HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/28/2022 - Special
Staff: Committee Members:
Christian Clegg, City Manager Councilmember, Bruce Freeman – Chair Gary Hallen, Assistant City Manager Councilmember, Bob Smith
Councilmember, Patty Gray Special Meeting of the Planning and Development Committee of the City Council – City of Bakersfield
Wednesday, September 28, 2022
12:00 p.m.
City Hall North – Conference Room A 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield CA 93301
A G E N D A
1. ROLL CALL
2. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
a. Agenda Item Public Statements
b. Non-Agenda Item Public Statement
3. ADOPT AUGUST 30, 2022, AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
4. REPORTS
5. DEFERRED BUSINESS
A. Committee Review of Ordinance Regarding Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and Direction –
C. Boyle
B. Update From Staff on Visit to Fresno with Suggestions to Amend our Municipal
Code re: Abatement of Public Nuisances – P. Burns/A. Zambrano
C. Committee Review of Resolution of Intent Regarding Process for Acquiring
Substandard/Chronic Nuisance/Vacant Properties – P. Saldana/J. Rudnick 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. COMMITTEE COMMENTS
8. ADJOURNMENT
Staff: Committee Members:
Christian Clegg, City Manager Councilmember, Bruce Freeman – Chair Anthony Valdez, Assistant to City Manager Councilmember, Bob Smith
Councilmember, Patty Gray Special Meeting of the Planning and Development Committee of the City Council – City of Bakersfield
Tuesday, August 30, 2022
12:00 p.m.
City Hall North – Conference Room A 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield CA 93301
A G E N D A
The meeting was called to order at 12:03 p.m.
1. ROLL CALL
Committee members: Councilmember Bob Smith
Councilmember Patty Gray
City Staff: Christian Clegg, City Manager
Gary Hallen, Assistant City Manager
Anthony Valdez, Assistant to the City Manager
Virginia “Ginny” Gennaro, City Attorney Viridiana “Viri” King, Deputy City Attorney Ashley Zambrano, Deputy City Attorney
Christopher Boyle, Development Services Director
Phil Burns, Building Director
Paul Johnson, Planning Director
Paul Saldana, Economic & Development Director
2. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
a. Agenda Item Public Statements
b. Non-Agenda Item Public Statement
3. ADOPT JUNE 13, 2022 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
Motion by Committee Member Gray, seconded by Committee Member Smith to
adopt the agenda summary report as submitted. Motion carried.
4. DEFERRED BUSINESS
A. Committee Discussion and Recommendation Regarding Update on Parking Stall Size Standards – C. Boyle Chris Boyle, Development Services Director provided committee members an
update from the original referral from Committee Member Smith regarding
comparable city parking stall size standards. It was found that the average size
stalls are 8.5 ft. wide by 16 ft. long. A typical percentage of compact stalls allowed
would be 25 percent.
Committee Gray requested some background on this topic as she was not here
when the original referral was requested by Committee Chair Freeman. City staff
provided a quick general overview of parking and how it impacts development.
Committee Member Smith moved to prepare an ordinance amendment
incorporating compact stalls into the City’s parking regulations providing for
compact parking stall of 8 feet by 15 feet in depth, at a ration of 20% of all stalls
beyond the first 20 stalls required, including compact stalls being allowed in
residential use settings. Committee Member Gray seconded the motion. Motion
carried. 5. NEW BUSINESS
A. Committee Discussion and Recommendation Regarding Floor Area Ratio (FAR) –
Chris Boyle, Development Services Director provided committee an overview of
ordinance specific to Floor Area Ration (FAR) and analysis whether FAR has potential to cause barrier to greater density in the downtown area.
Committee Member Gray moved to defer item at this time. Committee Member
Smith seconded. Motion carried.
B. Committee Discussion and Recommendation Regarding General Plan Update and Housing Element – C. Boyle
Chris Boyle, Development Services Director provided committee members an
information update of the progress towards updating the General Plan.
No action by the committee was required. Receive and file.
C. Committee Discussion and Recommendation Regarding Downtown Commercial
Vacant Building Ordinance (Fresno Ordinance) – P. Burns
Phil Burns, Building Director, provided the committee an update on Chronic
Vacant Nuisance Buildings from information provided to the committee June 22,
2022 committee meeting and discussion of Chronic Vacant Nuisance Building
Toolkit.
Committee Member Smith asked for some clarification on the timeline for receivership process. City staff provided committee a general overview of steps of
the receivership process.
Mr. Burns went on to share information on City of Fresno Code Enforcement Program, the telephone conference with Fresno staff, and the City’s plan to
conduct a site visit to better understand Fresno’s approach and programs. Mr.
Burns shared that they have 5 to 6 attorneys solely dedicated to Code
Enforcement. Currently Bakersfield has a total of 4 attorney’s and none that are
dedicated to only Code Enforcement.
Mr. Burns reported that the staff is still in the process of finalizing the City Chronic
Vacant Nuisance Building Tool Kit as they also work on hiring employees to
operate the program which would include two code enforcement officers, one
assistant code enforcement officer and an operations support specialist to
complete the Special Projects Unit.
Committee Member Smith asked about City purchasing some of the Nuisance
Buildings. City staff shared that although monies have been set aside for that
purpose. Staff is still working on the details on which ones will be moved to
receivership or purchase or eligible for EOA funding for demolition. Also, once a
building is purchased, what will the next steps look like; what will it take to rehab
the location.
City Attorney Ginny Gennaro suggested real estate negotiations be brought to
closed session for preliminary council approval.
Committee Member Smith asked about imminent domain information. An informational memo was provided from City Attorney’s Office to the committee
after the meeting.
Committee Member Smith moved to direct staff to visit City of Fresno’s Code Enforcement efforts on chronic vacant nuisance buildings and bring back
suggested ordinance to a special meeting before bringing to full council.
Committee member Gray seconded. Motion carried.
6. COMMITTEE COMMENTS
None
7. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 1:13 p.m.
August 30, 2022
MEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Bruce Freeman, Chair
Bob Smith
Patty Gray
FROM: Christopher Boyle, Development Services Director
SUBJECT: Update on Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
Information provided within this memorandum functions as an update to information provided at the August 30,
2022, Planning and Development Committee meeting. At that meeting, the topic of Floor Area Ratio (FAR) was
referred back to staff with a request for better clarity as to how FAR is calculated and what implications the
removal of FAR from zoning ordinance might be in the downtown district of the community.
BACKGROUND
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is defined in the Municipal Code (BMC Section 17.04.282) as the gross floor area of all
buildings on a parcel or site divided by the net parcel or site area as depicted in the following:
FAR = Total gross building floor area (sq. ft.)
Total net parcel/site area (sq. ft.)
The Bakersfield Municipal Code only provides FAR provisions within the C-B (Central Business) and C-C
(Commercial Center) Zone Districts, BMC Sections 17.25 and 17.26 respectively. The maximum FAR in both the C-
B (Central Business) and C-C (Commercial Center) Zone Districts is 3.0. This means that the square footage of a
building in these zones may be three times larger than the parcel it is located on. Additional floor area may be
permitted by the Planning Director when the project includes one or more public benefit features.
The Downtown Bakersfield area is formally referred to as the “Central District” by the Municipal Code and is
illustrated in Chapter 17.58. The area is generally considered 23rd Street (north), Q Street (east), California Avenue
(south), and F Street (west). This area is primarily zoned C-B (Central Business) and C-C (Commercial Center), with
a General Plan designation of MUC (Mixed Use).
Although FAR is referenced in the Land Use Element of the General Plan, the zoning ordinance only references
FAR within the C-B (Central Business) and C-C (Commercial Center).
ANALYSIS
Floor area ratios are but one tool that shape the form and function of the built environment. By defining total
potential square footage as a ratio of overall lot size, the built environment is inherently limited as to how large a
structure can become. Other ordinal tools that shape the urban form include building height limitations, zoning
setbacks, and/or lot coverage.
In the C-B and C-C Zone Districts, there are no setback requirements (except in specific instances) and liberal
building height restrictions. Lot coverages allow 100% coverage of any parcel area (except in specific instances).
Thus, removal of FAR requirements in the downtown would result in the building scale being guided almost
exclusively by building height requirements. Current parking requirements would also create inherent constraints.
Discussion at the August 30th Planning and Development Committee meeting naturally migrated to a conversation
on the interrelationship of parking and building scale. Whereas the removal of FAR will allow for potentially much
larger structures, parking requirements for those structures increases with square footage. Lack of parking
squelches the attractiveness of the structure for tenants, whether residential or commercial, and the cost of
constructing subterranean or pedestal-style parking is prohibitive. Thus, parking is needed to make larger buildings
viable, but parking construction costs make larger building cost-prohibitive. The end result is that removal of FAR
requirements from the zoning code only provides the opportunity to build bigger structures; it does not provide a
strategy to make larger structures economically more feasible. The Zoning Ordinance does not address the
economics of development – only the scale that development can aspire to.
Staff is familiar with the parking-building scale dynamic. Removal of FAR requirements will provide for greater
square footage in the downtown area, and provision of parking to serve this square footage will be an increasing
prerequisite to ensure vitality in the downtown sector and sustain and enhance the functionality of the downtown
core moving forward.
For this reason, staff noted that a wholistic parking strategy for the downtown core will be necessary in order to
fully capitalize on the potential densities of a non-FAR-constrained downtown landscape. A Property and Business
Improvement District (PBID) encompassing the Central District is one tool that could create a long-lasting solution
to what is becoming a long-lasting problem. A PBID is a special benefit assessment district that can provide support
for enhanced amenities such as parking, maintenance, public safety, beautification and economic development
programs above and beyond those provided by the City. Although the City currently provides expanded services
in the Central District that include cleaning, tree-trimming and care, homeless assistance, business
development and street life projects such as wall murals and decorative lighting, PBID services, to include parking,
could improve the overall viability of Central District, resulting in higher property values, sales and tax revenues,
and the capacity to construct larger structures unencumbered by the challenges of providing on-site parking.
In association with a separate concern on today’s agenda, staff visited the nearby (and often compared) City of
Fresno. While looking at vacant buildings in Fresno, the group also toured the downtown sector of the City.
Fresno’s downtown is supported by a PBID. Downtown Fresno provides multiple public parking garages and lots
which cumulatively provide nearly 4,700 parking stalls. When counting on-street parking, downtown Fresno
provides 6,696 parking stalls. Bakersfield Downtown District includes a total of 2,735 parking stalls, of which only
590 are located in a public parking garage.
Regardless, staff remains not averse to the removal of FAR requirements from the C-B (Central Business) and C-C
(Commercial Center) Zone Districts. It continues the process toward realizing a renewed vision for downtown.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that your Committee digest the information within this report and any testimony associated
with the Committee meeting and provide direction to staff. CEQA analysis will not be completed as part of this
report as there is no project associated with the preparation of this report per the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA).
NEXT STEPS
Staff will take the direction of the Committee. Potential options include:
1. Direct staff to prepare an ordinance amendment that removes ordinance specific to the application of
floor area ratios in the C-B (Central Business) and C-C (Commercial Center) Zone Districts and prepare
appropriate environmental documentation in support of the ordinance amendment.
2. Provide alternative direction to staff as it relates to retention or elimination of FAR ordinance in the C-B
(Central Business) and C-C (Commercial Center) Zone Districts.
3. Provide no direction at this time. Receive and file this report.
MEMORANDUM
September 22, 2022
TO: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Bruce Freeman, Chair
Patty Gray
Bob Smith
FROM: Christopher Boyle, Development Services Director
Phil Burns, Building Director
SUBJECT: Update from Staff Visit to Fresno (on Chronic Vacant Nuisance Buildings)
Information provided within this memorandum functions as an update to information provided at the
August 30, 2022, Planning and Development Committee meeting. At that meeting, the topic of The City
of Fresno’s vacant building ordinance related to commercial buildings was discussed as staff had
completed a teleconference with Fresno Code Enforcement Staff. Due to the vast amount of information
exchanged, City staff requested a site visit to Fresno to both discuss the ordinance further and observe
Fresno’s implementation in the field. Staff had a site visit to Fresno on September 16, 2022, which include
Assistant City Manager Gary Hallen, Development Services Director, Christopher Boyle, Building Director,
Phil Burns and Code Enforcement Manager David Paquette.
City of Fresno Code Enforcement Program
As discussed in the last committee meeting, Fresno has a very robust Code Enforcement Program
including five plus attorneys. I truly commend Fresno’s Attorney’s Office and Code Enforcement Staff.
Fresno graciously “pulled out all stops” during our visit. We met with the Chief Assistant City Attorney
over the Code Enforcement program, Community Compliance Manager, two senior Code Enforcement
Officers assigned this task, Building Official, Head Engineer, Director of Prevention Services and the list
goes on. The Code Enforcement Program was moved under the City Attorney’s office three years ago and
their new Fresno Vacant Building ordinance that applies to commercial properties is just over one year
old.
As we found in our initial telephone conversation and expressed to this committee, the ordinance as
written is stringent but is not being strictly followed dues to various site constraints for this type of
building. For instance, there appears to be a provision that would require a building owner to install a fire
sprinkler system if the commercial building met the requirements. The reality is they are following the
Fire Code provisions where they can, which requires 5-year certifications to the sprinkler system. Some
buildings fire systems have been vandalized to a point that it is to excessively expensive to require a repair.
It would only get repaired if there was a tenant that took occupancy in the future. Each property is
assessed to determine what will be requested. Fresno is purposely not utilizing administrative penalties
in an effort to gain collaborative compliance.
Fresno shared a lot of their approaches including what appeared to work and items that need to be
revised. They admitted that their ordinance is dynamically changing based on their experiences. As an
example, they have a requirement for Plexiglas or similar clear to be used for window board ups. They
found it has many pros and cons and are now moving to solely utilizing plywood that is painted. They are
still exploring the best color. Some areas of town were painted to match the building, some were painted
a standardized grey and others a mat black. Fresno also moved to an entire in-house abatement staff.
City employees are completing all abatements. We did not get into the details of this side of the program.
After meeting with Fresno’s team, Bakersfield City staff internally met and brained stormed what is the
difference between what we do now and what is accomplished by Fresno’s ordinance. More than any
particular “tool” or “requirement”, speeding up the applicable timelines for abatement is the key item. In
some instances, Fresno utilizes an 18-day notice to abate without an abatement hearing. Tying this
shortened abatement timeline to our chronic vacant nuisance buildings city wide would provide a much
greater impact to all our neighborhoods, including vacant commercial buildings, fire damaged buildings
and chronic or substandard nuisance properties. We have been working with the City Attorney’s Office
to revise our current administrative process to clarify and shorten timelines in these circumstances.
Ordinance Revisions
At the Committee meeting, the City Attorney’s Office will present suggestions to amend the Bakersfield
Municipal Code regarding the abatement of public nuisances, including vacant/substandard/chronic
nuisance properties.
Conclusions
City staff continues to make steps forward in creating a comprehensive program to address blighted
buildings and properties. Dedicated personnel should be on staff within the next six weeks.
NEXT STEPS
Staff will take the direction of the Committee. Potential options include:
1. Direct staff to move forward with proposed ordinance modification as depicted at the
committee meeting to speed up our process for abatement of violations where the conditions
of a Chronic Vacant Nuisance Building exist.
2. Provide Alternate direction to Staff.
Ca
s
e
Ty
p
e
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
Wa
r
d
C
a
s
e
Ty
p
e
C
o
d
e
Ca
s
e
S
t
a
t
u
s
YR
PS
Ac
t
i
v
e
De
m
o
l
i
t
i
o
n
Ca
s
e
s
1
81
2
Ba
k
e
r
St
.
*
2
AD
B
2
2
‐00
2
0
0
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
7
1
6
5
N
/
A
22
‐11
7
0
2
D
e
m
o
pe
n
d
i
n
g
ut
i
l
i
t
y
removal by PG&E (9 ‐22 ‐2022)
2
82
9
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
Av
e
.
2
AD
B
22
‐03
3
8
1
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
1
5
9
N
/
A
22
‐72
1
2
F
i
r
e
Re
p
a
i
r
Pe
r
m
i
t
/ St
o
p
Work Issued (7 ‐1 ‐2022)
3
70
8
Dr
.
Ma
r
t
i
n
Lu
t
h
e
r
Ki
n
g
Jr
2
AD
B
2
2
‐03
6
5
6
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
9
4
4
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
2
1
2n
d
No
t
i
c
e
pe
n
d
i
n
g
(7
‐19 ‐2022)
4
26
0
1
Ca
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
Av
e
n
u
e
2
AD
B
2
2
‐41
6
4
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
1
9
6
N
/
A
A
b
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
In
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n
( 10 ‐23 ‐2022)
5
50
3
S.
Wi
l
l
i
a
m
s
St
2
AD
B
2
2
‐00
2
9
1
2
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
2
2
4
N
/
A
A
b
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
In
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n
( 11 ‐6 ‐2022)
6
44
1
1s
t
St
.
2
AD
B
2
2
‐02
0
2
3
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
0
1
7
4
N
/
A
Ab
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
In
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n
(
11 ‐12 ‐2022)
7
30
0
1
Ma
d
i
s
o
n
Av
e
1
AD
B
2
2
‐04
8
3
5
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
7
4
2
N
/
A
2
n
d
No
t
i
c
e
pe
n
d
i
n
g
(9
‐7 ‐2022)
8
10
1
2
31
s
t
St
.
3
AD
B
2
2
‐04
6
5
3
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
8
8
8
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
1
4
Ab
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
He
a
r
i
n
g
(1
0
‐4 ‐2022)
9
24
2
5
Ha
l
e
y
St
3
AD
B
2
2
‐36
7
5
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
2
6
8
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
2
2
Bi
d
Re
q
u
e
s
t
(9
‐13
‐20
2
2
)
10
52
1
La
k
e
St
2
AD
B
2
2
‐51
9
1
A
c
t
i
v
e
N/
A
1
7
2
n
d
No
t
i
c
e
pe
n
d
i
n
g
(9
‐16 ‐2022)
11
52
4
Pa
c
i
f
i
c
St
2
AD
B
2
2
‐52
6
8
Ac
t
i
v
e
N/
A
2
9
N
/
A
7
‐da
y
No
t
i
c
e
pe
n
d
i
n
g
(8 ‐30 ‐2022)
12
50
9
H St
r
e
e
t
2
AD
B
2
2
‐54
2
3
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
2
3
6
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
2
2
Re
i
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n
pe
n
d
i
n
g
(9 ‐28 ‐2022)
13
20
0
1
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
Av
e
2
AD
B
2
2
‐55
8
1
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
0
A
s
b
e
s
t
o
s
In
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n
(9
‐19 ‐2022)
14
20
1
1
Ch
e
s
t
e
r
Av
e
2
AD
B
2
2
‐55
8
2
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
1
D
e
m
o
pe
n
d
i
n
g
ut
i
l
i
t
y
removal by PG&E (9 ‐22 ‐2022)
15
23
0
0
Wh
i
t
e
Ln
1
AD
B
2
2
‐56
6
5
A
c
t
i
v
e
N/
A
R
e
i
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n
pe
n
d
i
n
g
(9 ‐14 ‐2022)
16
12
3
1
E 18
t
h
S t
2
AD
B
2
2
‐58
5
6
Ac
t
i
v
e
20
2
2
7
‐da
y
No
t
i
c
e
pe
n
d
i
n
g
(9 ‐16 ‐2022)
Re
c
e
i
v
e
r
s
h
i
p
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
17
28
2
5
Ca
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
Av
e
.
2
Re
c
e
i
v
e
r
s
h
i
p
2
2
‐01
9
5
6
Ac
t
i
v
e
20
1
2
2
6
4
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
0
4
18
22
0
5
20
t
h
St
.
2
Re
c
e
i
v
e
r
s
h
i
p
2
1
‐01
2
7
2
Ac
t
i
v
e
20
1
5
9
6
N
/
A
Ch
r
o
n
i
c
Va
c
a
n
t
Nu
i
s
a
n
c
e
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
19
38
0
4
Un
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
Av
e
.
3
PM
2
1
‐00
0
0
8
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
1
2
3
4
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
1
5
20
26
8
8
Os
w
e
l
l
St
.
*
2
PM
1
4
‐00
6
5
8
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
4
2
3
3
N
/
A
21
61
0
0
Qu
a
k
i
n
g
As
p
e
n
St
.
6
PM
2
2
‐00
1
1
4
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
2
1
8
9
N
/
A
22
32
0
7
Un
i
o
n
Av
e
.
*
3
PM
1
4
‐01
2
9
0
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
4
1
3
9
N
/
A
23
12
0
0
11
t
h
St
.
2
PM
06
‐00
1
4
8
2
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
0
6
1
2
2
N
/
A
24
91
3
Wa
t
t
s
St
.
1
PM
22
‐00
3
8
8
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
7
1
2
2
6
/
2
8
/
2
0
1
3
25
30
8
17
t
h
St
.
2
PM
2
2
‐02
1
4
7
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
5
1
1
7
N
/
A
26
13
1
2
Eu
r
e
k
a
St
.
2
PM
1
8
‐00
2
8
4
0
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
8
1
1
4
N
/
A
27
40
5
Cy
p
r
e
s
s
St
.
2
BL
D
C
1
3
‐06
4
0
9
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
3
1
0
2
N
/
A
28
11
0
2
34
t
h
St
.
3
BL
D
C
1
9
‐07
0
1
4
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
6
1
0
1
N
/
A
29
11
2
5
Sn
y
d
e
r
Ln
2
PM
1
1
‐04
6
6
2
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
1
9
9
N
/
A
30
15
0
1
Ra
l
s
t
o
n
St
2
BL
D
C
1
6
‐02
2
0
6
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
6
9
9
N
/
A
31
71
5
34
t
h
St
r
e
e
t
*
3
PM
22
‐02
9
2
5
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
6
9
8
N
/
A
32
12
2
6
E 18
t
h
St
.
2
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
1
1
‐01
2
7
8
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
1
9
7
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
2
2
33
23
2
8
18
t
h
St
r
e
e
t
2
PM
1
4
‐02
7
6
7
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
4
9
7
N
/
A
34
17
1
7
Ba
k
e
r
St
.
*
2
BL
D
C
2
2
‐02
4
1
2
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
1
9
4
N
/
A
35
11
5
S Ow
n
e
s
St
.
2
PM
1
8
‐05
0
6
9
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
8
9
3
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
1
7
36
33
0
S Ch
e
s
t
e
r
Av
e
*
2
BL
D
C
1
8
‐26
9
8
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
8
9
0
N
\
A
37
12
1
7
Ba
k
e
r
St
.
*
2
PM
2
2
‐02
0
3
8
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
0
8
5
N
/
A
38
38
0
8
Br
y
n
Ma
w
r
Dr
3
PM
2
2
‐02
8
8
6
Ac
t
i
v
e
20
1
5
8
4
N
/
A
39
33
1
5
Sa
n
Di
m
a
s
St
.
2
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
1
4
‐00
7
1
1
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
4
8
1
N
/
A
40
11
2
7
3r
d
St
r
e
e
t
2
PM
1
1
‐11
7
6
2
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
1
7
8
N
/
A
41
11
0
8
H St
r
e
e
t
2
BL
D
C
1
6
‐04
7
0
7
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
6
7
7
N
/
A
Ye
a
r
Ta
x
De
f
a
u
l
t
Sc
o
r
e
S
t
a
t
u
s
Pe
r
m
i
t
#
Ca
s
e
Ty
p
e
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
Wa
r
d
C
a
s
e
Ty
p
e
C
o
d
e
Ca
s
e
S
t
a
t
u
s
YR
PS
Ye
a
r
Ta
x
De
f
a
u
l
t
Sc
o
r
e
S
t
a
t
u
s
Pe
r
m
i
t
#
42
63
0
0
De
n
n
e
n
St
7
PM
1
8
‐00
3
6
5
8
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
8
7
3
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
2
2
43
32
5
Ho
l
t
b
y
Rd
2
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
1
5
‐63
0
0
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
5
6
5
N
/
A
44
22
3
18
t
h
St
.
2
PM
/
B
L
D
C
2
2
‐02
9
2
4
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
8
6
3
N
/
A
45
14
1
6
Ri
c
h
l
a
n
d
St
.
2
PM
1
5
‐03
7
1
8
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
5
6
2
N
/
A
46
15
0
9
Po
t
o
m
a
c
Av
e
2
PM
2
0
‐01
3
4
5
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
0
6
2
N
/
A
47
20
1
1
18
t
h
St
.
2
PM
1
6
‐00
2
8
5
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
6
5
9
N
/
A
48
80
2
Un
i
o
n
Av
e
*
2
PM
1
7
‐07
4
5
7
Ac
t
i
v
e
20
1
7
5
3
N
/
A
49
14
1
6
Te
r
r
a
c
e
Wa
y
2
PM
1
9
‐04
3
0
9
Ac
t
i
v
e
20
1
6
5
1
N
/
A
50
11
0
Tr
u
x
t
u
n
Av
e
.
2
PM
1
3
‐01
7
2
3
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
3
4
7
N
/
A
51
63
1
Be
r
n
a
r
d
St
.
2
PM
1
8
‐00
0
1
4
Ac
t
i
v
e
20
1
8
3
1
N
/
A
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
to
Mo
n
i
t
o
r
52
90
6
un
i
o
n
Av
e
2
PM
2
2
‐03
4
2
5
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
2
5
3
N
/
A
53
50
5
Un
i
o
n
Av
e
.
2
BL
D
C
2
2
‐02
9
2
6
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
0
4
6
N
/
A
54
14
0
0
18
t
h
St
.
2
PM
2
2
‐02
3
4
7
Cl
o
s
e
d
N/
A
4
4
N
/
A
55
51
6
S.
Un
i
o
n
Av
e
.
2
PM
2
1
‐05
3
7
1
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
1
3
7
N
/
A
56
14
1
6
E.
9t
h
St
.
2
PM
2
2
‐01
3
2
2
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
1
2
7
N
/
A
57
43
0
S Wi
l
l
i
a
m
s
St
r
e
e
t
2
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
2
1
‐00
1
7
6
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
1
2
5
N
/
A
58
11
2
5
19
t
h
St
r
e
e
t
2
BL
D
C
2
2
‐02
1
6
8
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
2
1
7
N
/
A
59
17
2
1
De
Wo
l
f
e
St
.
2
PM
/
B
L
D
C
2
2
‐08
9
/
2
2
‐18
6
7
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
2
1
2
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
2
1
60
60
1
Me
l
b
a
Ln
2
BL
D
C
2
2
‐00
0
2
9
4
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
2
1
0
N
/
A
61
20
5
H St
.
/2
0
7
H St
.
*
2
BL
D
C
2
2
‐01
1
9
4
Ac
t
i
v
e
20
2
2
7
N
/
A
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
*
To
t
a
l
ca
s
e
s
= all
ca
s
e
‐
un
f
o
u
n
d
e
d
ca
s
e
s
‐
(w
e
un
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
un
f
o
u
n
d
e
d
ca
s
e
s
ad
d
to
th
e
wo
r
k
lo
a
d
bu
t
we
ar
e
fo
c
u
s
i
n
g
on
pr
o
p
e
r
i
e
s
wi
t
h
ve
r
i
f
i
e
d
PM
,
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
,
AD
B
vio
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
)
Co
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
1
10
2
7
S.
Br
o
w
n
St
.
2
AD
B
2
1
‐05
7
2
0
C
l
o
s
e
d
20
2
1
5
0
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
0
9
22
‐93
2
6
De
m
o
l
i
s
h
e
d
(8
‐29
‐20
2
2
)
3
14
1
5
Or
e
g
o
n
St
.
2
AD
B
2
1
‐04
1
5
0
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
2
1
3
7
N
/
A
22
‐47
9
4
De
m
o
Pe
r
m
i
t
(4
‐21
‐20
2
2
)
4
22
0
7
Ve
r
d
e
St
.
2
AD
B
2
2
‐00
0
3
6
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
1
1
3
9
6
/
3
0
/
2
0
1
0
22
‐93
2
5
A
s
b
e
s
t
o
s
ab
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
(9
‐15 ‐2022)
3
20
0
E Br
u
n
d
a
g
e
La
n
e
.
2
AD
B
2
2
‐03
5
2
1
A
c
t
i
v
e
20
1
4
6
6
N
/
A
2
n
d
No
t
i
c
e
pe
n
d
i
n
g
(7
‐19 ‐2022)
City Manager’s Office
1600 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301
661-326-3751 FAX: 661-324-1850
GH
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
September. 26, 2022
TO: Planning and Development Committee
Bruce Freeman, Chair
Patty Gray
Bob Smith
FROM: Gary Hallen, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Agenda Item 5.c. - Committee Review of Resolution of Intent Regarding
Process for Acquiring Substandard/Chronic Nuisance/Vacant Properties
BACKGROUND: City Staff will present a draft Resolution of Intent that addresses how the City intends to move forward with the identification and possible purchase of substandard/chronic nuisance properties. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that your committee digest the information within this report and any presentation shared with the Committee. NEXT STEPS: Provide no direction at this time. Receive and file this presentation.