Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/16/96 BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUN~~'~~st 16, 1~ 996 FROM: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER ~ SUBJECT: GENERAL INFORMATION 1. In response to downtown parking issues, City staff initiated the formation of the "Downtown Parking Committee". The group began meeting in May to discuss downtown parking problems and potential solutions. A detailed status report is attached. 2. Samples of new letterhead that is being proposed as a replacement fOr the current Council stationery is attached. Please contact the Clerk's office regarding your preference and/or comments and suggestions. 3. A progress report on formation of the Chester Avenue landscape maintenance district is enclosed. One or our grant applications for construction monies is doing well in the funding process, but the award won't be finalized for some months. 4. Responses to Council inquiries are attached, as follows: · Status of the Canlan Ice Rink project and financing; · Placement of SB 1505/Transportation Funding on the 8/21/96 Council agenda; · Illegal parking at Colony and Panama; · Permit application process for cabaret licensing; · 6 month history of police service calls in Kern City. 5. Attached is a letter we received in support of the proposed addition to the Convention Center. 6. I had a lengthy meeting with the Kern County Chief Administrative Officer this week. It was a positive exchange on a variety of subjects. 7. Please remember that I'm working only Tuesday afternoon and Wednesday next week.' Gail Waiters will be in charge while I'm out. AT:rs cc: Department Heads Pamela McCarthy, Acting City Clerk Trudy Slater, Administrative Analyst BAKERSFIELD Economic and Community Development Department ~.~ August 15, 1996 · TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Jake Wager, Economic Development Direct SUBJECT: Proposed Improvements and Modifications to Downtown Parking In response to increasing interest from downtown business owners regarding downtown parking issues the city initiated forming the Downtown Parking Committee. Members of this committee include Cathy Butler (DBA), Roland Brown (Personal Trainer/Ackerman Chiropractic), Mark Sheffield (Five and Dime Antiques), Shawn Beyeler (Bottoms-Up Tavern), Randy Anderson (Five Star) and city staff representatives from Planning, Traffic, Police and Economic and Community Development. This committee has provided an opportunity for City staff and downtown business owners to meet once a month to discuss downtown parking problems and potential solutions. Since starting these meetings in May the committee has identified parking problems and developed solutions to these problems. The basic problem identified by the committee is that there is not enough on-street parking downtown. The committee has tried to address this by creating more on-street parking for downtown shoppers and customers by getting employers and employees away from business storefronts and into public and private parking lots. To achieve this the committee has come up with the following ideas which can be readily implemented: 1. Develop a comprehensive signage plan for the 18th and Eye Street Parking Structure to include more directional signage to the structure by strategically placing more signage throughout the downtown. This sign would be a universal parking symbol. Another sign such as" CITY PARKING MONTHLY - HOURLY" would be placed above the 18th Street entrance to help the public identify the structure. According to the Parking Committee the public does not know that this is a public parking structure for the public. Before ordering this sign staff is waiting for contract negotiations with parking vendors to manage the structure which expires at the end of this year. The committee also suggested a reader board sign with parking rates on the entrance booth. To help allay security concerns Randy Anderson has arranged for three additional lights on the alley side of the parking structure. 2. Staff has developed a simple marketing brochure promoting the availability of parking at the parking structure and at the 19th & "K" Street Parking Lot. A copy is attached. Randy Anderson and Cathy Butler have offered to distribute this brochure to new and existing businesses reminding them of these parking facilities. Staff will also be working with Mr. Anderson to develop a letter reminding businesses of the parking validation program available at the parking structure. He has offered to distribute this letter and explain the program to business owners. The importance of a marketing plan for the structure has been emphasized in the request for proposals sent to parking management vendors. 3. Th~ 19th & "K" Street lot is available for parking by monthly lease only. Of the 88 parking spaces five are designated for handicapped parking, 50 are leased by the Kress . Building, 12 by the Haberfelde, and three by Forrest Dickey Jewelers. This leaves 19 unleased spaces which are the City's responsibility to monitor. Although the lot is posted "Parking by permit only all others will be towed away at owners expense" people continue to park their cars at the lot. Last year the Economic and Community Development Department asked the Police Department to put courtesy notices on illegally parked cars. Now, again, people are parking their cars at the lot. Since the courtesy notice did not work that well last year, this year's solution is to issue the illegal parkers a parking citation. This eliminates the need for the Police Department to call a tow truck and is an attention getter. To accommodate the short-term parker we are proposing that (10) unleased parking spaces would be posted at the lot with 90 minute parking signs. The enforcement program would begin when the 90 minute parking spaces are posted. This approach would leave us with nine spaces for lease. If the demand for leased spaces exceeds this number then we can reduce the number of 90 minute posted parking spaces. If a business leased the parking spaces the signs would be removed. 4. To accommodate the motorists who insist on parking on-street, parking time limit signs fronting parking lots and undeveloped properties would be removed until such a time that these lots are developed. By having more on-street parking for long-term parkers, away from building and storefronts, the idea is that this parking would be available for customers. The committee has identified a number of locations where this could occur. The locations tend to be out of the core area where there is less demand or competition for parking. The committee will continue to meet to discuss and solve more difficult parking problems until the process no longer seems productive. These ideas seem to be simple and implementable solutions that would help demonstrate our willingness to work with property owners and merchants in addressing downtown's parking problems. Staff will be monitoring these ideas to see if they are working. tandy.prk. db8yellow Bakersfield Downtown · (%-s~~t-~aa~- Redevelop 1 ~ 1Tth et. TSUXTUN e~. ' .... loth et. ~A T & 8 P NAI~ D',gJ IN DOiWNTO WN.B 4 ERSFIELDi ~ ~',:Th~:~itv~6~ed na~fi'~ st~c~e'~rogides ~":: ~ ~)' :)~ The;ci~,omed ~ark~n~ }ot.prcmdes:c~onvement::;. : 'coavement¢ attende~ parkmg for, the geg~ratpubhc..' {:?~,sbe~ial V~lidat'~ pr6~a~,avai,lable for m~rchan{d. ~. Fo~ mo~e '~nf°rmati°n' cai!:' :- The,Parklag Stdcture;(80~5)3254044:_ ~. : BAKERSFIELD CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM August 14, 1996 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM' Ga aiters, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Letterhead Stationery Attached are samples of new letterhead that staff is proposing as a replacement once the letterhead Council is currently using is depleted. Staff is suggesting this new letterhead as a cost saving measure and to update your letterhead to be in conformance with the "new logo" and City seal. We would like input from the Mayor and Council as to your preference. The grade and quality of paper will not change. In fact, it will be of higher quality because the Bakersfield seal will be in the gold foil that is embossed on your business cards. The savings will be derived from the economies of scale that are realized from ordering reams of the same letterhead. Even if there is a change in Council member(s), we will still come out ahead because the printing company will stock the letterhead with everything in place except the names, and has the ability to overlay the names as changes occur. Please let the City Clerk's Office know your preference for sample #1, 2 or 3; or if you have any other suggestions/comments. cc: City Manager Acting City Clerk BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA CITY COUNCIL Bob Price ' Mayor Patricia DeMond Vice-Mayor Ward 2 Irma Carson Ward 1 Patricia Smith Ward 5 Kevin McDermott Ward 4 Randy Rowles Ward 5 Jacqule Sullivan Ward 6 Mark Salvaggio Ward 7 1501 Truxtun Avenue ~ Bakersfield, California 93301. * (805) 326-3767 * Fax (805) 323-3780 BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA CITY COUNCIL Bob Price Mayor Patricia DeMond Vice-Mayor Ward 2 Irma Carson Ward 1 · Patricia Smith Ward 5 Kevin McDermott Ward 4 Randy Rowles Ward 5 Jacquie Sullivan Ward 6 Mark Salvagglo Ward 7 1501 Truxtun Avenue * Bakersfield, California 93301. * (805) 326-3767 ~ Fax (805) 323-3780 BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA CITY COUNCIL Bob Price Mayor PatHcia DeMond Vice-Mayor Ward 2 Irma Carson Ward 1 Patrlcia Smith Ward5 Kevin McDermott Ward 4 Randy Rowles Ward 5 Jacquie Sullivan Ward 6 Mark Salvaggio Ward 7 1501 Truxtun Avenue * Bakersfield, California 93301 * (805) 326-3767 ~ Fax (805) 323-3780 BAKERSFIELD Economic and Community Development Department 'ff~ A MEMORANDUM August 16, 1996 ~~/~ TO: Jake Wager ~ ,, ~ FROM: David Lymani~'"" ~ SUBJECT: Progress Report on Chester Avenue Maintenance District Formation Downtown Business Association president Phil Bentley sent letters to affected Chester Avenue property owners on August 7 asking for their support of the proposed Chester Avenue Maintenance District. These letters were prepared and mailed by this office. On August 12, Mayor Price sent letters to these same property owners asking their support of such a district. For those owners that reside out of town, they were asked to complete a form indicating their support and return it to me. Local property owners were asked to call me to arrange an appointment to discuss the maintenance district. To date, I have received (5) phone calls from local property owners in response to the Mayor's letter. Of these, (1) has indicated support in writing, (2) have asked for more information before having a meeting, (1) has requested a meeting, and (1) has stated opposition. I have not heard from any out of town property owners. I mailed a calendar to each ambassador asking for available times on his or her schedule through September 13. To date I have received (4) responses to this request. I have developed a comprehensive status reporting form containing each property owner's name, parcel number, property street address, the percentage of the total district's area the property represents, the proposed annual assessment for each parcel, and whether the property owner supports, opposes, or is undecided on the issue of.district formation. (~ MEMORANDUM ~/.-~ ~-~ TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: GREGORY J. ~I~O, F~CE D~CTOR~~ DATE: AUGUST 12, 1996 SUBJECT: ICE RINK DEVELOPMENT On January 24, 1996 the City Council Referred the Subject Item To Staff (Referral No. WF00008167). Subsequently on March 20, 1996, the City Council passed a Resolution of Intention to sponsor an Ice Rink Development by Canlan with a tax excempt financing through the National Economic Development Council (NEDC). This week I have confirmed that Canlan is proceeding with the project to be financed privately, a contractor has been selected and permits should be pulled within 60 days. ec MG.IK. 148 BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Raul M. Rojas, Public Works Zcto~~ DATE: August 12, 1996 SUBJECT: SB 1505/TRANSPORTATION FUNDING Cit~ Council Referral Record # WF0010924 / 001 At the last regular Council meeting Councilmember Mark Salvaggio requested staff' place the issue of SB 1505 on the agenda for the August 21, 1996 Council meeting. Attached for your information are copies of the following agenda documents: 1. Administrative Report 2. Draft letters to State Assemblymen, and 3. City Resolution in opposition to new amendment to SB 1505 regarding at-grade crossings. If you require additional information, please give me a call. WF10924.001 .rfll'o Attachments '~, ~ City of Bakersfield *REPRINT* WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 NEQ/JOB: WF0010924' / 001 PROJECT: DATE PRINTED: 8/09/96 REQUEST DATE: 8/07/96 SCHEDULE DATES o~W: START: ~/07/96 LOCATION: COMPLETION: 8/09/96 FACILITY NODES GEN. LOC: WARD7 FROM: FACILITY ID: TO: REF NBR: COUNCIL REQ DEPT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL REQUESTOR: REFERRAL - SALVAGGIO WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DESCRIPTION: SB 1505/TRANSPORTATION FUNDING REQUEST COMMENTS ***REFERRAL TO PUBLIC WORKS*** SALVAGGIO REQUESTED STAFF PLACE THE ISSUE OF SB 1505 AND THE IMPORTANCE OF THE RAILROAD'S PARTICIPATION, ON THE AGENDA FOR THE AUGUST 21, 1996 COUNCIL MEETING. STAFF REQUESTED RON RUETTGERS BE NOTIFIED OF THIS~MEETING. JOB ORDER DESCRIPTION: SB 1505/TRANSPORTATION FUNDING Category: PUBLIC WORKS TASK: RESPONSE TO REFERRAL ASSIGNED DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS START DATE / / COMPLETION DATE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE: August 12, 1996 CITY ATTORNEY -'-~ CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: A resolution of the Council of the City of Bakersfield in opposition to'repeal of Section 190 of Streets and Highways Code (SB 1505) regarding at-grade crossings. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Resolution. BACKGROUND: The City of Bakersfield is concerned about certain proposed changes within the current version of SB 1505. The bill, which revises the process for estimating the mount of state and federal funds to be available for transportation projects in the state, will have a deleterious eft'cci upon the City of Bakersfield's ability to meet the transportation needs of its citizens. The amendment to section 60 means that at the most 2 or 3 ('Fresno, Modesto and Belmon0 top ranked projects will be constructed but no more. The amendment does not mean, that "[a]ll projects.which have been included in the most current.., list ·.. will be funded." As currently proposed, the bill will eliminate the Grade separation program. Because the City of Bakersfield has two major railroad lines traversing it, this program has been very beneficial in bringing needed state funding to a number of projects which have eradicated dangerous at-grade highway/raikoad crossings within our community. The elimination of the program (contained within SB 1505 calling for the repeal of Section 190 of the Streets and Highways Code) will not only mean that new projects will not be funded but also that needed supplemental allocations for projects will not be forthcoming. Several other urban communities bisected by railroads will be similarly affected, including Fresno, Stockton, Sacramento, and Los Angeles. A second program is SB 1505 which is proposed to be cut is the State Local Transportation Partnership Program (SLTPP). The City of Bakersfield receives between $300,000 and $400,000 in additional Gas Tax- revenues each year due to this program. To eliminate this program as well as repealing Section 190 of the Streets and Highways Code will seriously impact the City's ability to fund transportation program needs in the community. The City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, and the Greater Bakersfield Separation of Grade District continue to oppose Senate Bill 1505 notwithstanding the Appropriations Committee's amendment to section 60. SBISO~.ADM August 12. 1996 The Honorable Keith Olberg Calitbrnia State Assembly State Capitol, Room 4112 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Assembly Member Oiberg: The City Council of the City of Bakersfield, California, County of Kern, would like to inform you of our opposition to SB 1505 (Kopp) in its current form, which would repeal the Separation of Grade Program contained in the Streets and Highways Code of California. The attached resolution requests that the Legislature amend SB 1505 to delete language repealing the Separation of Grade Program from the bill. Annual separation of grade appropriations totaling $15 million provide 80 percent of the cost of highway/railroad overpasse~s and undercrossings statewide. Under this critical program, many dangerous at- grade railroad crossings have been eliminated in the greater Bakersfield area of Kern County. Since 1980 alone, six grade separatiom have been built using nearly $24 million in State appropriations supplemented by $7.25 million in railroad and local government funds. However, if section 190 of the Streets and Highways Code is repealed by enactment of SB 1505, two projects now in the planning stages which have already received partial funding may have to be terminated. In addition, seven other projects in the Bakersfield area which are now on the Public Utilities Commission priority list for future funding will likely never be built. Elsewhere in Kern County, the communities of Delano, Rosamond, Shafier, Tehachapi and Wasco also need grade separations which would have a reasonable change of being funded under this statewide program in the future. Elimination of the Separation of Grade Program would deal a severe blow to public safety in Kern County and in other regions across the State which depend on this program. Traffic congestion and delays caused by at- grade crossings will also choke economic growth in these areas. For these reasons, we urge you to oppose SB 1505 unless it is amended to delete the repeal of section 190 Separation of Grade Program funds. Thank you tbr considering our views. Sincerely, BOB PRICE, Mayor of the CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, attachment: Resolution copy: City Council Members of the City of Bakersfield Alan Tandy, City Manager Greater Bakersfield Separation of Grade District Kern Council of Governments August 12, 1996 The Honorable Trice Harvey California State As~mbly State Capitol, Room 5136 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Assembly Member Harvey: The City Council of the City of Bakersfield, California, County of Kern, would like to infOrm you of our opposition to SB 1505 (Kopp) in its current form, which would repeal the Separation of Grade Program contained in the Streets and Highways Code of California. The attached resolution requests that the Legislature amend SB 1505 to delete language repealing the Separation of Grade Program from the bill. Annual separation of grade appropriations totaling $15 million provide 80 percent of the cost of highway/railroad overpasses and undercrossings statewide. Under this critical program, many dangerous at- grade railroad crossings have been eliminated in the greater Bakersfield area of Kern County. Since 1980 alone, six grade separations have been built using nearly $24 million in State appropriations supplemented by $7.25 million in railroad and local government funds. However, if section 190 of the Streets and Highways Code is repealed by enactment of SB 1505, two projects now in the planning stages which have already received partial fun~ng may have to be'terminated. In addition, seven other projects in the Bakersfield area which are now on the Public Utilities Commission priority list for future funding will likely never be built. Elsewhere in Kern County, the communities of Delano, Rosamond, Shafier, Tehachapi and Wasco also need grade separations which would have a reasonable change of being funded under this statewide program in the future. Elimination of the Separation of Grade Program would deal a severe blow to public safety in Kern County and in other regions across the State which depend on this program. Traffic congestion and delays caused by at- grade crossings will also choke economic growth in these areas. For these reasons, we urge you to oppose SB 1505 unless it is amended to delete the repeal of section 190 Separation of Grade Program funds. Thank you for considering our views. Sincerely, BOB PRICE, Mayor of the CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, attachment: Resolution copy: City Council Members of the City of Bakersfield Alan Tandy, City Manager Greater Bakersfield Separation of Grade District Kern Council of Governments August 12, 1996 The Honorable Charles P~x~chigian, Chairman Assembly Appropriations Committee State CapitOl, Room 2114 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Assembly Member Poochigian: The City Council of the City of Bakersfield, California, County of Kern, would like to inf°rm you of our opposition to SB 1505 (Kopp) in its current tbrm, which would repeal the Separation of Grade Program ~contained in the Streets and Highways Code of Califi~rnia. The attached resolution requests that the Legislature amend SB 1505 to delete language repealing the Separation of Grade Program from the bill. Annual separation of grade appropriations totaling $15 million provide 80 percent of the cost of highway/railroad overpasses and undercrossings statewide. Under this critical program, many dangerous at- grade railroad crossings have been eliminated in the greater Bakersfield area of Kern County. Since 1980 alone, six grade separations have been built using nearly $24 million in State appropriations supplemented by $7.25 million in railroad and local government funds. However, if section 190 of the Streets and Highways Code is repealed by enactment of SB 1505, two projects now in the planning stages which have already received partial funding may have to be terminated. In addition, seven other projects in the Bakersfield area which are m~w on the Public Utilities Commission priority list for future funding will likely never be built. Elsewhere in Kern County, the communities of Delano, Rosamond, Shafter, Tehachapi and Wasco also need grade separations which would have a reasonable change of being funded under this statewide program in the future. Elimination of the Separation of Grade Program would deal a severe blow to public safety in Kern County and in other regions across the State which depend on this program. Traffic congestion and delays caused by at- grade crossings will also choke economic growth in these areas. For these reasons, we urge you to oppose SB 1505 unless it is amended to delete the repeal of section 190 Separation of Grade Program funds. Thank you for considering our views. Sincerely, BOB PRICE, Mayor of the CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, attachment: Resolution copy: City Council Members of the City of Bakersfield Alan Tandy, City Manager Greater Bakersfield Separation of Grade District Kern Council of Governments August 12, 1996 The Honorable Charles Poochigian, Chairman Assembly Appropriations Committee State Capitol, Room 2114 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Assembly Member Poochigian: The City Council of the City of Bakersfield, California, County of Kern, would like to inforTM the Assembly Appropriations Committee of our opposition to SB 1505 (Kopp) in its current form, which would repeal the Separation of Grade Program contained in the Streets and Highways Code of California. The attached remlution requests that the Legislature amend SB 1505 to delete language repealing the Separation of Grade Program from the bill. Annual separation of grade appropriations totaling $15 million provide 80 percent of the cost of highway/railroad overpasses and undercrossings statewide. Under this critical program, many dangerous at- grade railroad crossings have been eliminated in the greater Bakersfield area of Kern County. Since 1980 alone, six grade separations have been built using nearly $24 million in State appropriations supplemented by $7.25 million in railroad and local government funds. However, if section 190 of the Streets and Highways Code is repealed by enactment of SB 1505, two projects now in the planning stages which have already received partial funding may have to be terminated. In addition, seven other projects in the Bakersfield area which are now on the Public Utilities Commission priority list for future funding will likely never be built. Elsewhere in Kern County, the communities of Delano, Rosamond, Shaft, er, Tehachapi and Wasco also need grade separations which would have a reasonable change of being funded under this statewide program in the future. Elimination of the Separation of Grade Program would deal a severe blow to public safety in Kern County an~ in other regions across the State which depend on this program. Traffic congestion and delays caused by at- grade crossings will also choke economic growth in these areas. For these reasons, we urge you to oppose SB 1505 unless it is amended to delete the repeal of section 190 Separation of Grade Program funds. Thank you for considering our views. Sincerely, BOB PRICE, Mayor of the CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, attachment: Resolution copy: Members, Assembly Appropriations Committee City Council Members of the City of Bakersfield Alan Tandy. City Manager Greater Bakersfield Separation of Grade District Kern Council of Governments August 12, 1996 The Honorable Brian Setencich California State Assembly State Capitol, Room 4017 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Assembly Member Setencich: The City Council of the City of Bakersfield, California, County of Kern, would like to inform you of our opposition to SB 1505 (Kopp) in its current form, which would repeal the Separation of Grade Program contained in the Streets and Highways Code of California. The attached resolution requests that the Legislature amend SB 1505 to delete language repealing the Separation of Grade Program from the bill. Annual separation of grade appropriations totaling $15 million provide 80 percent of the cost of highway/railroad overpasses and undercrossings statewide. Under this critical program, many dangerous at- grade railroad crossings have been eliminated in the greater Bakersfield area of Kern County. Since 1980 alone, six grade ~parafions have been built using nearly $24 million in State appropriations supplemented by $7.25 million in railroad and local government funds. However, if section 190 of the Streets and Highways Code is repealed by enactment of SB 1505, two projects now in the planning stages which have already received partial funding may have to be terminated. In addition, seven other projects in the Bakersfield area which are now on the Public Utilities Commission priority list for future funding will likely never be built. Elmwhere in Kern County, the communities of Delano, Rosamond, Shafter, Tehachapi and Wasco also need grade separations which would have a reasonable change of being funded under this statewide program in the future. Elimination of the Separation of Grade Program would deal a severe blow to public safety in Kern County and in other regions across the State which depend on this program. Traffic congestion and delays caused by at- grade crossings will also choke economic growth in these areas. For these reasons, we urge you to oppose SB 1505 unle~ it is amended to delete the repeal of section 190 Separation of Grade Program flmds. Thank you for consideririg our views. Sincerely, BOB PRICE, Mayor of the CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, 'attachment: Resolution copy: City Council Members of the City of Bakersfield Alan Tandy, City Manager Greater Bakersfield Separation of Grade District Kern Council of Governments RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD IN OPPOSITION TO REPEAL OF SECTION 190 OF STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE (SENATE BILL 1505). WHEREAS, City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, is bisected by two major railroad lines, the Main Line of the Southern Pacific and the Main Line of The Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe; and WHEREAS, the urban Bakersfield area and other cities and communities within Kern County contain many dangerous at-grade crossings of these two major railroad lines, subjecting the citizens of the City of Bakersfield to blocking delays, traffic congestion and crossing accidents; and WHEREAS, for more than 40 years, as part of the State Separation of Grade Program, the public Utilities Commission has ranked separation of grade projects throughout the State of California most urgently in need of construction according to a scientific cost/benefit formula; and WHEREAS, for more than 40 years, the California Transportation Commission has allocated State Highway Fund monies appropriated annually pursuant to Section 190 of the Streets & Highways Code for the construction of the most urgently needed grade separation projects throughout the State, as dete~rmined by the Public Utilities Commission; and WHEREAS, over the last 40 years, many dangerous at-grade railroad crossings have been eliminated in the greater Bakersfield area thanks to the Separation of Grade Program, including Beale Avenue at the Southern Pacific; Chester Avenue at the AT&SF; Chester Avenue at the Southern Pacific; Truxtun Avenue at the AT&SF; Union Avenue at the Southern Pacific; H Street at the AT&SF; Fairfax Road at the Southern Pacific; Oswell Street at the Southern Pacific; and WHEREAS, construction has commenced on the Coffee Road Overpass at the Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe (AT&SF), a project which received an initial allocation of $3.2 million under the State Separation of Grade Program; and WHEREAS, the County of Kern next year will commence construction of the Oak Creek Road Overpass of the Southern Pacific in Mojave, another project funded in part with funds appropriated under Streets & Highways Code section 190; and WHEREAS, the Greater Bakersfield Separation of Grade District in cooperation with the City of Bakersfield and the County of Kern has nominated a number of additional separation of grade projects for priority ranking by the Public Utilities Commission, including Baker Street at East Truxtun: Morning Drive; Seventh Standard Road; Cal!oway Drive; Q Street; Olive Drive, and additional projects will be nominated in the future as growth accelerates in the Bakersfield · area: and WHEREAS, many other communities in Kern County also have dangerous at-grade crossings which may qualify for funding by the State Separation of Grade Program in the future; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1505 (SB 1505) under consideration in the State Legislature proposes to reform the process by which transportation funds are allocated; and WHEREAS, the CITY OF BAKERSFIELD concurs with many of the reforms proposed by SB 1505, .however, section 60 of SB 1505 would repeal section 190 of the Streets & Highways Code, thus removing the source of funding for the State Separation of Grade program; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Bakersfield as folloWs: 1. The above recitals are true and correct. 2. The continued funding of the State Separation of Grade Program through annual appropriations made under Streets & Highways Code section 190 is essential to the current and future safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, State of California; and 3. The City Council opposes SB 1505 so long as section 60, repealing Streets & Highways Code section 190, remains in the bill; and 4. The City Council requests that SB 1505 be amended by eliminating section 60 f~:om such bill, thereby retaining section 190 of the Streets & Highways Code; and 5. The City Couhcil of the City of Bakersfield authorizes and directs that certified copies of this Resolution be provided to all members of the State Legislature from Kern County, as well as to the Chairman and other members of the Assembly Appropriaions Committee in a timely fashion so that this Resolution be considered in opposition to SB 1505 to repeal of section 190 of Streets & Highways Code I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on .., by the following vote: ACTING CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the City Council of the CITY OF BAKERSFIELD APPROVED BOB PRICE MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED as to form: JUDY K. SKOUSEN City Attorney By: ALAN DALE DANIEL Assistant City Attorney for' the City of Bakersfield RES · PD 64-2759  MEMORANDUM August 15, 1996 TO Honorab~le Mayor Price and Co~.r~l Members FROM S.E. Brummer, Chief of Police ~ SUBJECT Response to CRR #WF0010923/001 - Illegal Parking at Colony and Panama Council Member Salvaggio requested staff cite commercial vehicles for illegal parking on Colony and Panama Lane. The attached memorandum describes commercial vehicle enforcement action taken by the police department. vrf attachment: Memorandum "Commercial Vehicle Parking" by Officer S. Fagot, dated 8/14/96 :.:::/ ¥¥', BAKERSFIELD POLICE '-'~ ~iii',,?.:~ ~'.-'! ; ',., MEMORANDUM August14,1996. To: Lt. T. Moore, Traffic Commander From: Officer S. Fagot, ~t88 - Commercial Enforcement Subject: Commercial Vehicle Parking On approximately 6/25/96, I received a phone message from an unidentified employee of the Jack in the Box Restaurant located at 2221 Panama Lane. The message was regarding illegal parking of commercial vehicles in the dirt field at the southeast corner of the business..I telephoned the business management and was advised they were unaware of anyone calling the police department about this problem. I responded to the business on the following morning and contacted the on-duty manager identified as: Marissela Roldan Business Address: 2221 Panama Lane/397-2076 Roldan told me the owner of the property, who she identified as Mr. Steinert, had called the Jack in the Box Corporate office and complained about the landscaping around the business. I asked her if anyone in the residential area located east of the business had complained to her about commercial vehicles parking in the 'vacant dirt lot, and she said she was not aware of any complaints. I asked her if she knew where I could contact Mr. Steinert. Roldan did not have an address or phone number for Steinhert, and she advised the corporate office may have the information. After speaking with Roldan, I contacted Randy Fidler at the City of Bakersfield Building Department. I advised him of the situation, and he said the City had constructed a barrier consisting of wooden poles and cables along the north side of Panama Lane and the east curb line of Colony Street, specifically to keep the commercial vehicles out of the area. I asked Fidler if he was familiar with the southeast corner location adjacent to the Jack In the Box Restaurant and he said he was. Fidler said the area is private property and is commercially zoned for business and architectural design. I asked him Lt. T. Moore, Traffic Commander Commercial Vehicle Parking 2221 Panama Lane August 14, 1996 Page 2 if it would be possible for the City to fence off the area to keep commercial vehicles out of the dirt field to eliminate the dust and noise in the area. He said it would be expensive and the owner should possibly be responsible. I did not attempt further action after speaking with Fidler. On 8/9/96, I recontacted Jack in the Box Manager Marissela Roldan, who provided the address for the corporate office. Jack in the Box Corporate Support Center 9330 Balboa Avenue San Diego, CA 93113 (619) 571-2121 In addition, I observed that "No Parking'' signs had been installed at the entrances near the property where the commercial vehicles previously parked. I called the corporate support center and spoke with Judy Ankrom who identified the property owner as: Marvin Steinert 3939 Bernard Street/872-5545. I called the number provided for Steinert and spoke with Max Steinert, Marvin Steiner's son. I explained the situation to him, and he said he was already aware of the problem with the commercial vehicles parking on the dirt lot. He told me his father had spoken to Randy Fidler of the City Building Department on 7/15/96, and had authorized the City to place "No Parking" signs at that location. Max Steinert said he would assist and/or cooperate with any necessary enforcement actions. Panama Lane is a city street, and drivers park their vehicles on the street near convenience stores and restaurants. They are not cited for parking short periods of time, however citations are issued for parking extended periods of time or overnight. (Violation of Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 10.32.140 -'Parking on City Streets') Photographs of the Panama Lane and Colony Street area were taken for future reference. A copy of the area zoning maps is attached for your information. Respectfully submitted, Officer S. Fagot, #488 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ' ..... "'"' ZONING MAP 123-25 PUD SEC. 25 T. 30~.~ R 27E LEGEN ~' ,, j SC.~S R-I R-I ~ PUBLIC PARKS I ~A R-I L CITY dF' BAKERSFIELD "''""'" ZONING MAP 123-24 * __ P~C.~CO mAD ~* SEC. 24 T. 305. R. 27£ · LEGEND R-I R-I · I I sc~s M'I R'I M-I M-I ~u o ~ANNED UNI~ ~Y[LO~ENT Z~E ~RsS ~ ~ FAmV,[W ROAD R-I ~vE C-2 ~ ~A~ MAU~C~ AVE AMENDM[~: ~ ~" ~ City cf Bakersfield ~' *REPRINT* WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 REQ/JOB: W~10_0109~/ iQ. oi~ PROJECT: DATE PRINTED: 8/.09/.96 REQUEST DATE: DA%~8S/07/96 CREW: SCHEDULE START: 0/.07/.96 LOCATION: COMPLETION: 8 / 19 / 96 GEN. LOC: WARD7 FACILITY NODES ' FROM: FACILITY ID: T0: REF NBR: COUNCIl, ~','M'r.~ REQ DEPT: CIT~.-_~COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH REQUESTOR: REF_ERRA~_. -. -_S~V_~GG!O ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DESCRIPTION: ~L~A~ ~k~N~A~3~::d0~NyT.'& PANAMN REQUEST COMMENTS ***REFERRAL TO POLICE DEPARTMENT*** SALVAGGIO REQUESTED STAFF CITE THE SEMI-TRUCKS PARKING ILLEGALLY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF JACK IN THE BOX ON THE EAST SIDE OF COLONY, SOUTH OF PANAMA LANE AND CAUSING PROBLEMS FOR AREA BUSINESSES. JOB ORDER DESCRIPTION: ILLEGAL PARKING AT COLONY & PANAMA Category: POLICE SERVICES DEPT TASK: RESPONSE TO REFERRAL ASSIGNED DEPARTMENT: POLICE SERVICES START DATE __/__/__ COMPLETION DATE / / PD 64-2759 MEMORANDUM August 14, 1996 Honorable Mayor Price and Co~n.~il/Members TO FROM S.E. Brummer, Chief of Police ~ %~ SUBJECT Response to CRR #WF0010938 - Cabaret Licenses During the City Council Meeting of August 7, 1996, Council Member Demond requested staff define the procedures and regulations for cabaret licenses. The attached memorandum describes the police department's cabaret permit application process. vrf attachment: Council Referral #WF0010938/002 - Cabaret Licenses by Sgt. W. Henry, dated 8/14/96 BAKERSFIELD POLICE MEMORANDUM August 14, 1996 To: Chief Brummer From: Sergeant Henry Subject: Council Referral WF0010938/002 - Cabaret Licenses On August 7, 1996, Council Member DeMOnd requested information regarding the cabaret license application process. This was a dual request to include the City Attorney's Office. Regarding the Bakersfield Police Department's part in the process, upon receiving the application, an investigator from the Vice\Narcotics detail would conduct a routine background investigation regarding the applicants and the business location. This investigation would include a criminal history check on the applicants and contact with area business' to ascertain if they had any concerns or objections. The investigation, upon completion, is then forwarded to the Chiefls office. During the year that the license is active, the activity would be monitored at the business and any concerns or problems that arose would be considered in any renewal request. Respectfully~., ,. d, Sergeant Wry. He~ry arter8 Headqu ~ City of Bakersfield *REPRINT* WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 REQ/JOB: · W~0010938 /~002 PROJECT: DATE PRINTED: 8~09~96 ............ REQUEST DATE: 8/07/96 SCHEDULE DATES CREW: START: ~7~96 LOCATION: COMPLETION: 9/96 FACILITY NODES FACILITY ID: TO: REF NBR: COUNCIL ~TM'I'S REQ DEPT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH ........ / ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL REQUESTOR: REFERRAL - DEMOND ~ WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DE S CRI PT I ON: ,CABARE~-~ ~C-EN~ E~S REQUEST COMMENTS ***DUAL REFERRAL TO CITY ATTORNEY AND POLICE DEPT; CITY ATTORNEY AS LEAD*** DEMOND REQUESTED STAFF DEFINE THE PROCEDURES AND REGULATIONS/CRITERIA FOR CABARET LICENSES, PRIOR TO THE NEXT RENEWAL CYCLE. JOB ORDER DESCRIPTION: CABARET LICENSES Category: POLICE SERVICES DEPT TASK: RESPONSE TO REFERRAL ASSIGNED DEPARTMENT: POLICE SERVICES START DATE / / COMPLETION DATE __/__/__ ~ p~) 64-:~59  MEMORANDUM August 15, 1996 TO Honorable Mayor Price and Co,Members FROM S.E. BrUmmer, Chief of Police/~'~v SUBJECT Response to CRR #WF000972 - Crime in Kern City During the City Council Meeting of July 24, 1996, Council Member Rowles requested staff determine if there is a connection between the delivering of handbills and the crime rate in Kern City. The attached memorandum provides a history of calls for service within the last six months. vrf attachment: Council Referral #WF0009772/001 - Crime in Kern City by Sgt. W. Henry, dated 8~07~96 BAKERSFIELD POLICE MEMORANDUM August7,1996 To: Chief Brummer From: Sergeant Henry Subject: Council Referral WF0009772/001- Crime in Kern City On July 24, 1996, Council Member Rowles requested information regarding the connection between delivering handbills and the crime rate in Kern City. Information was received regarding calls for service in the Kern City area for the past six months. During this period, the Bakersfield Police Department responded to 101 calls for service, covering a wide range of requests. In examining the reports taken, 7 were for suspicious subjects or vehicles, 11 were theft reports (including burglary), and 1 was for assault. It is not known at what rate handbills are being delivered in the Kern City area, however, none of'the information examined suggests a connection with handbill delivery and any existing icrime rate. Actual reports taken are a small percentage of the actual service calls. Respectfully~Titt_~ -~ Re-~ City of Bakersfield ~ -- *REPRINT* WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 REQ/JOB: WF000~772 / 001 PROJECT: DATE PRII~FED: 8/.01/.96 REQUEST DATE: 7/24/96 ~ EW: SCHEDULE DATES START: '//.24/.96 LOCATION: COMPLETION: 8 / 05 / 96 GEN. LOC: WARD5 FACILITY NODES FROM: FACILITY ID: TO: REF NBR: COUNCI ~, REQ DEPT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH REQUESTOR: REFERRAL - ROWLES ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL · WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DE'~CRIPTION ~ - CRIME-~N KERN ~CITY~ REQUEST COMMENTS · **REFERRAL-TO POLICE DEPARTMENT*** ROWLES REQUESTED STAFF DETERMINE IF,.THERE IS ANY CONNECTION BETWEEN THE DELIVERING OF HANDBILLS AND THE CRIME RATE IN KERN CITY AND BRING RESULTS BACK TO HIM. . JOB ORDER DESCRIPTION: CRIME IN KERN CITY Category: POLICE SERVICES DEPT TASK: RESPONSE TO REFERRAL ASSIGNED DEPARTMENT: POLICE SERVICES START DATE __/ / COMPLETION DATE MEMORANDUM August 13, 1996 TO: ALAN TANDY, City Manager JUDY K. SKOUSEN, City Attorney ~o~.~,0 uJ/~ ~' JACK HARDISTY, Director of Development Services ~ ~ ~ Director of Public Works 0 ~.~c,~.~ ~ RAUL ROJAS, · FROM: ALLEN M. SHAW, Assistant City Attorney SUBJECT: Kem County Health Department Inspections of City Restaurants - Issue: Is the Kern County Health Department required to inspect grease interceptors as part of their annual inspections of restaurants within the City of Bakersfield? Conclusion: No. Basis: Health and Safety Code section 114100 DisCussion: For some time, the City has had a problem with grease collecting and blocking one of the sewer mains in the City causing the sewage to back up and overflow into a nearby business for which damages the City was then liable. We have suspected that the grease was coming from a certain restaurant upstream from the problem. After paying for the cleanup several times, our office decided to look into the matter of whether that restaurant's grease interceptors were being regularly cleaned out and maintained. That · led to the question of who should be inspecting these devices and whether or not such inspections were done. We suspected the County was responsible for their inspection as part of the annual health department inspection of the restaurant. We were informed by the City's consultant drafting the study concerning the feasibility of the City taking over certain health department inspections that it was a common practice for the restaurant inspections to include an inspection of the grease interceptor'. We learned that the County was not inspecting the grease interceptors within the City and thought we were on to something. Our research, however, determined that inspecting the grease interceptors of restaurants was not the responsibility of the County Health Department and thus we could not blame the problem on the County. We did determine that it did not appear the City had a program for regular inspections of grease interceptors and that, if the City took over health inspections of restaurants, we could easily add that inspection without much cost Alan Tandy, City Manager Page 2 August 13, 1996 of time to the restaurant or the City. Annual inspections may prevent some sewerline blockages in the future. The following is a'discussion of the state of the law. By Health and Safety Code section 101375, the County Health Officer is charged with the duty of enforcing "regulations" issued under the Health and Safety Code and statutes relating to health, if the City has passed a resolution consenting to such enforcement. The City in fact passed such a resolution on August 9, 1965. Our Municipal Code also transfers duties to the County Health Officer (BMC § 8.04.020). County ordinances also require the County Health Officer to perform such duties within the boundaries of any City that authorizes such enforcement. The California Uniform Retail Food Facilities Law, commencing at Health and Safety Code section 113700, is such a statute, enforceable by the County Health Officer (Health & Saf., § 113925.) Health and Safety Code section 114100 is a statute governing restaurant plumbing and disposal of liquid waste. Although it possesses some broad language, a reasonable interpretation of the statute's references to "plumbing" and "plUmbing fixtures" could include grease interceptors which are often just outside the restaurant, although it could be argued that the health officer is only interested in the plumbing fixtures inside the restaurant. The Retail Food Facilities Law's focus is on protecting the public from food contamination occurring while preparing food for sale. As an extension of this focus in enforcement of this statute, the County and its Health Officer naturally interpret this statute in this context and concentrate their resources on protecting the consuming public. Since grease interceptors are usually placed underground outside the restaurant, it could be argued they pose no direct threat to contaminate food. It could also be argued that a sewer backup in the restaurant could certainly pose a health risk or contaminate food. The City's interest in the waste disposal process is not only in protecting the health of the consuming public but also in protecting the City sewer system from damage and interference, Consistent therewith, the City possesses regulatory and inspection power over the types, sizes, maintenance and operation of restaurant grease interceptors through the building permit process, uniform building and plumbing codes and through its own sewer ordinances (Chapter 14.12 BMC, recently amended August 1995.) We have no specific requirement in our sewer ordinances for regular inspection or maintenance of grease interceptors. Bakersfield Municipal Code sections 14.12.100 and 14.12.220 and 'Uniform Plumbing Code section 306.1 allow for City inspection of interceptors at any time to enforce proper maintenance and operation and to identify prohibited discharges of excessive quantities of grease into the City sewer system. Currently, it appears that once the Uniform Building and Plumbing Codes are complied with at the time of construction, the City does nothing about grease interceptors. Alan Tandy, City Manager' Page 3 August 13, 1996 If the City rescinded its authority given to the County to be the Health Department for the City and created in own health department, the City could interpret the Retail Food Facilities Law to require, regular inspections and maintenance of all restaurant's liquid waste disposal stream from the inside of the restaurant to the sewer, including the grease interceptors outside the restaurant. The one other issue which surfaces in this context is the contract which the City executed with the County in 1953 to enforce City "health" ordinances. There are two problems the City would encounter if it demanded the County enforce City "health" ordinances: (1) the Bakersfield Municipal Code does not contain any "health" ordinances, such as restaurant sanitation regulations since, we transferred.all this to the County; and (2) the City never paid the contract price for enforcement to the County for this service. The County has never revoked the contract with the City nor found the City to be in default of the Contract but County Health Department officials have stated verbally to City staff that our failure to pay is one of the reasons they refuse to enforce health regulations within the City. In summary, the failure to regularly inspect grease interceptors to insure regular maintenance of them may contribute to the City's problems with our sewerlines. The County does not, and will not, inspect them. The City could inspect them as part of the annual health inspections for very little additional time or cost. cc: Scott Manzer, Risk Manager Jack LaRochelle, Engineering Services Manager S:~ATTY~VIEMOS~RESTRANT.INS P.O. BOX 942849 ? · SACRAMENTO, CA 94249-0001. '~. ~ (916) 445-2931 ~i~]~ ce DISTRICT OFFICE 4974 EAST CLINTON WAY, #100 FRESNO, CA 93727 (209) 253-0140 COMMITTEES: Chairman APPROPRIATIONS Member NATURAL RESOURCES WATER, PARKS & WILDLIFE August 8, 1996 JOINT LEGISLATIVE BUDGET COMMITTEE The Honorable Alan Tandy ~ 7 City Manager - City ofBakersfield 1501 Tmxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Dear Mr. Tandy: I am writing to inform you of some recent actions taken by me to accommodate your concems on Senate Bill 1505 (Kopp). SB'1505 is a major transportation reform bill. This legislation 'chariges the process by. which-transportation' funds are 15rogrammed and allocate~l, it Would also give far greater'contr01-'and'disCretion to local governments. One of the major concerns identified with SB 1505 Was the possible loss of funds for grade separation projects. Under current law, grade separation projects are funded as a local assistance item in the Department of Transportation (CalTrans) budget, and $15 million is allocated annually for earmarked projects. Under SB 1505, the grade separation projects would be classified under a "Regional Choice" category -- the grade separation projects would be prioritized at the local level along with all other projects.. The Regional Choice category would receive 80% of the Transportation budget. Because o~'the concerns raised by local governments, I authored an amendment that will ensure funding of grade separation projects at the current level until June 30, 2000. The amendment was adopted during a hearing on the bill in the Appropriations Committee on August 7, 1996. This amendment provide, s that all projects which have been included in the most current grade separation project list developed by the Public Utilities Commission can continue to compete for the $15 million annual state allocation through June 30, 2000. After July 1, 2000, all future grade separation projects will be considered for funding under the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) along with other projects eligible f0t Regional Choice funding. This language does not mean that less fUnds will be available for these types· Of Projects after jUne 30, 2000;:' it simply provides local agencies the opPortunity to decid~ ftmding'p~iorities for their transi~ortation resources alloCated to them~tbxough~_the~S~IP~ · ~,~i,,to~ o,, ~**y~t~ P~er ! CITY ~iAHAG['~F~$ OFF; Senate Bill 1505 Page Two Although 'this amendment provides some security to local governments and agencies, it is a compromise worked out by myself and the author of the legislation. I am hopeful that this compromise language will assist you in preparing for the reforms that will take place throughout CalTrans. I believe that you will agree that the reforms will simplify the programming and allocation process.. If you have any questions, please contact my office at (916) 445-2931. Si~el~ely, /~ . es S. Poochigian (~/ BAKERSFIELD Alan Tandy · City Manager August 14, 1996 d The Honorable ldce Harvey, $2nd Assembly District The Honombl~ ~an Th~ Honombl~ Koith Tho Honombl~ 0ira Go~ta, ~th 8~nat~ District The Honom~l~ K~nnoth L Maddy, ~4th 8onate District Tho Honombl~ ~on VIA F~ Re: Opposition to SB 1505 Gentlemen: The City Council of the City of Bakemfield has on its agenda for August 21 a resolution and letter opposing SB 1505. It is our understanding that this measure is going to the Assembly Floor on Thursday, August 15. This letter is to reaffi~. Bakersfield's opposition to SB 1505 in its cuffent fo~, which would repeal Separation of Grade Program contained in the Streets and Highways Code of California. The program has allowed the elimination of many dangerous at-grade railroad crossings in the greater Bakersfield ama of Kern County. Two additional projects which have received pa~ial funding may have to be te~inated. Seven proje~s now on the Public Utilities Commission pdodty list for future funding will likely never be built. Other Kern Coun~ cities also need grade separations which could be funded under this statewide program. Elimination of the Separation of Grade Program would deal a severe blow to public safety in Kern Coun~ and in other regions across the State which depend on this program. Please oppose SB 1505 unless it is amended to delete the repeal of section 190 Separation of Grade Program funds. A focal letter from the Mayor and a resolution from the Ci~ Council of Bakersfield will be fo~arded to you after approval at the Council meeting of August 21. Since~ly, ndy ~ < ' City Manager (sbiC) CC: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Governor Pete Wilson Senator Quentin Kopp Assemblyman Chades Poochigian City of Bakersfield · City Manager's Office · 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield · California · 93301 (805) 326-3751 · Fax (805) 324-1850