install and maintain landscaping in accordance with the landscape ordinance. However, the requirement shall not apply to projects where a current use is expanded and the valuation of the building permit is less than 50% of the replacement value of the existing improvements. If the existing uses are to be expanded greater than 50% of their replacement value, the Planning Director shall determine the amount and placement of landscaping needed. Landscape Requirements ‐ Tree Preservation and Protection Trees voluntarily removed from an existing project, except when necessary for the protection of public safety, property damage, etc., shall be replaced within 120 days of removal. Replacement must conform to the original intent of the landscape design and adhere to the state’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) to comply with mandating the Governor’s Executive Order for a 25% reduction in water use. Additionally, trees shall be replaced at the average size of what is or was existing not to exceed a 48‐inch box container size. Failure to replace existing trees shall be subject to the issuance of notices of violations, correction orders, citations, and any administrative remedies provided under the Municipal Code or applicable state law. STAFF ANALYSIS When existing landscaping on commercial sites is altered, it is typically for the following reasons: (a) accommodate improvements, for example carports or other similar structures; (b) resurface and reconfigure parking lot spaces; (c) upgrade landscaping with new lush trees; (d) downgrade landscaping with new drought resistant trees; and (e) willful removal of landscaping for various reasons. In response to the referral for commercial parking lots, the ordinance requires trees to be planted at a minimum ratio of 1 tree for each 6 parking spaces, but shall be sufficient to attain shading over 40% of the total area of all uncovered parking stalls, loading areas, drive aisles, and maneuvering areas. When improvements are proposed, Staff evaluates the plans to ensure they do not conflict with ordinance requirements (e.g., property setbacks, parking calculations, height requirements, etc.). Although landscaping is considered, there is no requirement to submit a new landscape plan. RECOMMENDATION As noted above, Staff received direction to develop a policy that provides specific guidance for developers on landscaping in commercial parking lots when there are changes to an approved landscape plan. Based on the analysis performed, Staff recommends amending Section 17.61.020 to require review and approval of a revised landscape plan when the approved landscape/irrigation plan is substantially modified. Substantial modification in this section means a change in the character or quantity of the plant material or irrigation that equals or exceeds one hundred square feet of landscape area. To provide specific guidance, the revised landscape plan would require the following (see Attachment A for complete list of changes):  Preparation by a landscape design professional  Description of the new landscaping and how it complies with the ordinance  Detailed summary of landscaping removed  Location of where replacement landscaping will be placed on site  Shade calculations confirming attainment of shading requirements  Identification of any existing missing/underperforming landscaping on site  Trees removed as part of a revised landscape plan shall be replaced on a 1‐to‐1 basis, with few exceptions NEXT STEPS Present draft text amendments to the Planning Commission for a public hearing at an upcoming regularly scheduled meeting, then present to Council. Attachment A: Ordinance REDLINE -- Page 1 of 4 Pages – BMC Section 17.61.020 - Landscape ORDINANCE NO. _____________ ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 17.61.020 OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Bakersfield as follows: SECTION 1. Section 17.61.020 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 17.61.020 Landscaping Required. A. All projects for which site plan approval is required shall install and maintain landscaping in accordance with the requirements of this chapter; provided, however, these landscape requirements shall not apply to projects where a current use is expanded and the valuation of the building permit is less than fifty percent of the replacement value of the existing improvements. If the existing uses are to be expanded greater than fifty percent of their replacement value, the planning director, or designee, shall determine the amount and placement of landscaping needed to comply with this section. B. Occupancy of a use subject to these standards shall not be permitted until the approved landscaping and irrigation has been installed, or if permitted by the planning director, an agreement and/or surety bond or cash deposit sufficient to cover the cost of installation, which amount has been determined to complete the work plus administration costs by the city, and such has been provided to the city specifying completion of installation within a time specified by the planning director. C. An approved landscape plan for commercial improvement projects must be revised if the landscape/irrigation is substantially modified. Substantial modification in this section means a change in the character or quantity of the plant material or irrigation that equals or exceeds one hundred square feet of landscape area. 1. A revised landscape plan under this section shall be prepared by a landscape design professional and include all of the following: a. A description of the new landscaping and how it complies with the ordinance; REDLINE -- Page 2 of 4 Pages – BMC Section 17.61.020 - Landscape b. A detailed summary of landscaping removed; c. The location of where replacement landscaping will be placed on site; d. Shade calculations confirming attainment of shading requirements; and e. Identification of any existing missing or underperforming landscaping on site. 2. Trees removed as part of a revised landscape plan shall be replaced on a 1-to-1 basis unless: a. It would be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or to property or residents in the area; or b. Special physical circumstances exist limiting additional landscaping of a particular property. 3. No building permit(s) shall be issued or installation of landscaping shall occur, prior to approval of the revised landscape plan by the planning director or designee. All landscaping shall be installed per the approved plans within 120 days of submittal of the revised landscape plan or as otherwise approved by the planning director or designee. SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall be posted in accordance with the provisions of the Bakersfield Municipal Code and shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. ---------o0o---------- REDLINE -- Page 3 of 4 Pages – BMC Section 17.61.020 - Landscape I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance was passed and adopted, by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on _____________________________ by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBER: RIVERA, GONZALES, WEIR, SMITH, FREEMAN, SULLIVAN, PARLIER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER: _______________________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER: _______________________________________________________________ ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER: _______________________________________________________________ _ ______________________________________ JULIE DRIMAKIS, CMC CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the Council of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED: By: ______________________________ KAREN GOH Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: VIRGINIA GENNARO City Attorney By: ___________________________ VIRIDIANA GALLARDO-KING Deputy City Attorney REDLINE -- Page 4 of 4 Pages – BMC Section 17.61.020 - Landscape VKG/vlg S:\COUNCIL\Ords\19-20\17.61.020 (Landscape Ord).Rdln.DOCX MEMORANDUM May 11, 2020 TO: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Bruce Freeman, Chair Bob Smith Willie Rivera FROM: Phil Burns, Building Director THRU: Christopher Boyle, Development Services Director SUBJECT: Vacant Building Ordinance This item is in response to a referral made by Councilmember Gonzales at the February 19, 2020 Council meeting. Background At the February 19, 2020 City Council meeting, Councilmember Gonzales requested that Sacramento’s Municipal Code regarding vacant buildings be discussed in the Planning and Development Committee. Staff has made several attempts to contact Sacramento and other jurisdictions regarding Vacant Building Ordinances. However, due to the COVID‐19 pandemic, we have been unable to speak to anyone regarding the topic. Staff has reviewed various ordinances, including Sacramento’s vacant building ordinance, and have summarized findings herein. Vacant Building Ordinances are intended to address the public nuisance, blight, and maintenance issues that arise from vacant properties that are not effectively kept up to City Standards. Vacant Building Ordinances address the following concerns as they pertain to vacant or abandoned buildings:  Mandates the owner register the building with the Building Division and post signage on the structure identifying points of contact.  Requires the owner to maintain the grounds and the exterior and interior of the building secured in good condition.  Provides that a property in violation of the requirements is a public nuisance; and  Establishes an annual registration fee. Penalties for non‐compliance typically include:  Non‐registration fine  Inspection fees ($400)  1st violation fine ($1000)  Subsequent violation fine ($5000 for every 30 days for every subsequent violation)  Abatement costs based on time and material  General administrative or civil penalties Typically, these ordinances impose a registration requirement upon the property owner along with fees so that Code Enforcement officers can monitor the property. In most cases, the jurisdiction places the responsibility for maintenance and security on the property owner, while the city or county performs periodic inspections and administers penalties for non‐compliance. Staff has made several attempts to contact other jurisdictions regarding Vacant Building Ordinances to discuss issues like successes, percent compliance and how they have handled non‐compliant property owners. However, due to the COVID‐19 pandemic, staff has been unable to speak to anyone regarding the topic. Staff Analysis The issue of vacant buildings on residents’ property is currently addressed by Code Enforcement via two methods. First, Code Enforcement maintains a list of substandard buildings, and conducts periodic inspections to verify status and determine if the nuisance has been abated. These inspections are prioritized based on citizen complaints and proximity to known areas of high transient populations. Second, beyond approximately quarterly inspections, vacant buildings are addressed upon receipt of citizen complaints regarding maintenance or requests to board up a structure by the Bakersfield Police Department. This leads to additional time and public funds being spent on blighted buildings. Vacant buildings within neighborhoods can lead to increased illegal activity and potentially decreased property values. Current Codes The Bakersfield Municipal Code (BMC) addresses Property Maintenance in depth, but does not clearly define or specifically address City oversight of vacant buildings. Chapter 8.27 defines public nuisances based on the follow:  Unsecured doorway, window, or other opening  Broken window  Overgrown, dead, decayed, or hazardous trees, weeds, and other vegetation  Building exterior, wall, fence, driveway, sidewalk, or walkway in a state of disrepair or deterioration  Lumber, junk, trash, debris, or salvage materials visible to the general public  Abandoned or discarded furniture, appliances, fixtures, or equipment visible to the general public These code sections require vacant buildings to be secured, but many of these properties are not sufficiently maintained on a regular basis by the property owner. We do have many properties where the property owners are unresponsive and in some cases properties have not went through a probate to establish a current owner. These properties do continually require Code Enforcement inspections to board up the building or address other maintenance violations such as occupied by transient. Current Tools In addition to Chapter 8.27, the BMC addresses public nuisance properties in Chapter 8.80. Under this chapter, the City outlines procedures for Code Enforcement to cite, remedy, and penalize property owners who do not maintain their property as required by law. This includes the following:  Formal administrative process (BMC 8.80) o Correction Notice o Re‐inspection o Hearing o Abatement (possible warrant required) o Lien  Admin Citation (BMC 140.020) o $1,000 Fine –must be paid within 30 days o Hearing – if requested within 30 days of request o Non‐payment requires civil remedy against person in small claims court  Injunctions and civil penalties o Requires City Attorney’s Office to file suit against property owner o $1000 per day such conditions continue o May be long process as time frame tied to court process  Criminal violations o Misdemeanors o Infractions It is important to note that only one admin process may be used at a time for the exact same violation. We could not process both a formal administrative process and admin citation for overgrown weeds and debris, etc. Ordinances relating to Vacant Buildings of the 13 comparable cities, Sacramento, and Chula Vista were reviewed and summarized by staff as depicted in Exhibit A. The City of Bakersfield’s ordinance does not currently include a vacant building registration for specific properties to be monitored by Code Enforcement as a formal fee required process. Considerations Currently, the City has the processes and tools in place which are sufficient to address unmaintained vacant buildings that become a public nuisance. In comparison to ordinances like that of Sacramento, the main distinctions are: 1) require registration, 2) require monthly inspections and 3) tiered administrative fees/fines in lieu of the City abating the nuisance. In order to implement an ordinance like Sacramento’s to address vacant buildings throughout the City, Code Enforcement would require additional personnel for intake, inspections, and to process these properties. Staff would need to evaluate resource needs depending on the scope of a proposed program, for instance frequency of inspections and overall volume of vacant buildings. We believe, a full‐time Clerk/Typist position would be required to intake and process registrations and payments, as well as maintain files as required for proper records management. Most likely, two additional full‐time Code Enforcement Officers would be required to inspect properties, initiate abatement, and process legal proceedings. The need could be greater. This would require an additional commitment of at least $250,000 annually in order to initiate a vacant buildings program within the City. This would in essence establish dedicated Code Enforcement team to be proactive in monitoring these sites. A Vacant Building Ordinance utilizes administrative fines to motivate compliance and tiered up fines where properties do not comply. This means the properties in this program would not utilize the current admin process to abate the public nuisance and would sit, becoming more of an eyesore as time passes while fines go up. This is a significant change from past process. It should be stressed that some properties may get extremely unpleasant. If there is failure to pay the fines, again this would take a court process. Code Enforcement receives many complaints regarding maintenance of private property. Serial offenders account for a large portion of the Municipal Code Violations in the City. There are sufficient tools within the BMC to address properties that become a public nuisance. Staff needs to understand what the committee desires to accomplish to determine an approach and process to get there. Potential Staff Direction: 1. Perform additional research and make contact with multiples jurisdiction that have vacant building ordinances to discuss best practices, failures, and suggestions. Bring additional information from other cities to a future meeting. 2. Explore increasing administrative penalties associated with vacant buildings. Possibly adding additional language related unmaintained vacant buildings. This could be a hybrid approach of using the BMC Chapter 8.80 process to abate the nuisance and issuance of an administrative citation for the continued allowance of unmaintained vacant building. 3. Draft a Vacant Building Ordinance including required staffing for discussion at a future meeting. MEMORANDUM May 21, 2020 TO: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Bruce Freeman, Chair Bob Smith Willie Rivera FROM: Christopher Boyle, Development Services Director SUBJECT: Short Term Rental Ordinance This memo is prepared in response to a referral from Council member Gonzales at the March 11, 2020 City Council meeting for staff to provide information on adoption of a vacation rental ordinance. This memorandum will discuss the topic from two perspectives. It will first review the individual components typical to an ordinance governing short term rentals within residential districts of a municipality, Secondly, the memo will discuss available contract services which are designed to support the implementation and enforcement of the ordinance. ANALYSIS Background Vacation or "short term" rentals ("STRs") have been a growing staple of the tourism economy, providing an alternative from traditional hotel/motel room lodgings for travelers. Although STRs technically include a hotel room or other traditional form of overnight accommodation, the term "STR" is now usually linked to short‐term stays within homes in residential areas of communities, including apartments, condominiums, single family homes, and accessory dwelling units. The common denominator is the rental is for thirty days or less. The difference is that whereas hotels are usually permitted uses within the zones they are allowed, STRs are often not permitted within residentially zoned areas of a community, which are anticipated to provide for more permanent forms of residency. With the advent of online booking engines such as VRBO, AirBnB and HomeAway, among hundreds of others, it has become easier for property owners to list a house, condo, or apartment as a STR and manage that rental without support from more traditional property management companies. These online booking engines have also made it easier to search and book STRs. STRs can be second homes that are used by the owner during a portion of the year, investment properties without a permanent owner‐occupant at any time, or rooms or portions of homes rented by the owner‐occupant to make ends meet. The increase in STR activity, especially in residential neighborhoods, has created challenges across the country. Issues ranging from noise, trash and parking to a decline in available long‐term housing options are regularly cited by residents in impacted communities. Across the State of California and the United States, counties and cities are attempting to strike a balance between regulating STRs to address neighborhood compatibility and environmental concerns while recognizing property owner rights. Resort communities in particular are attempting to find that balance while also acknowledging the role that tourism economy and revenue plays in particularly the smaller resort communities. STRs can generate millions of dollars in Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenue along with substantial accompanying permitting fees. Ordinance Considerations The main concerns with any land use regulation are: reasonableness and effective enforceability. Staff has begun to review other municipalities that regulate STR's. Due to time constraints, a reliance on previous analysis of California Counties is provided below. It is by no means exhaustive. Over 100 California municipalities currently have STR ordinances in place, including some comparable cites. Staff will continue to gather information. As illustrated in table below, there are distinct similarities in regulatory approaches. Ordinance Characteristics El Dorado County Douglas County Marin County San Bernardino County Butte County Sonoma County Riverside County Alpine County Permit Required XX XXXXX 300 ft. notice of permit issuance XX Bedroom & Occupant Requirements X XXXX Exterior Sign Posting of STR X X Internet advertisement of STR must include permit number XXXXX Permit, Permit conditions and emergency contact information posted XXXXXXXX TOT Certificate Required XXXXXXXX Local 24 hr. contact XX XXXX Application Fee XX XX XX Annual renewal X XXX Parking Restrictions XXX XX X Noise Regulations X X X XXX X Trash/Bear Bin or Animal Proof XXXXXXX Requirements Violation ‐XXXX Suspension or revocation Violation ‐ Nuisance Abatement XX X X Violation ‐ Fines XX X Vi olation ‐ Misdemeanor (including occupant(s))XX X X The table demonstrates specific commonalities in STR ordinances, including: • Separate permit required in addition to Transient Occupancy Tax certificate. • Renewal of permit required. • Imposition of parking and trash regulations. • Imposition of noise standards or guidelines. • Posting of rules/regulations of permit and emergency contact information. • Requirement for a local 24‐hour contact. • Occupancy limits. • Methodologies for enforcement and associated penalties. As to enforcement, the ordinances range from administrative citations, nuisance abatement proceedings to the "3 Strike Rule" (3 verifiable violations during a prescribed period of time and consequences to permit occur). Almost every ordinance reviewed to date charges a fee for the permit, thus allowing potential cost recovery of administration of the permit program. Code enforcement already has cost recovery provisions available. The review of other municipalities also revealed that the Finance Department is not the department/division that is charged with administering or enforcing the permit program. In most cases, the department charged with these duties is the equivalent of Development Services. This is logical because the TOT ordinance addresses taxation and revenue and most if not all the above permitting regulations fall logically within building and zoning codes. Here in Bakersfield, Development Services is the logical choice for a permitting program as it has the expertise to provide permit issuance via the Planning Division and can also regulate and enforce the ordinance via the Code Enforcement Division. Additionally, the TOT taxation program is vastly different in scope than a land use permitting program. It is not advisable to merge them and, as a result, staff does not recommend that the TOT ordinance be amended to include land use regulatory permits or enforcement. A bridge can be provided in the land use regulatory ordinance to ensure compliance with the TOT ordinance. Available Contract Services If the City Council wished to pursue an STR program where staff researches and identifies STRs, adopts an ordinance, does outreach to those properties being used as STRs, and formulates and implements a system of regulation and tax collection for STRs, a significant investment in staff will be required. This memorandum does not fully analyze exactly how much staff would be required, but to operate an in‐house program would require multiple additional staff members added throughout the process. Staff has the expertise and manpower to prepare an ordinance for consideration of adoption, but the overall implementation and management of the program over time is not currently in place. Additional enforcement personnel would most probably be required. An alternative approach would be to utilize contracted services to implement, manage and maintain the bulk of the requirements necessary for establishing a functional and successful STR program. Staff has completed preliminary dialogue with two firms whose expertise is providing STR support services to municipalities. Those services are scalable per the desires of the municipality, and usually follow the following tiers of service: 1. Short Term Rental Detection and Monitoring – The contracted firm would research all available Bakersfield short‐term rental ad listings posted on all of the various STR sites and verify their status as STRs. The contracted firm would then connect the ad listings to property record data, and determine compliance with adopted code and the properties registration status. These listing would be maintained and updated as necessary. All aspects of the system and the databases would be accessible online by Bakersfield staff with unlimited licenses. 2. STR Property Notification and Reconciliation – The contracted firm would then notify noncompliant STRs and educate as to the STR rules for the City. If the property owner wished to continue utilizing the property as an STR, they would be directed to secure the required permit and then access an online registration process with the contracted service. The system would also provide automated notifications and annual license renewal to permit holders. 3. STR Tax Collection System – The contracted firm would then also manage an online TOT remittance to be forwarded to the City. An auditing tool to leverage captured booking data in comparison to tax collection data would be utilized so as to assess overall program compliance. The contract firm also typically provides a Complaint Hotline, a 24/7 bilingual complaint phone hotline and online complaint reporting system that would serve as an additional code compliance tool. Again, the City would have access to all aspects of the system. A preliminary quote from one STR firm included startup costs of approximately $6,000, with annual contracts of approximately $21,000. STR specialized service firms advertise a greater than 90 percent compliance rate within a year or less. The Code Enforcement Division would be tasked with responding to the remaining unregistered and unpermitted STRs in an effort to attain full compliance with the STR ordinance. RECOMMENDATION As noted above, staff received direction to provide information on adoption of a vacation rental ordinance. After digestion of the information above, if the Council wishes to move forward at this time, staff recommends: 1. The preparation of an ordinance for consideration of adoption by the City Council. 2. The release of an RFP to secure outside services to implement and manage the aforementioned ordinance. 3. An analysis of staff requirements necessary, dependent upon the contractual obligations of the selected agency/firm, in successfully implementing the STR ordinance. The Committee may provide alternative direction to staff as it deems appropriate. NEXT STEPS Provide staff direction. Attachment A: Sample Ordinance from San Bernardino County Attachment B: Sample Ordinance from City of Pasadena (with brochure) Planning and Development Committee Calendar January 2020 Through December 2020 All meetings will be held at City Hall North, First Floor, Conference Room A Approved: DRAFT Planning and Devlopement Committee Meetings 12:00 p.m.3:30 Closed Session 5:15 p.m. Public Session Budget Hearing: 06/10, Budget Adoption: 6/24 Holidays - City Hall Closed May 27th @9:00 am, June 8th @ 12:00 p.m. SMTWTHF S SMTWTHF S SMTWTHFS 1234 1 1234567 567891011 2345678 891011121314 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 26 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 29 30 31 SMTWTHF S SMTWTHF S SMTWTHFS 1234 12 123456 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 3456789 78910111213 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 26 27 28 29 30 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 28 29 30 31 SMTWTHF S SMTWTHF S SMTWTHFS 1234 1 12345 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2345678 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9101112131415 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 26 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 27 28 29 30 30 31 SMTWTHF S SMTWTHF S SMTWTHFS 123 1234567 12345 4 5 6 7 8 910 8 91011121314 6 7 8 9101112 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 13 14 15 16 17 128 19 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 29 30 27 28 29 30 31 League of California Cities Mayors and Council Members Executive Forum - CANCELED League of California Cities Annual Conference - October 7 - 9, 2020 APRIL MAY JUNE City Council Meetings Budget Departmental Workshop JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER Landscaping in Commercial Parking Lots May 21, 2020 Planning & Development Committee Landscape Standards -General Ordinance •1998 -Chapter 17.61 Landscape Standards Purpose •Provide transition and mitigate conflicts between adjacent land uses •Promote attractive visual harmony between the landscape and development •Reduce air, noise and visual pollution; decrease temperatures •Promote water use efficiency Landscape Standards -New Projects Multi-Family, Commercial, Industrial Projects •Subject to formal Site Plan Review (SPR) SPR Process •Development is constructed in accordance with city ordinances and standards -landscape plan Landscape Plan (Parking Lots) •Ratio of 1 tree for each 6 parking spaces •Attain shading over 40% of the total area of all uncovered parking stalls, drive aisles, loading areas Landscape Standards -Improvements Improvements to Existing Projects that Require SPR •Where a current use is expanded and the valuation of the building permit is <50% of the replacement value of the existing improvements o No landscape review is required •Where a current use is expanded and the valuation is >50% of their replacement value o Planning Director determines the amount and placement of landscaping needed Landscape Alterations Alterations to Existing Landscaping •Tree preservation and protection o Replaced within 120 days of removal o Average size of what was existing, 48-inch box •Common reasons for alterations o ADA compliance, carports o Resurface and reconfigure parking lots o Upgrade landscaping with new lush trees o Downgrade landscaping with new drought resistant trees Next Steps Referral •Develop Policy that provides specific guidance to developers on landscaping in commercial parking lots when there are changes to an approved landscape plan Next Steps Policy •Review/approval of a revised landscape plan when substantial modifications proposed •Substantial modification = a change in the character or quantity of the plant material that equals or exceeds 100 SF of landscape area Specific Guidance •Prepared by a landscape design professional •Show shade calculations •Identify missing/underperforming landscaping •Trees removed shall be replaced on a 1-to-1 basis Next Steps Questions Planning and Development Committee –May 21, 2020 City Council Referral (Ward 2) City Council Committee Meeting Planning & Development Vacant Building Ordinance Background Background At the February 19,2020 City Council meeting,Council Member Gonzales requested that Sacramento’s Municipal Code regarding vacant buildings be discussed in the Planning and Development Committee. VBO Purpose What is a the purpose of a Vacant Building Ordinance ? Vacant Building Ordinances are intended to address the public nuisance,blight,and maintenance issues that arise from vacant properties that are not effectively kept up to City Standards. Define a vacant building -Unoccupied for period of time (varies 10-45 days)or not legally able to occupy. Typically,these ordinances impose a registration requirement upon the property owner along with fees so that Code Enforcement officers can monitor the property. Vacant Building Ordinance What is a Vacant Building Ordinance? Vacant Building Ordinances address the following concerns as they pertain to vacant or abandoned buildings: •Mandates the owner register the building and post signage identifying points of contact. •Requires the owner to maintain the grounds, exterior and interior of the building including secured in good condition. •Establishes that a property in violation of the requirements is a public nuisance •Establishes a registration fee and tiered penalties for non- compliance. VBO Structure Vacant Building Ordinance Structure Registration and Penalties for non-compliance typically include: •Annual or Monthly Registration ($305 Monthly) •Non-registration fine •Inspection fees ($400 each time called out) •1st violation fine ($1000 for 1st 30 days) •Subsequent violation fine (Up to $5000 for every 30 days for every subsequent violation) (Sacramento’s requirements for reference) Current Regulations Bakersfield Current Codes Bakersfield Municipal Code (BMC) addresses Property maintenance in depth but does not define or specifically address a vacant building. Some common property maintenance are: •Unsecured doorway, window, or other opening •Broken window •Overgrown, dead, decayed, or hazardous trees, weeds, and other vegetation •Building exterior, wall, fence, driveway, sidewalk, or walkway in a state of disrepair or deterioration •Lumber, junk, trash, debris, or salvage materials visible to the general public •Abandoned or discarded furniture, appliances, fixtures, or eq. Current Tools Current Codes Tools Bakersfield Municipal Code (BMC) provide Code Enforcement Officer several tools to addresses public nuisance issues: •Formal administrative process (BMC 8.80) •Correction Notice •Hearing •Abatement (possible warrant required) •Lien •Admin Citation (BMC 140.020) •$1,000 Fine –must be paid within 30 days •Hearing –if requested within 30 days of request •Non-payment requires civil remedy against person in small claims court Current Tools Current Codes Tools –Cont. Tools Cont.: •Injunctions and civil penalties •Requires City Attorney’s Office to file suit against property owner •$1000 per day such conditions continue •May be long process as time frame tied to court process •Criminal violations •Misdemeanors •Infractions It is important to note that only one admin process may be used at a time for the exact same violation. Example Vacant Buildings Examples of Vacant Buildings Vacant Buildings Some Various Situations Encountered Considerations Considerations for a Vacant Building Ordinance •What is the goal of the ordinance? •Residential •Commercial •Do we need a registration program? •This would require additional staff to operate program (Staffing level would vary depending on volume of vacant buildings and required frequency of inspections) •What happens to a property if they are non-responsive? •We are aware of some residential properties that are tied up in probate issues. Potential Staff Direction Potential Staff Direction •Perform additional research and make contact with multiple jurisdictions. Bring additional information to a future meeting. •Explore increasing administrative penalties associated with vacant buildings. Possibly adding additional language related unmaintained vacant buildings. •Draft a Vacant Building Ordinance including required staffing needs for discussion at a future meeting. Next Steps Questions and Direction End Planning and Development Committee –May 21, 2020 City Council Referral (Ward 2) City Council Committee Meeting Planning & Development Short Term Rental Ordinances: A Discussion Background Background Background Background Background Background Overview of Bakersfield * Source: HostCompliance Overview of Bakersfield Source: HostCompliance Overview of Bakersfield Source: HostCompliance Overview of Bakersfield Source: HostCompliance Background Background Current Conditions As defined in 3.40.10…. A.“Hotel” means any public or private hotel, inn, hostelry, tourist home or house, motel, roominghouse or other lodging place within the city offering lodging, wherein the owner and operator thereof, for compensation, furnishes lodging to any transient as defined in subsection E of this section. Since Hotels are not allowed in residential zones, once discovered, STRs receive a letter requesting the discontinuance of illegal activities. Ordinance Requirements In order to allow a “hotel” in a residential zone, the first step would be amendment of the Municipal Code to address and permit STRs. Over 100 municipalities have STR ordinances in California alone. Permit Required 300 ft. notice of permit issuance Bedroom & Occupant Requirements Exterior Sign Posting of STR Internet advertisement of STR Permit, Emergency contact information posted TOT Certificate Required Local 24 hr. contact Application Fee and Annual renewals Parking Restrictions Noise Regulations Trash/Bear Bin or Animal Proof Requirements Violation Suspension or revocation Violation -Nuisance Abatement and Fines Ordinance Requirements If the City adopts an ordinance allowing for STRs, then . . . The City will need to enforce the ordinance. Difficult to achieve and potentially costly. Many cities use contract services because of the difficulties in achieving compliance. Contract Services Contract Services Contract Services Short Term Rental Detection and Monitoring STR Property Notification and Reconciliation STR Tax Collection System Even provide a Complaint Hotline to assist in on-the-ground Code Enforcement efforts. Costs are typically scaled to number of STRs to promote ROI. Next Steps Staff received direction to provide information on adoption of a vacation rental ordinance. If the Council wishes to move forward at this time, staff recommends: •preparation of an ordinance for consideration of adoption by the City Council. •release of an RFP to secure outside services to implement/manage the ordinance. •analysis of staff requirements necessary to successfully implement the ordinance. The Committee may provide alternative direction to staff as it deems appropriate. End Definition "Vacant Building"Registration Fee Penalty for Non- Registration Penalty for violating maintenance/security requirements Bakersfield A structure that is not occupied or that is not legally occupied due to substandard condition. N/A N/A Vacant structures that do not comply with Chapter 8.27 Property Maintenance Requirements result in punishment as set forth in general penalty provision Section 1.40.010. Sacramento The Sacramento Municipal Code outlines registration and maintenance of Vacant Buildings and Structures in Chapter 15.52. This applies to commercial buildings that are unoccupied for more than 45 days and residential buildings that are unoccupied for more than 10 days. $305 + $400 each time an inspector is called to the site. N/A $1000 for first violation; and up to $5000 for every 30 days for every subsequent violation. Chula Vista (Note: residential properties only) "Vacant" means a building/structure that is not legally occupied.$70 N/A Administrative citation, civil penalties, or liens for city abatement of nuisance. Fresno Buildings expected to be unoccupied for at least 30 days.No fee.$250/month for non- registration Non-compliance, or failure by the property owner to comply with each of the standards set forth throughout the ordinance within eighteen (18) days of notification is a separate violation of this code and subject to penalties or legal action. Riverside For purposes of this title, the term "vacant building" means any structure or building that is unoccupied or occupied by unauthorized persons whether or not it is unsecured or boarded. N/A N/A Administrative penalties or liens for city abatement of nuisance. Stockton “Vacant” means any building or structure that is unoccupied or occupied by unauthorized persons whether or not it is secured or boarded. N/A N/A A violation of this chapter shall be treated as a strict liability offense regardless of intent. Any person, firm, or corporation that violates any provision of this chapter shall be subject to prosecution and administrative enforcement, in accordance with the provisions of Title 1. San Bernardino San Bernardino Municipal Code dictiates exterior and interior maintenance requirements for signle family residences, multi- family residential, commercial and industrial property in Chapter 15.24. N/A N/A Any person who violates or causes violation of any provision of this Chapter shall be deemed guily of an infration, which upon conviction thereof is punishable in accordance with the provisions of Section 1.12.010 of this Code. Modesto "Vacant building" means an unoccupied or an illegally occupied structure or an occupied structure without adequate facilities/utilities. $214 N/A Civil or administrative penalties for public nuisance Oxnard The Oxnard Municipal Code dictates property conservation requirements in Article IX. N/A N/A Administrative penalties or liens for city abatement of attractive nuisance. Ontario "Vacant" means a building of structure that is not legally occupied.$209 N/A Violations of this chapter shall be treated as a strict liability offense regardless of intent. Any person that violates any portion of this chapter shall be subject to enforcement and fines as provided in Chapter 1.2. Fremont The Fremont Municipal Code dictates neighborhood preservation requirements in Chapter 8.60. N/A N/A Administrative penalties or liens for city abatement of public nuisance. Glendale The Glendale Municipal Code dictates requirements for the abatement of public nuisances in Chapter 8.30. N/A N/A Administrative penalties or liens for public nuisance. Pasadena The Pasadena Municipal Code dictates requirements for mainenance and registration of vacant buildings and lots in Chapter 14.70. $356 N/A Administrative penalties or liens for city abatement of nuisance. County of Kern "Vacant" property mean any property, including any buildings and/or structure theron that is not legally occupied. $152 N/A Administrative penalties or liens for county abatement of nuisance. County of Tulare The Tulare County Code or Ordinances dictates requirements for the abatement of public nuisances in Chapter 1.1. N/A N/A Administrative penalties or liens for county abatement of nuisance. County of Fresno The Fresno County Code or Ordinances dictates requirements for the abatement of public nuisances in Chapter 15.32. N/A N/A Administrative penalties or liens for county abatement of nuisance. Summary of Comparable Cities - Vacant Building Ordinance Exhibit A Page 1 of 1 Michelle Cruz From:Viridiana Gallardo-King Sent:Wednesday, May 20, 2020 3:04 PM To:Michelle Cruz Cc:Lena R. Legge; Julie Drimakis; Pilar Avalos; Jacqui Kitchen Subject:FW: 7 cars parked at Air/B&B Attachments:20200519_180203_resized.jpg Mr. Kloth sent pictures; if you can also attach these and the message below to tomorrow’s item 4(c). Thanks Viridiana Gallardo-King Deputy City Attorney City Attorney of Bakersfield 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor Bakersfield, CA 93301 (661)326-3633 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail/transmission is intended to be sent only to the recipient stated therein.This e- mail/transmission is confidential and also may be legally privileged or protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine, and also may be restricted from disclosure by applicable state and federal law. Any copying, disclosure, distribution, review or use of this e-mail/transmission by other than the intended recipient or that person's agent is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail/transmission in error, please notify the sender, and immediately permanently delete or destroy this e-mail/transmission, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media, and destroy any printouts of the e-mail/transmission. No attorney-client relationship is created by the act of sending or receiving this message outside of a written agreement. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any tax advice contained in this e-mail/transmission, including any attachments, was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of: (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code; or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. From: btkloth@bak.rr.com <btkloth@bak.rr.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 2:48 PM To: Viridiana Gallardo‐King <vking@bakersfieldcity.us> Subject: FW: 7 cars parked at Air/B&B Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Bakersfield. Think before you click! Ms, King. Once again good afternoon. This is a picture I took late yesterday afternoon ‐ after 6 pm. There are 7 cars parked at the multiple tenant housing/ hotel/ Air B & B. This number of cars/ individuals are always present after 5 in the evening. Thanks, Terry. ----------------------------------------- From: "Terry Kloth" To: "btkloth@bak.rr.com" Cc: Sent: Wednesday May 20 2020 5:39:48PM Subject: 7 cars parked at Air/B&B Sent from my MetroPCS 4G LTE Android device Michelle Cruz From:Viridiana Gallardo-King Sent:Wednesday, May 20, 2020 3:05 PM To:Michelle Cruz Cc:Julie Drimakis; Jacqui Kitchen; Pilar Avalos; Lena R. Legge Subject:FW: 7 cars one not visible on curb Attachments:20200519_180140_resized.jpg Another one for item 4(C) for tomorrow’s planning and development committee meeting. Viridiana Gallardo-King Deputy City Attorney City Attorney of Bakersfield 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor Bakersfield, CA 93301 (661)326-3633 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail/transmission is intended to be sent only to the recipient stated therein.This e- mail/transmission is confidential and also may be legally privileged or protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine, and also may be restricted from disclosure by applicable state and federal law. Any copying, disclosure, distribution, review or use of this e-mail/transmission by other than the intended recipient or that person's agent is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail/transmission in error, please notify the sender, and immediately permanently delete or destroy this e-mail/transmission, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media, and destroy any printouts of the e-mail/transmission. No attorney-client relationship is created by the act of sending or receiving this message outside of a written agreement. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any tax advice contained in this e-mail/transmission, including any attachments, was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of: (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code; or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. From: btkloth@bak.rr.com <btkloth@bak.rr.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 2:56 PM To: Viridiana Gallardo‐King <vking@bakersfieldcity.us> Subject: FW: 7 cars one not visible on curb Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Bakersfield. Think before you click! Ms, King. One more picture of the cars/ vehicles parked at the multiple tenant housing/ hotel/ Air B &B. The car along the curb is not visible at this angle. But have counted as many as 8 cars associated with this unit. Thanks, Terry. ----------------------------------------- From: "Terry Kloth" To: "btkloth@bak.rr.com" Cc: Sent: Wednesday May 20 2020 5:50:25PM Subject: 7 cars one not visible on curb Michelle Cruz From:Viridiana Gallardo-King Sent:Wednesday, May 20, 2020 1:20 PM To:Michelle Cruz Cc:Lena R. Legge; Pilar Avalos; Jacqui Kitchen Subject:Planning and Development Committee Meeting Agenda Packet Importance:High Good Afternoon Michelle: I have the following comment regarding the short term rental ordinance (item 4(C)) for the Planning and Development Committee meeting tomorrow. If you can please work with the City Clerk’s office and make sure the committee members receive a copy prior to the meeting. Thank you Viridiana Gallardo-King Deputy City Attorney City Attorney of Bakersfield 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor Bakersfield, CA 93301 (661)326-3633 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail/transmission is intended to be sent only to the recipient stated therein.This e- mail/transmission is confidential and also may be legally privileged or protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine, and also may be restricted from disclosure by applicable state and federal law. Any copying, disclosure, distribution, review or use of this e-mail/transmission by other than the intended recipient or that person's agent is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail/transmission in error, please notify the sender, and immediately permanently delete or destroy this e-mail/transmission, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media, and destroy any printouts of the e-mail/transmission. No attorney-client relationship is created by the act of sending or receiving this message outside of a written agreement. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any tax advice contained in this e-mail/transmission, including any attachments, was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of: (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code; or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. From: btkloth@bak.rr.com <btkloth@bak.rr.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 11:26 AM To: Viridiana Gallardo‐King <vking@bakersfieldcity.us> Subject: RE: Planning and Development Committee Meeting Agenda Packet Importance: High Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Bakersfield. Think before you click! Ms. King, Good morning. Some of my comments are as follows. We purchased our residence ( 6801 Murphys Ct) in 1978 and have lived at this residence since that time. We purchased the residence which was single family housing and was located on a cul de sac which gave us more privacy and distanced us from street traffic on Manning or other main streets. The residence across the street ( 6804 Murphys CT) is no longer a single family housing unit. It is a hotel/ Air BB/ or some other type of multiple tenant arrangement . There are 7‐ 8 cars from individuals who enter this building which appears to contain 7 or more apartments or bedrooms. There appears to be one laundry room and maybe a common kitchen and a common pool (just like a hotel). The house was converted from a 3 bedroom house to the 7 or more apartments / rooms. I have requested three times the police regarding strange issues and strange cars parked in front of my house or the neighborhood. But this is not the only time that the police have been to our neighborhood regarding this multiple tenant housing arrangement. I have witnessed the arrival at this hotel two to three other times. Recently the police were there and evicted two or three individual parties and later found that one of the individuals had a stolen pickup parked in front of my house. They asked me if I had an extension cord so that they could cut off the locking device so that they could return the vehicle to the original owner. The neighbors have reported to me that they are having "pot parties" at this house and this morning there was a strange smell coming from this multiple tenant arrangement. There has been whole wheels with tires left in the street by the curb for days. There is old bed frames and mirrors setting outside in front of the garage door. They keep on missing garbage collection day and over‐ flowing garbage cans just sit there for a week until the next pick‐up day. During this time of virus concern this multiple tenant (Air B&B ) seems like an accident waiting to happen with no controls or means to prevent it. The tenants do not wear masks or appear to do social distancing. There is no vetting of these tenants so we have no idea who is in our neighborhood. There appears to be very little owner care or over site during the week. The tenants are on their own. One of neighbors had a car broken into and items stolen and this was done I an told by someone from the multiple tenant / Ai B& B arrangement. They were in violation of the length of the driveway and had not got a permit for widening the driveway. This multiple tenant arrangement / Air/ B&B is not something that we expect to ever see or desire in our neighborhood. We purchased our residence in what we thought was single family housing. We raised our child here and felt very ,very, safe in this neighborhood. Since this the arrival of this multiple tenants/ AR B&B arrangement we no longer feel safe in our neighborhood. The multiple tenants are coming and going and have no respect or care regarding our neighborhood. They act just like they are in a hotel with no oversite. This will not improve over time. This type of multiple tenant/ hotel/ Air B&B should not be allowed in single family residential areas which are zoned as such . We had always planned to stay in this house thru our retirement but those thoughts are changing do to the allowance of this multiple tenant/ hotel/ Air B&B to remain in our neighborhood. I have pictures of the parked 7 cars and the junk outside of the house. I will send these to you by separate e‐mail. We hope that this helps with stopping/ elimination of these multiple tenant/ hotels/ Air B & B in single family housing neighborhoods. Thanks for your help and your time, Terry & Betsy. Note, If I do not make the meeting due to virus concerns they could call me at home at 661‐ 834‐7387. I do have an I phone as well. Thanks again. Michelle Cruz From:Viridiana Gallardo-King Sent:Wednesday, May 20, 2020 3:04 PM To:Michelle Cruz Cc:Lena R. Legge; Julie Drimakis; Pilar Avalos; Jacqui Kitchen Subject:FW: 7 cars parked at Air/B&B Attachments:20200519_180203_resized.jpg Mr. Kloth sent pictures; if you can also attach these and the message below to tomorrow’s item 4(c). Thanks Viridiana Gallardo-King Deputy City Attorney City Attorney of Bakersfield 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor Bakersfield, CA 93301 (661)326-3633 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail/transmission is intended to be sent only to the recipient stated therein.This e- mail/transmission is confidential and also may be legally privileged or protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine, and also may be restricted from disclosure by applicable state and federal law. Any copying, disclosure, distribution, review or use of this e-mail/transmission by other than the intended recipient or that person's agent is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail/transmission in error, please notify the sender, and immediately permanently delete or destroy this e-mail/transmission, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media, and destroy any printouts of the e-mail/transmission. No attorney-client relationship is created by the act of sending or receiving this message outside of a written agreement. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any tax advice contained in this e-mail/transmission, including any attachments, was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of: (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code; or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. From: btkloth@bak.rr.com <btkloth@bak.rr.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 2:48 PM To: Viridiana Gallardo‐King <vking@bakersfieldcity.us> Subject: FW: 7 cars parked at Air/B&B Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Bakersfield. Think before you click! Ms, King. Once again good afternoon. This is a picture I took late yesterday afternoon ‐ after 6 pm. There are 7 cars parked at the multiple tenant housing/ hotel/ Air B & B. This number of cars/ individuals are always present after 5 in the evening. Thanks, Terry. ----------------------------------------- From: "Terry Kloth" To: "btkloth@bak.rr.com" Cc: Sent: Wednesday May 20 2020 5:39:48PM Subject: 7 cars parked at Air/B&B Sent from my MetroPCS 4G LTE Android device Michelle Cruz From:Viridiana Gallardo-King Sent:Wednesday, May 20, 2020 3:05 PM To:Michelle Cruz Cc:Julie Drimakis; Jacqui Kitchen; Pilar Avalos; Lena R. Legge Subject:FW: 7 cars one not visible on curb Attachments:20200519_180140_resized.jpg Another one for item 4(C) for tomorrow’s planning and development committee meeting. Viridiana Gallardo-King Deputy City Attorney City Attorney of Bakersfield 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor Bakersfield, CA 93301 (661)326-3633 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail/transmission is intended to be sent only to the recipient stated therein.This e- mail/transmission is confidential and also may be legally privileged or protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine, and also may be restricted from disclosure by applicable state and federal law. Any copying, disclosure, distribution, review or use of this e-mail/transmission by other than the intended recipient or that person's agent is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail/transmission in error, please notify the sender, and immediately permanently delete or destroy this e-mail/transmission, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media, and destroy any printouts of the e-mail/transmission. No attorney-client relationship is created by the act of sending or receiving this message outside of a written agreement. IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any tax advice contained in this e-mail/transmission, including any attachments, was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of: (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code; or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. From: btkloth@bak.rr.com <btkloth@bak.rr.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 2:56 PM To: Viridiana Gallardo‐King <vking@bakersfieldcity.us> Subject: FW: 7 cars one not visible on curb Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Bakersfield. Think before you click! Ms, King. One more picture of the cars/ vehicles parked at the multiple tenant housing/ hotel/ Air B &B. The car along the curb is not visible at this angle. But have counted as many as 8 cars associated with this unit. Thanks, Terry. ----------------------------------------- From: "Terry Kloth" To: "btkloth@bak.rr.com" Cc: Sent: Wednesday May 20 2020 5:50:25PM Subject: 7 cars one not visible on curb