HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES NO 10-86RESOLUTION NO. 10-86
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BAKERSFIELD ADOPTING THE "PARK PLAN" AS AN
AMENDMENT TO THE OPEN SPACE ELEMENT OF THE
BAKERSFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN.
WHEREAS, an Open Space Element of the Bakersfield
Metropolitan Area General Plan was adopted on June 6, 1973, by
the City Council of the City of Bakersfield, which plan contains
certain policies regarding the provision of parks which have not
proven sufficient to ensure the meeting of future park land needs
for the City of Bakersfield; and
WHEREAS, more definitive statements of policies and
standards are necessary and appropriate to guide the City and to
inform developers of the City's expectations concerning the
provision of parks; and
WHEREAS, the City Council referred the matter of
providing parks to serve future development to the Planning
Commission with the direction that residents should have parks
reasonably available to them; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission studied this matter,
conducted workshops and public hearings upon the proposed park
plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, in accordance with the
provisions of Section 65351 of
hearing on September 19, 1985,
October 17, 1985, and November
the Government Code, held a public
and continued to October 3, 1985,
7, 1985, on the proposed Park
Plan, notice of time and place of hearing having been given at
least ten (10) calendar days before said hearing by publication
in a local newspaper of general circulation; and
WHEREAS, all matters presented at said hearing were duly
considered by the Planning Commission; and
-1-
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved a Negative
Declaration as the appropriate environmental document for use in
reviewing this proposed amendment to the general plan and
recommended the same to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of its hearing on November 7,
1985, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 154-85
and recommended that the "Park Plan" attached hereto as Exhibit
"A" and made a part hereof be adopted by this Council as an
amendment to the "Open Space Element of the Bakersfield
Metropolitan Area General Plan" and that the park policies of
such plan and the parks as delineated in the Rancho Laborde
Specific Plan, Sections 6 and 7, Township 30 South, Range 27
East, Sections 21 and 22, Township 30 South, Range 27 East
Master Plans be included as the general plan policies for the
provision of parks therein; and
W~EREAS, in accordance with the requirements of law, a
public hearing was held before this Council on January 8, 1986,
on the proposed Park Plan, notice of time and place having been
given at least ten (10) days and before said hearing by
publication in a local newspaper of general circulation; and
WHEREAS, all matters prescribed at said hearing have
been duly considered by the Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the
City of Bakersfield, as follows:
1. The above findings and recitals are true and
correct.
2. The Negative Declaration is hereby adopted and
approved.
-2-
3. The "Park Plan", attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and
made a part hereof, and the parks delineated in the Rancho
Laborde Specific Plan, Sections 607, Township 30 South, Range 27
East, Sections 21 and 22, Township 30 South, Range 27 East Master
Plans and the policies of the Park Plan hereby made applicable
thereto, are hereby adopted as an amendment to the Open Space
Element of the Bakersfield Metropolitan Area General Plan.
.......... o0o ..........
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was
passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at
regular meeting thereof held on the 22nd day of January ,
1986, by the following vote:
a
.... ~ ~ ~ . ..-'
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED this 22nd day of January , 1986
MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED as to form:
CI Y of the City of B~Gkersfield
AJS/mro
R-PARKPLN
-3-
PARK PLAN OF THE OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
BAKERSFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
NOVEMBER, 1985
Exhibit "A"
Introduction
This document is to supersede pages 28-33 of the Open Space
Element of the Bakersfield Metropolitan Area General Plan. It
is to update the city's policies with respect to the provision of
parks within the city. Although the city has embarked on a pro-
ject to rewrite its entire general plan this year (1985/86), due
to the pressures of growth and development it is necessary to
make these policies more explicit, direct and relevant to today's
concerns to avoid the further deterioration of the parks system
intended to serve the current and future residents of the City of
Bakersfield.
RECREATIONAL LAND
Recreational opportunities within urban areas have great public
value in maintaining physical, mental, and social well-being.
This value cannot be measured in monetary te~ms.
Public recreation areas tend to be squeezed out of newly develop-
ing urban areas because of the high cost of land. The citizens
are the ones who lose when this happens. Recreational facilities
which are designated on the city's general plan can assist in
insuring the proper distribution and spacing of these essential
facilities.
Polic~
A minimum standard is set for the amount and quality of land
devoted to public and private recreation. Dedication of land to
public recreation is an essential requirement of all urban
planning. Adherence to the general plan which designates recrea-
tional facilities is vital to the orderly development of a
community.
Definition
Recreation land is any area of land or water designated on the
state or regional or local open space plan as open space land and
which is actively used for recreation purposes and open to the
public for such purposes with or without charge.
EABLE 1: PARK ACREAGE AND ACTIVITY BY RECREATION SUPPLIERS--1982
No. of
ACREAGE Neighborhood Community Regional Facilities
Bakersfield City Parks
Kern County Parks
Public [lementary Schools
Kern Union Iligh Schools
PrivaLe/Perochial Schools
Bakersfield College
Ca1 SLate College
PrivaLe DevelopmenL
195.2 120.4 74.8 20
1,171,1 67.2 168.0 974.0 13
247,9 184.8 63.1 47
151.4 151.4 6
37.0 20.8 16.2 9
33.6 33.6 1
60.0 60.0 1
42.9 42.9 68
TOTALS 1,939.1 436.0 567.1 974.0 164
-3-
The park and recreation space suppliers include the City of
Bakersfield, County of Kern, public and private schools and faci-
lities provided by residential developers for the use of occu-
pants. These suppliers provided 1,939 acres'of recreational
opportunity in 164 facilities in 1982. It is estimated that area
residents and visitors enjoyed 5.56 million user-days at these
facilities.
Most recreation occurs at facilities close to the home. Over
55% of the total area-wide usage occurs on only 22.5% of the
acreage - the neighborhood parks, elementary school playgrounds
and the private recreation facilities such as swimming pools
included in primarily multi-family residential developments.
The City of Bakersfield supplied 195.2 acres of parks in 1982
which are largely neighborhood oriented while meeting over 49%
(or 2.23 million user days) of the recreation demand.
While the City is the largest single supplier of close-to-home
recreation opportunity, Kern County provides most of the actual
park acreage in the study area with 1,171 acres available includ-
ing 974 acres at Hart Park and the Kern River Park for general
outdoor uses (i.e., special areas for boat races and golfing not
included). These regionally oriented county parks supplied 1.16
million user days of recreation in 1982 or 20.9% of the total.
The city is also within the service area of several other more
distant regional recreation facilities.
Overall,
199,618
~rowth rate. The College,
Northeast communities are
10,000 persons.
the 1982 estimated metropolitan area population of
is projected to 287,789 by year 2000 for a 2.45% annual
Southwest, East Bakersfield and
expected to each increase by more than
Mini-parks, neighborhood and community
4.83 acres of local recreation area per 1,000 population.
City of Bakersfield supplied 1.81 acres of parks per 1,000
lation in 1980.
facilities now account for
The
popu-
Regional wide recreation provided by the County results in a
ratio of 4.08 acres per 1,000 population. By 2000, another 437
acres will be necessary to maintain this supply rate.
The overall goal is to provide park and recreation areas within
easy access to present and future residents of the urban
Bakersfield area. A strategic objective is to encourage all
agencies to maintain the current 4.83 acres of local recreation
supply for each 1,000 persons. Policies for local recreation
supply relate to location, land acquisition and development
timing, acreage standards, maintenance through special districts
and coordination with other suppliers and recreation programming.
THE PARK PLAN - POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION
This part presents the City's policies to provide for park space
in Bakersfield. Traditionally, local government has provided
-5-
citizens with formal open space
the city to continue doing this,
development of adequate recreational facilities
This is the central purpose of the Park Plan'as
apply to the Bakersfield area
guide the City of Bakersfield
recreational opportunities. For
sufficient sites for future
must be provided.
it is intended to
and it contains the policies to
in its provision of parks.
The Purpose. In the past, the City of Bakersfield has relied on
its ability to acquire necessary park lands as early as possible
before the cost of land made it prohibitive. However~ the com-
bined effects of the passage of Propositions 13 and 4 (tax limi-
tations) have seriously impaired the City's ability to acquire
and maintain parks. The problem was held in check for several
years through the provision by the Tenneco Realty Development
Corporation of park sites in the rapidly growing Southwest
Bakersfield area. While it is expected that Tenneco will con-
tinue to provide local parks in accord with general plan policies
for that area as its lands are developed in the Southwest and
park and maintenance districts will be formed whereby residents
benefited will pay all cost, the other areas of the city are not
as fortunate. The Northeast and South areas are also experienc-
in9 and will continue to experience rapid development according
to recent population projections. The majority of properties in
the Northeast and South are not owned by a major land developer
such as Tenneco with the ability to plan entire neighborhoods,
including necessary facilities and services. For thence reasons
new mechanisms are needed for the City to continue its role in
providing park and recreation sites and in developing them for
local residential use.
(Government Code Sec.
maintenance districts
maintenance.
This plan directs that Quimby Act
66477 et.seq.) provisions be adopted and
be established for park development and
The neighborhood park or school playground is the cornerstone of
our local recreation system. The study area is divided into 11
communities irrespective of the City boundary. The community
boundaries were selected bases primarily upon the existing major
arterial road system, but also considering State Freeways, pro-
posed arterials and non-residential areas. Each community was
further divided into neighborhoods utilizing existing and pro-
posed major arterial streets and other topographic features cre-
ating natural separations. A total of 69 neighborhoods have been
identified (See Map 2). An inventory of existing recreation
facilities and user activity was the first step in determining
the level of recreation participation and the current recreation
supply in Bakersfield. Five major supplier groups were identi-
fied as supplying land and facilities at
community level:
1.
the neighborhood and
City of Bakersfield Public Works Department - Parks
Division.
2. City of Bakersfield Community Services Department
Recreation Division
-7-
3. County of Kern Parks and Recreation Department.
4. Public schools, including colleges.
5. Private schools.
6. Private development (e.g., subdivisions, planned unit
developments and improvement association).
Although comparison with NRPA standards and current levels of
city service indicate the greatest need will be for more commu-
nity parks, neighborhood parks will continue to be foremost in
parks planning. Therefore, the direction of city policy will be
to maintain present parks in already developed areas and focus
attention to providing neighborhood parks in newly developing
areas.
The
including
acres per
siderable
City cannot maintain the present supply level on its own
the present supply ratio (1980) of city parks at 1.8064
1,000 population and it is necessary that there be con-
cooperation among the present suppliers including the
City,
overall Metropolitan Bakersfield local recreation
acres per 1,000 population. This may be compared
standard of overall local recreation provision of
County, schools and private development. The current
supply is 4.83
to a national
6.25 to 10.5
acres per 1,000 population. The supply of mini-parks throughout
Metro Bakersfield is 0.18 acres per 1,000 population compared to
the national standard of 0.25 to 0.5 acres per 1,000 persons.
Neighborhood parks in Metro Bakersfield are supplied at the rate
of 1.99 acres per 1,000 population while the national standard is
, I
6
)RTHEAST
I '5
RIO E
'- -r' -'7
,/
ENRIDGE:
:
RANCH EhlA'~
~5
l
OLLEGE ,,', I
%
3 4' SOUTHW
5
;2
'L:I.; 3 '
I ~ j PAN A,I
KERSFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLA
ARK PLAN BA
NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY BOUNDARIES
"NORTHEAST"- COMMUNITY NAME -- CITY BOUNDARY
STUDY AREA BOUNDARY
COMMUNITY BOUNDARY 3-NEIGHBORHOOD NUMBER ~ COUNTY AREA
.... RHOOD BOUNDARY ~ NON-RESIDENTIALAREA
NEIGHBOR ~ ---
listed at between 1.0 and 2.0 acres per 1,000 persons. Community
park and recreation areas comprise 2.66 acres per 1,000 popula-
tion which may be related to the national standard ranging from
5.0 to 8.0 acres per 1,000 population.
The local recreation areas discussed above include all recreation
suppliers within the area covered in the BMAGP (Land Use Element
Area). Some of the policies proposed in this section are
designed to apply to all current public recreation suppliers in
the Bakersfield area. For the City of Bakersfield, the proposed
policies are adopted for guidance in future City decisions deal-
ing with park and recreation land acquisition and maintenance.
To the others providing recreation areas, the proposed policies
represent the City's recommendation for a concerted effort and
uniform policy. The County of Kern, the public school districts
and private schools are hereby encouraged to continue and expand
their efforts with the City of Bakersfield to develop additional
recreation space and opportunity for the area's growing needs.
This part will first deal with goals, objectives and policies,
followed by a discussion on existing sources of funding and leg-
islative approaches available to local government for acquiring
lands for park development. A third section will provide a short
discussion of alternative concepts for the creation of neighbor-
hood parks.
Goals, objectives and Policies. This plan has one overriding
goal: to provide outdoor recreation areas, especially parks,
within easy access to present and future residents. To achieve
this goal, two
objective is a
the objectives
strategic objectives
set of policies that are
and the overall goal.
GOAL:
are set forth. Under each
essential in achieving
PROVIDE OUTDOOR RECREATION AREAS, ESPECIALLY PARKS,
WITHIN EASY ACCESS TO PRESENT AND FUTURE RESIDENTS OF
THE URBAN BAKERSFIELD AREA.
STRATEGIC
OBJECTIVE
A: Maintain the current (1982) supply of 4.83 acres of park
and recreation space for each 1,000 persons for local,
close-to-home recreation opportunity as a minimum
throughout each community. The City of Bakersfield's
effort is to provide the current ratio of 1.81 acres of
traditional public parks per 1,000 persons.
Policies:
1.
Local parks shall be developed at the rate of 2.5
acres/i,000 population. Part of these may be as part of
on-site recreation for such developments as Planned Unit
Developments. Traditional public parks shall be devel-
oped at the rate of 1.81 acres/i,000 population.
Approved master plans for development showin? the loca-
tion and size of parks intended to serve the area shall
guide their development in the approved plan area.
Plan for and acquire neighborhood parks within the cen-
tral portion of each neighborhood accessible to all res-
idents where there are no parks and land is available.
Acquire neighborhood parks as soon as possib2e to pro-
tect and enhance the residential neighborhood environ-
ment, ensure park availability and avoid the higher cost
of later land purchases.
Acauire and develop neighborhood and community recrea-
tion acreage through subdivision dedication and in-lieu
fees whereby future development provides for future rec-
reational need.
-11-
o
10.
ll.
12.
Acquire additional neighborhood and community park and
recreation acreage needed to achieve better overall dis-
tribution of parks to city standards in areas substan-
tially developed or in a process of redevelopment and
improvement with available funding and donations.
Use public mini-parks in developed residential areas
where neighborhood standards are not met and where it is
impossible to acquire sufficient acreage for neighbor-
hood facilities in order to provide a supply of recrea-
tional space and opportunity.
The planning and acquisition of local parks and play-
grounds shall adhere to the following minimum site size
standards:
Mini-parks (public)
Neighborhood parks/playground
Community park/playfield
0.5 usable acres
5.0 usable acres
15.0 usable acres
The above acreage figures apply to usable acreage.
Usable means area that people can use with an emphasis
on active and group use. It is essentially flat land
that can be developed for facilities and activity areas.
It is not land in steeper slope, land with unusually
poor soil conditions not suited for park development,
land areas subject to periodic flooding, land with
riparian or otherwise unique habitat worthy of preserva-
tion or water bodies or areas impacted adversely by
adjacent or nearby land uses.
Community parks within or at the boundaries of' neighbor-
hoods should satisfy the neighborhood park need if
equivalent facilities are provided in them.
New city parks are to be maintained by special districts
whether in future development areas or in already devel-
oped areas. The districts shall conform as closely as
possible to neighborhood boundaries.
Local park and recreation areas will be located and
designed for access to all age groups where practicable.
Facilities will be provided for both active (play areas
and courts) and passive (turf, walkways, trees and pic-
nic facilities where possible) recreational activity.
Encourage developers to plan~for and incorporate common
recreational facilities for ~he use of future residents,
such as in planned-unit-developments.
13.
Encourage schools to make playgrounds and playfields
available to local residents after normal school hours
and on weekends.
14.
Coordinate the acquisition, development and use of parks
and schools to avoid duplication of facilities and pro-
vide economic use of public funds.
15.
Encourage the development of recreation programs by pub-
lic agencies and sports organizations to involve more
children and adults in outdoor recreation activity. Use
volunteers to operate and maintain programs whenever
possible.
16.
Adopt or recognize an official park acquisition program
to meet current and future needs. Such a program should
include direct input for capital budgeting purposes
including the scheduling of Quimby Act funds. The pro-
gram should also be reviewed periodically with respect
to changing growth rates and general plan policies.
17. Adopt a parkland dedication ordinance with in-lieu fee
provisions under the Quimby Act.
18. Require proposed new development to pay for or provide
parks and recreation facilities to off set additional
demands on the park system brought about by it.
19.
Establish a formal mechanism by which the city may
accept gifts and dedications of parks and open space.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE
Maintain the current 4 acres of park and recreation
space for each 1,000 persons for general regional
recreation opportunity as a minimum standard.
POLICIES
Regional recreation is the responsibility of the county
and possibly the State.
The city will work with the county and North Bakersfield
Recreation and Park District in regional park planning.
o
Plan for and expand regional recreation opportunity
connection with the de3elopment and conservation of
appropriate areas along the Kern River.
in
4. In accordance with the development of a Kern River Plan,
designate multiple purpose areas for regional wide
recreation use consistent with space standards appli-
cable to usable areas (e.g., secondary floodplains) for
general purpose use such as picnic areas, camping, trail
use for hiking and bicycling and active sports both for
informal and for organized groups.
5. Develop a trail system connecting regional recreation
and education facilities for hiking and bicycling
purposes.
6. Study the feasibility of a recreation and land manage-
ment program allowing for the generation of supplemental
revenue to offset the cost of necessary further land
acquisition, development and operational costs. This
could include establishing concessions, rentals, user
fees and land leases.
funding
purposes
is highly competitive. In FY 1983-84, the city spent nearly
$0.5 million, primarily from 1980 State Bond Act funds, for the
development of parks in the southwest and northeast communities.
Park development in the college community, under development by
the Tenneco Corporation, will be financed by Tenneco and main-
tained by special districts. Because of the depletion of outside
sources, the city is now faced with using the Quimby Act to
require residential developers to dedicate land and/or pay in-lieu
fees and other fees and mechanisms to acquire and develop park
space. The Subdivision Map Act also allows local government to
require reservation and/or dedication of land for park and
recreational purposes provided that it has adopted appropriate
policies in its general plan.
Park and Recreation Area Funding and Acquisition. The
from State and Federal sources for park and recreation
-14-
The law requires that dedications required pursuant to Quimby
may not exceed three acres per 1,000 population unless a greater
amount was actually provided in 1980. For the two local agen-
cies, the City of Bakersfield and County of Kern, the followiDg
1980 population, acreage and acres per 1,000 persons existed.
TABLE 1
Park Acreage
Agency 1980 1980 Park
Population AcreaGe
Park Acreage
per 1,000 persons
City of
Bakersfield 105,735 191.01 1.80641
County of
Kern (Metro area
south of Kern
River only) 81,127
197.7 2.4369
1This is rounded to 1.81.
Therefore, 3 acres/i,000 population is the limit as far as exac-
tions as conditions of subdivisions. In order to meet the intent
of the legislation as to the how, when and where land dedication
and fee expenditures are to be accomplished, it is necessary to
prepare a development schedule. It is highly desirable, as indi-
cated in the policy portion, that sites be acqured before an area
is built up to ensure a better residential environment, the pre-
ferred site location and to avoid higher land costs later. The
implementation of Quimby Act legislation will not by itself
address all the needs. New schools and private development
-15-
should continue to assist in relieving the pressure on local
governmental agencies.
The difficulty in relying only on Quimby Act legislation becomes
evident where large acreages are needed such as for community
parks in the south and southwest. If it were to only require
1.81 acres per 1,000 population to reflect present city supply
rate in the southwest, only 25.4 acres by Year 2000 would be pro-
duced - adequate only for a single community park. Other sources
of land and funding will be necessary if desired standards are to
be achieved in the southwest. An option currently forthcoming is
in the recommendations of the Kern River Plan where some areas
adjacent to the southwest may be developed for active and passive
recreation use.
Park Development and Maintenance Costs. While the primary empha-
sis has been given to the space and distributional needs for
parks and recreation areas, it is also important to review the
costs involved in developing and maintaining parks. Once land is
dedicated for parks, there is a commitment for its development
particularly in the application of Quimby Act provisions which
would apply to growth areas with increasing recreation needs.
This part provides estimated development, and annual maintenance
cost factors for mini-park, neighborhood and community parks.
-16-
Table 2 describes estimated acre and total development costs pro-
vided by the City Parks Division and from current Tenneco Realty
Development Corporation costs for
Table 3 provides estimated annual
unit basis with totals by type of
parks in southwest Bakersfield.
park maintenance costs on a
park. The information was
developed from the Park Division Maintenance Program Budget. The
complexity of larger parks in evident in increased numbers and a
variety of facilities contributing to higher maintenance costs.
The estimated total annual cost involved in operating a mini-park
of 2.5 acres is approximately $19,000 compared to over $43,000
cost for operating a neighborhood park of 6.0 acres. Community
park annual maintenance costs approach $125,000 each.
-17-
TABLE 2: ESTIMATED
Park or Recreation
Area
Mini-park or
Small Neighborhood
Park1
(2.5 acres)
Neighborhood
Park2
(6 acres)
Community
Park3
(15.0 acres)
PARK DEVELOPMENT COSTS BY FACILITY
Development Acre Total
Item Cost Costs
Picnic Tables
Bar-B-Q's
Playground
or Tot-lot
Fountain
Landscaping
Security Lighting
$30,000 $ 75,000
Picnic Areas
(Group)
Bar-B-Q's
Fountains
Playground
Tennis and/or
Game Courts
Landscaping
Security Lighting
$40,000 $240,000
Picnic Areas
(Group)
Bar-B-Q's
Fountains
Playgrounds
Game Courts
Softball Diamonds
Incl. Lighting
Swimming Pool
Tennis Courts
Security Lighting
Parking
Restrooms
$50,000 $750,000
1Amberton Park is used as example: no parking, restrooms or
basketball courts.
2From Tenneco Realty Development Corporation for park development
costs, in Southwest Bakersfield.
3Figures are rough estimates. Actual costs may exceed estimates
source.
-15-
TABLE 3: ESTIMATED PARK ANNUAL MAINTENANCE COSTS BY FACILITY
Park of Recreation Maintenance Annual Unit Total
Area Item Cost Annual
Cost
Mini-park1 or Grounds $3,600 (acre) $ 9,000
Small Neighborhood Recreation
Park Facilities2 310 7,148
(2.5 acres) Irrigation 628 (acre) 1,570
Tree Maint-
enance 30 1,200
TOTAL
$18,918 ($7,567
per acre)
Neighborhood
(6.0 acres)
Grounds $3,600 (acre) $21,600
Recreation
Facilities 310 15,810
Irrigation 628 (acre) 3,767
Tree Maint-
enance 30 2,700
TOTALS
43,877 ($7,312
per acre)
Community
(15.0 acres)
Grounds $3,600 (acre) $54,000
Recreation
Facilities 310 30,422
Park Building 4,138 4,138
Irrigation 628 (acre) 9,420
Tree Maint-
enance 30 6,000
Swimming Pool 21,125 21,125
TOTALS
$125,205 ($8,347
per acre)
1AmDerton Park is used as example: no parking, restrooms or
basketball courts.
2Recreation Facilities in a mini-park include tot-lot play
apparatus, picnic nook, bar-b-q's, settees, fountain and
electrotier. In a neighborhood park, recreation facilities
include game courts, horseshoe courts, playgrounds, shelter,
group picnic area, picnic nooks, food serving shelter, bar-b-q's,
park tables, settees, fountains, bike racks, electrolier and
flood lights. Tennis Courts are optional and account for the
range in cost figures. In a community park, recreation facili-
ties include all neighborhood facilities plus tennis courts and
softball facilities (incl. backstop and bleachers). Annual cost
figures from PARK DIVISION MAINTENANCE PROGRAM, Budget Analysis
1983-84 Fiscal Year (City of Bakersfield).
-19-
TABLE 4: PROJECTED PARK DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE COSTS OVER
10 YEAR PERIOD
Park or Recreation
Area
Development Annual Maint- 10-Year
Cost enance Costs Total Costs
Mini-park or Small
Neighborhood Park
(2.5 acres)
Neighborhood Park
Community Park
$ 75,000 $18,918 $264,180
240,000 43,877 678,770
750,000 125,205 2,002,050
The overall total cost comparison of the three types of parks is
projected over ten years in Table 4. Since both development and
maintenance costs rise with the size and complexity of the park,
it is not entirely surprising that it would be less costly to
provide mini-parks or small neighborhood parks rather than com-
munity parks. For example, on an acreage basis, a mini-park
would cost $105,670 for development and maintenance over 10 years
compared to $113,130 for a neighborhood park with tennis courts
and $133,390 for an acre of community park land.
Under the above distribution, which provides maximum opportunity
for various kinds of facilities under the city's current level of
provision, it would cost approximately $1,575,552 (not including
interest) to fund development and maintenance over a 10 year
period. For comparison purposes, other parkland concepts for
neighborhood distribution ~ere evaluated with the following deve-
lopment and ten-year maintenance cost factors without interest:
-20-
Concept
1. Mini-parks only
2. Neighborhood parks only
3. Community parks only
4. 3.5 acres mini-parks
10.0 acres neighborhood parks
5. 7.5 acres mini-parks
6.0 acres neighborhood parks
6. 7.5 acres mini-parks
6.0 acres community parks
10-Year Cost
$ 1,426,572
1,527,228
1,801,845
1,501,132
1,471,310
1,593,360
As a matter of course, it is expected the fees or cost of park
land will become a part of the purchase price of residences and
would be spread over the term of 20 or 30 year mortgages for
lower annual payments.
Development costs can only be paid for by the city, a recreation
district, developers, or outside funding sources like grants or
donations as they become available. Maintenance costs can be
paid for through the formation of special districts such as a
recreation district or districts with powers to assess develop-
ment's costs to users.
Implementation. Map 2 identifies both existing and proposed park
and recreation areas. It also shows existing and potential
future regional parks in the Metropolitan area.
The application of Quimby Act dedication or in-lieu fee payment
requires basic criteria for site selection and fee application.
Map 2 identifies a central site within each neighborhood where
sites may be dedicated. A hypothetical neighborhood with a site
envelop area is shown in Figure 1 (Page 22).
REFER iO RANCHO LABORDE
SPECIFIC PLAN
TENNECO DEV CO
MASTER PLAN
APPROVED
REFER lO TEVI$ RANCH
M~STER PLAN
APPROVED 10-3 85 --
REFER TO TENNECO
MASTER PLAN
APPROVED H-21-85
I
I
L) (
p ~O.P 0 S EO REGIONAL
PAR~( ALONG KERN RIVEI
I
eIcAuF
81
::'i IpANAMA LN
I ~_ KERN RIVER pAR
_1 I~ CAMPGROUN
P~
E] L
/
:::i:i'~.. / ' ",~' / 7
.. :: ::..: .':: /~, .: \ / (
6qoo ~2ooo
FEET
2
MILES
PARK PLAN
BAKERSFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN
MAP 2
URBAN
· STUDY AREA BOUNDARY
-COMMUNITY BOUNDARY
NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARY
METROPOLITAN AREA
RECREATIONAL
OPPORTUNITIES
EX ISTING
-e- EXISTING
EXISTING
EXISTING
· PRIVATE
PUBLIC SCHOOL OR SITE
PRIVATE SCHOOL
CITY PARK
COUNTY PARK
OPEN SPACE WITHIN TRACTS
1983- 2000
CSO- CALIFORNIA STATE COLLEGE
BC -BAKERSFIELD COLLEGE
G-GOLF COURSE
[] PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
ACREAGE NEEDED TO MEET METROPOLITAN
45.3- STANDARD BY YR. 2000 BY COMMUNITY
-Z/-
-22-
Figure 1
Theoretically, a neighborhood consisting of primarily single-
family residential development resulting in a population of 7,500
would require 13.5 acres of city parkland. Assigning the acreage
to the three levels of facilities results in 3.75 acres of com-
munity parkland, 6.0 acres of neighborhood parks and 3.75 acres
in 3 mini-parks assigned per neighborhood in the following con-
ceptual layout:
Figure 2
1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25
Neighborhood Park Neighborhood Park
Community Park
3.75 I 3.75
3.75 I 3.75
1.25 1.25
1.25 1.25
Neighborhood Park Neighborhood Park
1.25
1.25 1.25 1.25
1.25 refers
to acreage
of each
mini-park
shown
-23-
The site envelop is intended to comply with the policy to plan
for and acquire neighborhood parks within the central portion of
the neighborhood. Within the theoretical neighborhood, only one-
fourth of the area would qualify for park dedication.
Subdivisions proposed outside the envelop shall contribute in-
lieu fees based on fair market value of the amount of land which
would otherwise be required.
TABLE 5: PARK LAND DEDICATION FORMULA
Types of Dwellings
Population Density
per housing unit
Acreage per
housing unit
Single-Family 3.5 .00875
Duplex, Triplex 2.8 .00070
Mobilehome 2.0 .00050
Apartment, Condominium 2.0 .00050
Note: The above table represents an example.
will need to be developed from the 1980
Specific figures
U.S. Census upon
drafting a Park Land Dedication Ordinance.
The fee schedule will be based on the land value for the par-
ticular acreage required per housing unit. For example, if the
unimproved land value is $20,000 per acre, the fee required for a
single-family residence (detached) is $175.
The County of Kern should also adopt the provisions of the Quimby
Act. If the county does not enact the Quimby Act provisions or
otherwise acquire parks and plan for neighborhood recreation
facilities in the review of development proposals, it would
become virtually impossible for the city to provide adequate
space or central site locations if the area is annexed later.
-24-
This plan does not proposed to make up
acreage if the county fails to provide it.
With the above information, it
revenue and alternative supply
development fees and donations)
the short fall in park
is evident that major sources of
contributions (such as grants,
are needed to address community
park needs. Commercial recreation, such as that provided in the
recently developed softball complex at Mesa Marin, and the use of
existing city and county-owned lands are possible alternatives to
meeting some of the need. The use of city land along the Kern
River adjacent to the southwest community will be addressed in
the following brief discussion of regional recreation supply.
Supplying Regional Recreation Opportunity. The Kern River Plan
recomanen~s the preservation of primary and secondary floodplains
along the Kern River. Between Gosford Road on the west and Manor
Way on the east, an area comprising 740 acres is designated for
preservation of the primary floodplain, resource management
within the secondary (t00-year) floodplain and public or private
recreational purposes. Approximately
river channel or water recharge area)
developed for recreational purposes.
350 acres is usable (not
and has the potential to be
This is more than suf-
ficient acreage to qualify as a regional park and would approach
the required 437 acres needed by 2000 for the entire Bakersfield
Metropolitan Area including Rosedale and Oildale. In view of the
total 740 acres proposed for open space which would include river
-25-
uses and less intensive development for the appreciation and use
of the natural river environment within the primary floodplain
(i.e., the river channel and high groundwater conditions), the
overall requirements should be met.
In the southwest area, a serious community recreation need has
been identified and will continue throughout the planning period.
Within the area between the Kern River and Truxtun Avenue west
of State Highway 99, the City of Bakersfield owns approximately
60 acres of usable area which may be considered for the develop-
ment of community recreation facilities primarily for the south-
west community. This would provide a significant part of the
current and future larger park needs in the southwest.
Alternative Actions. As indicated earlier, this plan and park
acquisition program respond to the minimal needs of the
Bakersfield area to the Year 2000. It is obvious that several
techniques or strategies will be needed to respond, including new
legislation (Quimby Act Ordinance), development fees, use of city
and county lands, encouraging private and commercial recreational
development, and providing assistance to the various public
schools in planning locations for future schools. Given this
participation, and the augmentation of city and county revenue
with State and Federal sources, the plan is achievable. Public
and private land trades may also be another means of acquiring
important parcels for recreation and park lands.
-26-
However, alternatives need to be considered either for the entire
proposal.or more appropriately in specific neighborhoods and com-
munities where the plan cannot be implemented ideally because
sufficient acreage is not available. The Park Plan does not sug-
gest removing homes in order to provide open space. For this
reason, alternative actions are suggested which would, if imple-
mented, move the community forward toward meeting the future
local recreation need; however, not all policies of the plan
would apply to the alternatives. The alternative is termed a
design approach.
Design Alternative
In the event that existing development precludes the acquisition
of five to fifteen acres for a neighborhood park or it is deter-
mined that small park sites are more appropriate as in the direct
applicability of the Quimby Act to subdivision residents, smaller
sites may be acquired close to homes. This concept assumes that
a school site will be acquired in a central area of the neigh-
borhood as outlined below. The school would provide approxima-
tely 5 acres of the approximately 15 acres need to serve a
neighborhood with a population of 7,500 (i.e., 1.99 acres per
1,000 persons).
-27-
Figure 3
Approximate Scale: Two inches equal to one mile. School and
park sites are not to scale.
The design aproach may also be used as part of a local area mas-
ter plan approved by the Planning Commission for development
which takes into conslaeratlo the land in distributions and
intensities within the plan area.