HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/25/94' " • ,
B A K E R S F I E L D
MEMORANDUM
February 25, 1994
T0: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: GENERAL INFORMATION
1. It is always a pleasure to be able to put good news in this document. On
Thursday and Friday, our Marks-Roos Bond Pool sold. We did not hit the
absolute low end of the scale on interest rates, as there was some bubbling
in rates that occurred in the last couple of days, but everything works.
The rates are reasonable. All financing for the Hotel is now in place.
The Laborde property owners will see a substantial rate reduction and the
"savings" on the deal will pay for the ballroom and meeting rooms.
2. This is a reminder that I will be on vacation March 9th through 16th. I
will miss a Council Meeting. During my absence, Gail Waiters will be in
charge the first week (March 9-11); John Stinson will be in charge the
second week (March 14-16). It gives them both experience that way!
3. In response to an item that appears in the Council Goals relative to a
desire to streamline our regulations, I am contemplating using a
streamlining process I have used in two other communities. Basically, it
consists of taking people from a cross section of the development community
and utilizing them to review our internal processes and procedures to
identify regulations which may not be necessary, and to articulate ways to
be more efficient in processing. At this point, it is just a concept we
are working on at staff level, and have chatted about with the BIA. I
think it might be a valuable tool. I also note in making this proposal
that, from my viewpoint, the City has historically done a good job, in
terms of trying to streamline and make efficient its development processes
in comparison to the vast majority of other communities. It does not mean
we can' t get better, but I do want to cl ari fy that thi s i s i n no way a
criticism of our deveiopment processes.
4. Enclosed you will find a copy of an agreement submitted by the Trade
Council to the Hammons firm, relative to the settlement of that issue. In
it, the Trade Council tried not to indemnify us, leaving us exposed to
lawsuit. It was also tied to a project agreement which, from the outset,
has been unacceptable to Hammons. Hammons will revise the document and
resubmit it to them. They have developed a corporate policy that
recognizes they are going to live with us in this community, and they will
not sign an agreement which does not indemnify and protect us, as well as
themseives. Dialogue will continue.
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
February 25, 1994
Page -2-
5. I raise a question for you: With the "new" money for the parks maintenance
having been voted down, do you, or do you not, wish to consolidate the
districts from 44 down to 7? It would certainly be an administrative
improvement, provide for greater clarity for taxpayers in the districts,
and should reduce costs. On the other hand, some people's rates go up;
some people's rates go down. You would probably get a higher level of
protest the first year by doing this. So, please give it some thought and
let me know.
6. I am going to go ahead and set in motian the appointment of the Fire Chief.
I had talked about a longer delay, but I will go ahead and initiate a
deliberate process, at this point.
7. We are anticipating the return of the Prostitution and Drug Loitering
Ordinances the second meeting in March. This will continue to give time
for community input and possible amendments ta the language. I promise,
these Ordinances will not be lost sight of.
8. The Intergovernmental Relations Committee met this week. It does not look
like the CSA for recreation and the Kern River Parkway is being considered
very seriously by the County any longer. This is speculation, rather than
their exact words, but I even wonder now, in light of their comments, if
they will proceed with the universal collection of garbage in the Metro
area. They seem to be hedging a bit. Th� meeting did reveal that the EIR
for the South Beltway should be out in March or April.
9. Responses to Council Referrals and inquiries are enclosed regarding Valley
Communities' request for release of deposit, the PUC's inspection of
railroad crossings, the zone change at Calloway and Brimhall and the siting
of the metropolitan recycling complex.
10. We met with the Kern County City Nianagers on the new County annexation
policy this week. A memo that went to them is enclosed. We will be
working on team efforts of the cities to address this - more information
will be available later.
AT.alb
Enclosures
cc: Department Heads
City Clerk
SE�IT BY � 2-23-94 � 15 � O1 � JOF�VV Q HAhIlKONS 1 ND. -► 805 324 1850 ;# 1/ 3
- JOHN Q. IEiAMMONS INDUSTRIES
300 J�HN O. FfAMMONS PAAKWAY - SUITE 900 TEL, (a1T) 8H4-a300
SPRINGFIELD, M�SSOUFiI 65806 FAX (ai7) 864-8800
*********��*********�
* FAX TRANSMITTAL *
***************�***��
DATE: �/? ;�g � TI:SE: � i O!� � PAGES : �
(includes cover sneet)
TO o �L �• �✓ T��J �j Y
RE: f�,�'`1��F � L�a a/C iJ� �£� � S S l/�
F1toM: I-�i'�-�' S/�-� � Y r�`.t�S�
NOTES : -� S'�'�K E� �✓ / TI`� ��►��' �d�S �c�%='�s'"C. � �
�L �`�9� S �'"� C.4 L L. �! �
Zf you do u�t�ece ve alI the pages, or have difficulty reading any of them, please
phone /�7` at 4111864-4300 as soan as possible. 'Ihank you.
�� gy : 2-23-94 � 1�� O 1� JOtIlV Q HA11�10NS I�(D. � 805 324 1850 :# 2/ 3
- -- -- - -- -- ..._, . .... ...__... r.r�.a
_ , ... . ' . ..r. ..• . ��. ��r
. � . . r��L'�:i..Y.
AGk F,�N�;J�T
T1iI� AGREENlESJ: I3 HEI'W£EN JL'H1r1 (',' HA�I7T70N.ri, HIS W1F�, JUANITSi H�I�10NS
1 HEF€INAFTER "DEVELOPER" ) AND :'HE LOCAL lJNI0N5 SIGNATORY HERETO ApL1
aFFiLIATED WITH Ti� BUII.DING ANL� CONSTRUCTION TRADES COVNCIL eF
�:ERN, iNYO AND MONO CQUNTIES iHEii$INAFTER "BUILDINs TRAUEB UNI02�$")
�Nn T�s�}� �TSrT,nTnxa �nt�n�� C`ATTN�`T]. !�F ��ror. �u�r� aNn �►a� �rTF4
�f ii�auring that che �r�jECt dEarrib�� hexa��' ie �silt vichout
labai diaputp, that the projac�t i,� built �t a r*a��nable ao�at with
akilled crafc.a psc�le a:id chac to th� maximum BXC@ggC po�oiblo uuio��
cr:�its���eopla are ernpleyed cindsi cvllective bargaiz�ng agraemea�4.
� DsvsLOPER �hall prc�vide to the BUII,DiNG TRADES COONCII. rcicvant
iu�ormatio�� aith reepecc ta the aenetu�c budgec�d i�� cengtrucLion
in�luding amounte budge�eei for eubcra�te.
2 T4�is Agreemet�t fe appi.icablc a:zly �fl thv Arajeet Dagcribed iu
thc Di�pv�ition il'la Developm�nL Aqrcement be�ween �evelop_r.r, tht
City of Bakerefi�ld and thE CEntral Dietrict b�vel��nenc 1�gency
dated . This Agrremr,nt ie limited to t�a� Projeet aa
da£f u�d iii 3eatiai� 2�Z of that Agr�eeneiit .
3 DEVSLOFEA ehall ent�Yt�i�l bid� fer conet�°ucti�iz �rork ao cL►fi�sedl
in E�chibit B frvco oniy uaior� aignatvey contracto�:�, Unio�i
eiau.atory coi�tractors gr• �heee cautractor� s,rho �r� signatory to aut
agr�ement with the BUZLDIN(� TRADEB UNIONS.
4. Thdee bida •hall be opened on 195��4. Yf the t�tai
atrou:it of Lhi loa►aoc bide �rom cniici�etore which a�� reeponoible
a�nd bonda�ble is le�� than .� PEA ehall award
tl:e w�oric co tho�e contza�torc+ a�id all term� of �h� �rajecC La3�Y
Agreeme.nt a�taehec� a• �xhibit A ahall be applirmbl� �o titoae
cantract4ra. Na canLracLOr may be awarded urork a.��l �rark om th�r
,prv j ec� who i a not pax'ty t c� th� Proi ect Labc�r Agxe�er.L .
5 If �hc total s�mount of the bids from c�trac�or� which are
reepou��£�16 artd .baudal�le f e mare than , tho��
ceatra�tors e�wil hsv� dayr� tc re�ubmit �3.de viiose • tot�l
3e 1�so chan . If th� amvsl2lC i� Yees tha�a '
���zr resu�mi��ivn of the bi�de, .: t$�e Pro� ect ahail be
cc�et�pi�eed unds+c. the tqrnt� af •tha Proj�ae Labor �r��nt.
6 I f �he anwuut. . o� bide i s. eaorQ chan DSVEIAPEA
��il be .#ree ta. entiertain bid� from� ar�y cemt�actv�-.
7' The BIIZLDiNd TRADE3 �i3NCSL and th� BUZI�IASd TR�ES UNIOMB �ugree
chat t�aey ehail z�t e�gaga in any �trika or �icket ��tivity •c t��
�ro�ert durinq the perioc't of ite ccrsetruczion. ,
i��
� The 9VI7sBING '!`RADES COUNCIL and BVILDINC °TRADF.� 8%i�1I0Ia8 agrae
that Li�ey ehall s�at participat� i:i or fizsanc� �ny ��giyaciort vith
UEVELc?PER vr�ie Gencr�l CoatracLOr. I'4cDevitL. 9tro�� �ad Eavie, irs
v�icn a�ty alaim .�e mad� chac ct�� prevailli�q �►�Qe 4C�lifcrnla �L:abar
Codt § 1720 ) f 6 appiic:bi� vr gov�=-sso tha !��°e�j��� .
� Any dispute sem to the me�ing, �pplicatiom os in�el'pretatio�l of
;)rr,^, ��..•��.�.i.:�,;ta :jR1j;:Nf:�A�' 1�`-i1 ;R7U:rrn.. i9�n:1'cY?mF'��C1:idAI��Y�•r.ce...t. : +r; ,.':+L'r;j"r,"._'�71.-, .. . �•,�......,..-•• ,. . ... . �r.. . . ... .. :'+.4. •_`�•
. .. ..� . . •
.�� BY' 2-23-94 : 15 � 02 : JOf�V Q HahIlVtONS ( �ID. J 8U5 32� 1850 :# 3/ 3
t2:i r. :.g�eemKU� �: ali 1�� i�rc�lv2d Lh�ui�}1 r_l:� lunwi 1��1� 111'bitz'rCi.ul� --.
�_�a i F,� f o�- Lal�oi- Ai�i: i� �•at. i on , Any �li ap;it. w e• .r.n�.•�:-nir:�; e i:c �'x pj F�•L
�abc�l :.�re�:mriit c�h�J: }�� i•adolveci �l�i•c�uql� ehe p:-oc�aii,��•�e� Co»taiiied
therciii . �
� � �
, `I �;
�:�,.
-%
, � � . . .., . . . :
:. . %
. � �
B A K E R S F I� L D
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
I501 TRUXTUN AVENUE
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301
(805) 326-3724
ED W. SCHULZ. DIRECTOR � CITti' FNGI\EER
February 17, 1994 r
Kern Council of Governments
1401 - 19th Street
Bakersfield, CA 93301
RE: South Beltway Environmental Impact Re�ort
Honorable Council:
; i,�; /i -�� '' .
,
i �� � � �`
�i ��� r� �,
(��C�[���C�D �
��b � � �M .
' i
Co`t�P 6�QG��QC�[�G°3°� OG�f��l�l�
We wish to take this opportunity to provide additional i�put regarding the environmental
review for the South Beltway locat�on efforts.
City of Bakersfield staff have been very involved in the be�tway location staady and analysis
from the first efforts. Our staff has identified eorrido�s, located potential interchange
locations, estimated right of way requirements, estimated �aght of way and construction costs
and participated in input for the computer modeling runs. As a result of these efforts, City
staff still recommends a preferred route designated as alignment "A" and which eJrtends
from I-5 to east of Weedpatch Highway and will be recoffimending same to the adopting
bodies. It is our preferred route for the following reasons:
2.
3.
It best serves the traffic demands of the co�idor to be serviced.
It will ultimately provide enhanced traansportation opportunities to the
Lamont area nonulation center.
It is least disruptive, in our opinion, to e�sting and planned development
(disregarding the DiGiorgio align�eni as ��i�g too far south).
It is recommended your Council certify the envi�onmentafl document as being complete and
refer the document to the City of Bakersfield and Kerai Cm�anty for route selection bearings
and route approval.
Very truly yours,
�� •
ED W. SCHULZ
Public Works Director
� �, �. � � � � � �: � � �: � � � � � � �
.
_ -- - -
�y
B A IC E R� F I E L D
PUBLIC WORKS DEPA1tTIvIEI�T'T r
MEMORANDUIl� II
TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager
FROM: Ed W. Schulz, Public Works Director �,
DATE: February 17, 1994
�F. C � ��
�;'d"� � ��'a���y:<._�x' .�i�'�1� -
SUBJECT: City Council Referral Record #12090
Request by Valley Communities regarding release of deposit
monies relating to Sewer Farm #3. (Brunni)
Attached is a copy of the status report on the Valley
Communities issue regarding release of reserve account.
Without their cooperation in working with the Sfa.te, this issue
will remain open for the time being.
.�o
REF12090
Attachment
' . °-�.
�„„�„�,� �,,,,
� { �'
, �_ ,.��=_
a,, `. .. . :. r�_
� 7. _ ;\,,�y� • \
� ��q0 �,T���Wbi� �
_��:•, Y J .,'�QC
__i�: _ `����o
_���/`� 1�,'��II�111,
MEMORANDUlN
FEBRUARY 15, 1994
TO . ED SCHULZ PUBLIC WORKS DIR.
FROM . JOE TURNER, WASTEWATER SUPT. �� �.�,w�..��_
SUBJECT: VALLEY COMMUNITIES, INC. REQUEST FOR
RELEASE OF RESERVE ACCOUNT DEPOSITS
On 2-14-94, I contacted Dave Hugie of Valley Communities, Inc.
regarding the current status of the above mentioned subject.
Dave indicated that they still feel the reserve account deposits
should be released. He indicated the matter has been put on hold
and is currently at a stand still. He said they would be sending
us a letter in the near future regarding the matter. He did not
say when this would happen.
In addition to the above, I conducted an inspection of the I-5
Effluent Disposal Site with David Daniels on 2-10-94 to document
any standing water and the areas being farmed. The areas observed
are shown on the attached drawing. As can be seen, water is being
allowed to stand on more than 600 acres.
Based on the results of the inspection, it appears Valley
Communities, Inc., or even the City, should obtain verification
from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board that the
method of managing the water as indicated on the drawing is
acceptable.
Until this is done, it is questionable if the reserve account
deposits should be released.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please give me
a call.
CJT/bl
Attachment
cc: Gail Waiters, Asst. City Manager
.�
_ --- --- i I
�
�
B A K E IZ S� I E L I�
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTA�ENT
I501 TRUXTUN AVENUE
BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORIVIA 93301
(805) 326-3724
ED W. SCHULZ. DIRECTOR a CITti' EtiGItiEER
Febru'ary 22, 1994
ALEX E. LUTKUS, Chief
Rail Engineering Safety Branch
Safety Division '
Public Utilities Commission
505 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102-3298
Dear Mr. Lutkus:
Approximately a month ago an on-site inspection was conda�cted at several local street
crossings with the Southern Pacific Transportation Compa�y railroads. 'I'he inspection team
included members of your staff, railroad representatives, � City Council member and City
staff. The primary purpose of the inspection was to demo�strate to your office the need ior
better m��ntenance of these crossings.
We really appreciate the manner in which the inspection was conducted and your prompt
written response to the City Manager regarding your fandings and a reco�endation for
repair of various locations.
We wish to advise you that repair has begun at ffiany of �he crossings with the assistance
of City maintenance personnel where appropriate. Wit1a your continued assistance in this
matter we hope to bring the crossing repair issue to a c�ose as rapidly as possible.
Again, thanks for your co�peration and assistanee.
Very truly yours,
�
ED W. SCHULZ
Public Works Director
D
ry �,� � � ����
��
cc:- Alan Tandy, City Manager �� �
�05n� 4�n1Q�Jla(�s(��3°� OFFiCIE�
; .
I',t - : p � .• "
CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL
MEETING OF: 02/09/94
REFERRED TO: PUBLIC WORKS E SCHULZ
ITEM:
ftECORD# 12987
Railroad Crossing issues. ;Brunri)
7�.'�!i '�qy 7�.n
� �:a �a 1!�-; i� �� �i �J
r- E� 1 �t 1994
rUBUC WORftS QE�ARtP�!��'�T
ACTION TAKEN BY COUNCIL:
BRUNNI REQUESTED STAFF DP,AFT A THANK. YOU LETT�R
IN RESP�NSE TO THELETTER REGARQING TNE RAILROAQ
CROSSINU ISSUES.
BACKUP MATERIAL ATTACHED: YES
DATE F�RWARDED BY CITY CLERK: 02/11/94
_-
STATE Of CAUfORN1A ° PETE WIISON. Goremor
-� P��B��C' UTIUTlES COMMISSION
"sos v�N aess �veNUe
SAN FRANCCISCO, CA 94103-3298
0
January 27, 1994 -
Alan Tandy, City Manager
City of Bakersfield
1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Dear Mr. Tandy: -
In response to various correspondence, includinq a letter from
your office on November 4, 1993, on-site meetings were held on
Friday morning, January 21, 1994 dt 5evegal street crossings of
railroad tracks belonging to Southern Pacific Transportation
Company (SPT) in Bakersfield.. The following people met to
discuss the condition of the crossing surfaces:
Conni Brunni
Ed Schulz
Luis Peralez
Jerry Maxwell
Teresa Morales
5teve Minton
Alex Lutkus
Haji Jameel
Art Aldridge
Councilmember, City of Bakersfield
Public Works Director, �akersfield
Asst. Superintendent, Streets, Bakersfield
Roadmaster, SPT Co.
Assemblyman Harvey's Office �
City of Tehachapi
CPUC
CPUC
CPUC
Revisions were made to some of the prearranged meeting sites, as
further study by City revealed higher pr�orities at other
crossings. The following crossings were inspected, with noted
findings.
1. Hughes Lane, Crossing BT-318.9a Th�.s crossing is in good
condition; no repairs recommendedo
2. White Lane, Crossing �BT-318.6: Some patching has been done
recently; high spots exist near �he median; a plank is loose
under eastbound traffic. Repairs are planned within the next
couple of weeks.
3. South H Street, Crossing BT-318.2: Some patching done; Jerry
Maxwell agreed to do some additional patching and replace a loose
plank.
4. South Chester Avenue, Crossing BT�319o5: This crossing has
been repaired and is in good condition.
5. Wilson Road, Crossing BT-317.3s Some planks are worn down;
some asphalt patching has been done, and � bit more patching
would help. Patching is planned within �he next couple of weeks.
.,�
Cft�ll 1a1��uY � �V�C1.711C1v l..l�.Y 1•lal�ayci � -
�a�ua�cy 27, 1994 �
- _ F'aqe 2
,
6. �rundage Lane, Crossinq BT-315.2: Pavement is raised at edge
of rails; Mr. Maxwell agreed to patch and trim the raised
pavement.
7. California Avenue, Crossing BT-314.15: Patching has been
done between tracks; easterly track is not used; center track
(siding) is a bit lower than main line, which can cause some
discomfort to motorists. CPUC staff is.recommending this
crossing for Federal Section 130 funding for additional warning
signals and renewed surfacing, but this is a long range process
involving competition for funds, agreements, etc. City will
commit 10$ matching funds when fundinq becomes available. In the
meantime Mr. Maxwell has requested his ananageanent's approval to
remove planks and pave the crossing.
8. Baker Street, Crossing B-312.9: Pavement is rough on the
outer edges, particularly for pedestrianse Mrm Maxwell plans to
resurface this crossing within 60 days.
9. District Blvd, Crossing BT-321.4-Cs Crossing is in
satisfactory condition; a bump that was reported to have been
there during an earZier review was no longer gresent. Mr.
Maxwell agreed to provide some additional patching in the next
couple of weeks.
The cooperation exhibited at the meetings by all parties is
appreciated.
>
Should you have any questions please contact either Art Aldridge
at (415) 557-2641 or Lorna Benne at (415) 557m3420.
Very truly yours,
�
ALEX E. LUTRUS, Chief
Rail Engineering Safety Branch
Safety Division
cc: Assemblyinan Trice Harvey
District Office
100 W. Columbus Street, Suite 201
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Conni Brunni, Councilmember
City of Bakersfield
150i Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
�I
;�
. ,
�anuary .Z7 � �994 �
• _ Pac�e; 3
, �.
Ed Schulz, Public Works Director -
City of Bakersfield
1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Luis Peralez, Asst. Superintendent - Streets
City of Bakersfield
4101 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93309
Jarry Maxwell, Roadmaster
Southern Pacific Transportation Company
700 Sumner Street
Bakersfield, CA 93305
Dick Dahllof, Public Projects Engineer
Southern Pacific Transportation Company
One Market Plaza -
San Francisco, CA 94105 .
�
•
B A K E IZ S F I E L D
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMORt1I�1DUM
TO: Councilmember Conni Brunni, �Vard 4
FROM: Ed W. Schulz, Fublic Works Director �
DATE: February 17, 1994
SUBJECT: Zone Change 5543, Gandola Annexation
Calloway Drive at Brimhall itoad
f������/�D
�
� � ..,, � �,�
�' \ �� L� ;�(/N'�! I
� � i
� C�' ���� �U"U'���
You questioned, "If this (zone change} goes through, will at free up that other corner (SW)
that Mr. Gandola had requested commercial with realignment of Calloway Drive?"
Response:
Basically, the Gandola situation would be unchanged if the Castle and Cooke request of
GC (General Commercial) to LR (Low I�ensity Residen�al) is approved, except to make
Gandola's property on the southeast corner less desirabfle as commercial. If City policy is
followed, the southwest corner still could not be zoned �ommercial.
My staff has been discussing the Calloway/��im�tall project with Mr. Gandola relative to the
zone change, annexation and right-of-way acquisition. li�ir. Gandola and his real estate
representatives are working on a possible arrangement with Castle and Cooke to acquire
additional land adjaccnt to the southwest LI� (i,ow Density Residential) parcel. If this
happens, the plan is to transfer the Gandola GC (General Commercial) zone on the
southeast comer to the southwest corner. 'The southeast comer could then be developed
residential consistent with the remainder of the Castle and Cooke development.
�tight-of-way acquisition discussions with the Gandolas are moving ahead. We may be near
agreement on the matter. We will keep you informed.
cc: Alan Tandy, City Manager
�
— ----- ------
I� - --- -
! CD�y �f �ak�nfi�ld
TRAl�i3Al1TfAL SUP Dare�........._._...w....._......:....._w.,......._
. �
� � � � o ��
�_ � T
..�.�ac�a.�rl.m.e�..�._...._ ......................_.........'........:....:........._.
�rom........�� ........... ..._.__1 ... ....... ._.__
... ........ ................................•..
± �or Your:— 9�-7 PP� 12� 09
- � Signature � /�d��SFi�'�^#OIT�P.�RK � File �
Please:—
� Return � See Me O Fofiow Up 0 Prepare �►nswer
Copyto a ... ......... .._..._ ...:.........................••••..._..........__.�.... ......_
i
' AAemo: .. _ .��... _..�......._..__._.._.........._.._.�___.. _ I
.... �:. ..�1...,�..�..�1,1,�i'.,1��!.;1�%.�''LG�'� �u�..�..��?-�?-. '�,
� .._. w'�����_a-�� �����,��� � _
� Qn
_ _ . . . - - - . . _... ��:�.w.: ��: �...!'��:�c���.�t=n �ri•'mr�......�_ ,
—' .. .....!�c�.�.:k�(,�i�vt/j?�ij?!�.. � ...._.. � ? ... ....._.. �
................................................._....._........� ...__._......... ._w._........
. i
......................................_........_._................_......_.._...._............. ..............._.. i
+ �
CiT"Y OF
BAKERSFIELD
-- PLANNING DEPARTMENT
JaCK HAROISTY, �irector
150/ TRUXTUN AVE.
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301
(805) 328-3733
February 4m 1994
Dear Property Owner or Other Interested Party:
You are being sent the attached notice because the Kern County tax
records indicate you own property in a proposed project area or within 300 feet of
a proposed project (see attached map), or you have specifically requested this
notnce be sent to you. The attached notice describes ghe proposed project and
draft environmental determination the City of Bakers�ield is currently processing.
In compliance with applicable environmental �nd planning laws, we are
informing you of your opportunity to comment either in favor or against the
proposed project. You should express your comme�ts at the public hearing
indicated on the attached notice. However, if you are unable to attend this
hearing, you may submit written comments to this department or contact me by
telephone prior to the hearing so that they can be considered by the Planning
Commission.
Sincerely,
, �
���� �� � -'�'~��
Michael J. M�cCabe
Assistant Planner
MJM:pjt
1\1194s4.pol
t '
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND PROPOSED NEGATNE DECLARATION
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CiTY OF BAKERSFIELD
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a hearing accepting testimony will be held before the Planning
Commission of the City of Bakersfield. The hearing will begin at 12:15 p.m., or as soon thereafter, as the
matter may be heard on MONDAY, March 14, 1994, in the Council Chambers, City Hall. The Monday
portion will be for presentation of staff testimony only. No action to approve or deny this project will be
taken on Monday. The hearing will be continued to take testimony [rom others at 5:30 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard on THURSDAY. March 17, 1994, in the Council Chambers of City
�-Iall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301, to consider the following request:
1. The project to be considered: Generai Plan Amendment 1-94, Segment IV. Changing the tand
use designation from GC (General Commercial) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 15 acres.
Zone Change No. 5543 changing the zoning district from C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) and C-
2(Regional Commercial) to R-1 (One Family Dwelling) on 15 actes.
l. Project location: Southeast corner of Brimhall Road and Calloway Drive.
3. The name and address of the project applicant:
Martin-McIntosh for Castle & Cooke Dev. Co.
2001 Wheelan Court
Bakersfield, CA 93309 .
NOTICE IS ALSO HEREBY GIVEN that a pvbtic hearing wilt be held ai the same time and place
by the Planning Commission to receive input from the public on the potential effect of this project on the
environment. Pursuant to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study has been
prepared, describing the degree of possible environmental impact of the proposed project. This study has
shown that the proposal (as mitigated) will not have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, a
Negative Declaration is proposed. Copies of the Initial Study and proposed Negative Declaration are on
file and available to the public through the Planning Department (contact Mike McCabe) in the
Development Services building at 1715 Chester Avenue, or by telephoning the department at (805) 326-
3733.
PUBLIC COMMENT regarding the proposed project and/or adequacy of the Negative
Declaration, including requests for additional environmental review, will be accepted in writing on or
before the hearing date indicated above at the Plannin� Department. If you challenge the action taken on
this proposal in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues raised at the public hearing, or in
written conespondence delivered to the City of Bakersfield prior to the close of the hearing.
DATED: February 4, 1994 POSTED: February 4, 1994
����_��
�IARD IS'I'Y�'
ng Directo
MJM:pjt
p:194s4.nph
�;,c�IEiAL �L;aN �ME:�lDiV1E:�1T
1-94. SE��1E�T iV
'' -;�' STLc^,YOO D
, .:�1.�
� ' ��t
9 > ' , `� ; ^�'INOCREEK
. � �J pURT
;I ----- _R
� � � � , 3ROOKSTONE
. ,
Sr2 ' � r COURT
,,'�O�r l'` ; ! R
!o
,
, �, , �
,` � i � �OXGLEN�
counm- ' 30 29 � couRT
� �3RIMHALL �OAD j " ;' � �;(►��G BRIMHALL RDy� �p.
i' %.
LR
/ ,
' �31
/ �
�R ,� /
� �
sP
0
GC
'ROP' "''i6R1N1:�;A'-`/!�'/,!�;
� ,�SE� , � //.� • � j.�t
32!�� /�� . /�,. ,
j///./�j/% j//./. j/i.� ��
i/ j j// j j//. j j j/. j/�j;;
%��%//��/����//���%�
: j%�j%�� j%��j//��/��I
'/�j�///,�//.�i%��/�//
i//�/�GC TO LR . ///./�
�.� • � •- � ��/
./ j/�j/ j/�j/ j j/�/ j j/�
�%���1 �����l�:1��
� � RAVENROCK DRIVE
I '
� LR
r
0
0
0
�
z
o LR
I �
�
, �_� � '_R ;Q( !LL'L-
I �>
I; ,R '�_
, ;� .
�oi
i e� r�AVENW00D .'�RIVE� ji w
'�.�..�OUNTY �...5..: • �; Z�
��?Y � � W I O �
�
�tZ i�� ia,
��{ Zf
��AFFORDSHIRE '�vAY o i
J, ��
(� I
�N1� � I I
Izip �
� '.YATERBURY �RIVE ;
� �oo ' q
sca� w �'r
_ T?9S, R2?c -
��4os
�CNE �;,�ANGc
5�43
� �I
`� a
; -' � � )
=, ;,
� ��
----- ; --------'> '
� ; �(2- �/2) RS � i I°;
� � �
i ;,� i i � .
, � �
,-.
' cV ' � � . i
i � ; � ` �Q RS �
I w � i�f
� � � � °��
i ; / V �
Cou ! ' � ,�3� � �
� � �
�'n' 9RIMHALL ROAD � �% � ���
' i� � PF
�
� //
, '�31 � i;
I 4-� c-2 �
I -- ;
R—S I/��P/ �
%
� /.
---- ;
�;
� � �
� �
20A % '
'
� �
1V
�
o �oo
SCAI.F IN FEET-
''29S, R21E
�
� � -�isT�=woo�
� ���
; �-;
�—� ; ���INDCREEK
, , :;OURT
� _ — , , �—'
� i ROOKSTONE
� COURT
C-2 � R-1
� �
� ' roxc��v
; �� couar
�AHALL RD�.� ��J.
.NROCK�DRIVE ,� y �
�
'�?( w
R-1 �
'oi
�.LI �-� �.��
�AVENWOOD Dr�IVE�i w
JI ��
q-� '�i �°1
!r-4 I�i
S�AF�ORDSHIRE WAY oI
�141 �U
iz�� �—� �
�
� VJATERBURY DRNE '
;
�
R—. -
�a4oa
0
.
;i GENERAL PLAN DESIG�lATIONS
�I RR �Rurai Residentiai - 2.5 aross i LI �Lieht [ndustriaii
acres�dwelling unit;
! ER iEstate Residentlai - ' a�velling
i SI �>erv�ce Industriai i
; unit/net acrei �
� HI I lea��v Inciustriai �
I SR (Suburban Residential - _ess than !
or equal to 4 dwelling units�net '
acre� i
LR ( Low Density Residential - iess � P ��'�h�ic �acilities�
than or equal to 7.26 dweiling �
units i net acre 1 PS �}'ublic�I'rivate 5chooi�
WR (Low Medium Density Residential - � �publicTransnartation►
greater than 4 and less than or �
eaual to 10 dwelling units/net
acre) P.S�v (Sulid Waste �acilitiesi
HMR (High Medium Density Residential - OS ;Open 5pace►
greater than 7.26 and less than
17.42 dwelling unitslnet acre� ��ep �Yaeks)
HR (High Den�sity Residential -
greater than 17.42 and less than OS-S (Slopes►
or equal to 72.6 dwelling units
/ net acre ) R.yp ( Resource-Intensive Agriculture,
20 acres aunimum)
i
HC (Highway Commercial)
GC {General Commercial)
YC (Major Commercial)
� OC ;Office Commerciail
� WC i"dixea Use Commerciai)
It-EA ( Resource-Extensive Agnculture,
�0 acres tninimum 1
R-MP ( Resource-Mineral Petroleum,
� acres minimum �
General Plan �treet Classification .�rterials are used primanlv bv throu¢h
traffic. with a minimai function to provide
Freeways orovide service cu throuen traific exciusivelv access to abuttinQ properrv.
with no access to abuuing �ro�ertv artd no a�-eraue
intersec�ions. Colleetors lunction to connect locai streets
with arteria'ts and to �rovtae access to
I Expressways are arterial hiehwavs with at least nartiai ahuttine propern�.
controi of access whicit mav or mav not he uivided or
I have 2rade senarations at intersections and mav nc an Loceis arc cxciusiveiv for nroncrt�• ac�ess anci
I interim taciiin� for an ultimale Ireewa��. tnroueh traflic is uiscoura�eu. _
fzonc
ZONING DESIGNATIONS �� �
� M-1 ;'Lignt Manuracturing� �
R-1 {One ramilv Dwelling - 0.000
sq.ft.;dwelling unit) I I�-2 �General Manuracturing)
E tEstate - 10,000 sq.ft./dwelling � M-3 !Heavy Industrlail
unit) i
A �Agriculture►
R-S (Resiaential Suburoan - 24,000
sq.ft./dwelling unit) A-20A (Agriculture-20 acre minimumt
R-S-iA (Residential Suburban, one-acre P -(Automobile Parking�
minimum lot size� -
RE (Rece°eation)
R-S-2a5A (Residential Suburban-2-1/2 acre
minimum lot size) Ch (Chu�ch)
R-S-5�1 (Residential Suburban five-acre OS (Open Space)
minimum lot size)
t�OSP. (Hospital)
R-S-10A (Residential Suburban ten-acre
minimum lot size) _ D (Arci�itectural Design)
(no longer in use)
R-2 (Limited Multiple Family
Dwelling - 1/2,500 A� (Architectural Design)
sq.ft./dwelling unit)
FP-P (�loodplain Primary)
R-3 (Limited Multiple Family
Dwelling - 1/1,250 FP-S (Floodplain Secondary)
sq.ft./dwelling unit) .
R-4 (Limited Multiple Family � (Ai�°port Approach)
Owelling - 1/600 � (Tr�vel Trailer Park)
sq.ft./dwelling unit)
0�4 (Mobilehome)
R-H (Residential Holding)
SC (Senior Citizen)
PUD (Planned Unit Development)
C-0 (Professional and Administration
Office )
C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial)
C-2 (Regional Commercial)
C-C (Commercial Center) �
PCD (Planned Commercial Development)
f\zone.l
•_. , :,-w
�,����"�.,, .�.�
� �a�,; �,�:�� :2y =
���� -.�
�� _ �i� )i�
. �
��\ 4� ��
_�; ��� .. . i�y�,y.R
'�� ,�. nn,niiM'�•
TO:
�ROM:
MEMORANDUIVI
Jack Hardisty, Planning L
Gene Bogart, Water and
SUBJECT: SITING OF METROPOLITAN RECYCLING COMPLEX
February 18, 1994
As we discussed at the Metropolitan Solid Waste Subcommittee meeting on January 28,1994
and follow-up meetings with City staff, we are now able to proceed with the environmental process
�equired to site a materials recovery facility (MRF) on City property.
The focus of the environmental review will be on two potential sites located on City sewer
farrn property located south of Highway 58 and east of the southerly extension of Mt. Vernon
Avenue, described as follows:
SITE #1 - 160 acre site located in N/W�/4 of Section 11, T.30S., R.28E. This site
includes approximately 100 acres of land necessary to buffer any
future recycling and/or transfer operations.
SITE #2 - 67 acre site located in the E�/z of the S/W'/a of Section 10, T.30S.,
R.28E. This site lies immediately south of the wastewater reservoirs
and adjacent to the e�isting 30 acre greenwaste/inert recycling site.
For reference, I've included a metro map highlighting these two sites.
In order to meet California's AB 939 Waste Diversion mandates, the site could ossibl be
fully operational by the year 2000. Based on the potential need for a complete materials recovery
and transfer station facility, we should evaluate both sites for the maximum potential level of land
use. Also, as part of the environmental review process the "No Project" option can be a third
alternative to siting a recovery facility. This will give the City maximum fle�bility in the future to
decide on the actual rype of facility (if needed) to meet the State mandates.
Mike Sides and Greg Sanders will be working directly with your staff on the initial project
description. If you have any questions or require further information at this time, please call me.
GB:sr
Attachment
cc: Alan Tandy
Ed Schulz
Jake Wager
Gail Waiters
Mike Sides
Mark Gauthier
��
�dlAR�AGE�'� ���G��.
� � � Virry�i� 3 Ye ��
REIW
CMllpTl
� 'fhI' ��7�0 p. � .
r �� � _
-� ,
i a.l. ��+ LL JI ° _ �Mkf�� �� `� � '� � s �
Ap. e, �RFR SCM. r�. e
� . ? 3 5 "1.
S\. . �� d
�:' � ,„,�, ;.�,a �
MraO � . ,
i ���-, �� ��' 3 VIANT
� „
am , 5`�� ��-, `� .,TM e .- s
A , � ' s r
� ^ �i :� �k � � i� �
� � S
. �
..e'�� ' :' .s� „�
t r�,+
_. �, � "�w3�r..�'^w5:�°A .esi�sas.
, .-: ., .;_''� ��. '� }.<.�:. � s�a�+.�.
Viilt�,8 .QBA1�' s °'- � -,
� �'", � gt�:
��II�F
� .� _ �iti: � 1 C
.. 4 . F . '": S�i�gW a
d S ` f' l %�4 � �� �' ���i��' 978. L
st. � ' � f;. �. �
" � `�� � � �; Sag�
r} � , A9� �
� }�� � �:
i ,� j a
. r
lR ". ��
-„: }P 4 S �`.�
" '� �IY41�Vi'�MWeic'i► �� �. �����
E �����
Grvv S�. �� ��l!'S�'�I�D - �� r � �.� ' �� "� z � .
� �••";• s, � " G/�EENlA�AS1L +�r ,��IER�a'i1;�'�
J . ;- �` ;� w ,, s : � �: . r
4 � '
;v > 1 v .- } y "'
+�. :�t d�!:4Jh�« �G�'B � } �k �� .
� w41 .rT
I � � 1 t'' �` . `
� � .' v �'3 ti .�C�� �,.�� f q " Y �'� e '�j Ir
� . fi � '#' � � � f
✓ y f 1�' �^c:� F •'� �
� . t I
� }�
\ g. . �
v T.3�t� �z �� �t.�� .
..wv���. ,..}.�. .
� �
, � }
�
¢ � r
'
�� b �
o � � ; : ��� � �-
O �
O � '
Z • "f '� 3 . : , <
O � ' . � � - . . ' � �� � .
F�
U ■ � , /
M �
. i , .
r
Y� '/
-- --' --- ��._��.
�i
� � �7
�f
;1 Y
� � � �� � � � � � � .. . � ti � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
VIA AV�� NI ��� �� !�aaron R0. � le��ti ."„��` Milk d
a .._. ' i'�Y \-'�
LL �
� a �
a�c«RSR�F.: h`
=1KIMBMR A�/E ' r c�.
x r� Q.�... . �' ri j... .. �f ^
� t,£ .$:. F. F: MA�lfiEN MOIIO 6 Dr. 1 . � >
3',�'� �,�A. N� fM �g � .. t� ; m
�����'��� �2EWrvR..~a.'. �... N I �... ......... F
; �� Z �' � . . ........•..� `<
j �: a �
� ...;t... SMr Le. p w
i �POR��RFiELO�, Sarromx�s Aw. 3 Sm�
AvE � � NAYfAIR CT , y
� • �: • • •••• � Story Ln. =
� lAlIIfAX � • _
__ -�~�-_ s
r � V�.a Ar.
�
� , � . 8enan � Or.
�t :-� o .
,t �, IA
� a' u �
u
� w:�, >� Q �erF�ua
� . WI�SON RD ry
.L � . �y y.- •��• ��.• �������� �
�% � '� � 3a F -- t $� •• '� � �j� � �� �� �
� �� �a.
� „���s 3 a:� W.� ,
'��s,����fj� �� ��vrP��� j�� p:A �
� � � , � � � :s � { .,t. ; s c�.7. I
� � ..............,......;.
� 5 �-�: �,in z�` 5::�`� 5� HALLELUTA �• ST � .
u �
r s �:�. '� �` ��,•%'i?� °gi r�m,o � ; p( ',
. I��1Il R'• .
_ ' RlULLER ROAD
>; ;
:� a• g' � - -- �
<: �: �.SCMWART2�� AVE �
4� ¢. •°� �V/ � $f.
�� 3• � ~ OA31S im • •RD • �� � \
.
: •
' 9� '
. • , .
: : : �.�......e� �' � � � wHire �N
. .
............. ............. .. ...........
E LN� �
�: / ' p :
. � Q:
W� . u: ,
°'� / �A eEAAr '
2 .�; .. .::°...
o " ¢•� :
h/ �y f'
{� �� •
�, � � �:
: �Q a > .
-- , -------- 3.
� _ ���_ �
��� /
� � O WESTFIELD AVE
Dul
@. a� .................. .
p Bla
i: ¢ ...............
–' ........ °
Q� �
� y�� •
� ...... ... � � ,�
H
—� • AIRVIEW•• RD••
t ! x i
a
LL
a � .
� P�ET�i3OI'OLITAN
; B��ERBFIELD
� LEGEND
� �rt www��R cww�� �oi.w
� � �'UIV �M[T�
� . �-.� N/l< �CCIN 4Yrtr�� � Mn�f/ Mb�
�
�
�
'
�
� r
-�=----------- rroa� 43�?T�! ..,....oa..,....
�
B A K E R S F I E L D
MEM�RANDI!!IA
February 25, 1994
T0: KERN COUNTY CITY MA AGERS
FROM: JOHN W. STINSO , AS ISTANT CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: COUNTY ANNEXATION POLICY
��� June 15, 1993 �ounty Admin�ist� a�iva Office� Joe urew presenied a report to the
Board of Supervisors regarding revisions to the property tax exchange policy
related to city annexations. This report recommended that the board authorize
the Administrative Office to negotiate the exchange of revenues associated with
annexations; that each annexation be treated uniquely; and that all sources of
revenue, including property tax, sales tax, fines and forfeitures, etc. be
considered in the negotiation process.
In response to an outcry by cities Joe Drew conducted a meeting on July 12, 1993
with the City Manager's Group to discuss the proposed action. A letter sent to
the City of Bakersfield from Adel Klein on July 28, 1993 indicated that it was
agreed at the meeting that all annexations currently in process would be handled
in the historical manner with property tax exchanges based upon the existing
"cost/service" ratio. Excluded from this agreement were annexations of existing
commercial or industrial properties which would be evaluated on an individual
basis and a negotiation process would occur for the exchange of property taxes
related to these annexations. Also was a request for a list of effected
annexation. An additional meeting was set to meet on August 12th with the City
Managers annexation task force.
The Manager's met on September 9, 1993 to discuss the different impacts of the
county policy on cities and the impacts the county policy would have on future
land use decisions as well as the uncertainty for developers who desired to have
their projects constructed within a city and were caught in a feud between the
City and County over property or other tax splitse
A letter �rom Joe Drew dat�d Septemiaer 21, 19�3 sLaLed that the Count�r had
drafted a"fair and equitable r�solution" to the division of property tax
revenues associated with annexaiions. He stated that it was the County's goal
to "transfer only that amount of revenue which equates to the cost of services
being transferred." Included with that letter was a list of services which the
County transfers to cities upon annexation and a worksheet showing the net
General Fund cost to the County. They proposed an annexation formula revenue
distribution based upon the a percentage distribution of Property and Sales Taxes
related to the net general fund cost of services transferred and the transfer of
all other local revenues to cities. Current contract fire and police services
were not to be affected and the county agreed not to oppose annexations.
At the meeting in dctober there was considerable discussion about the assumption
made by county staff in the preparation of their county cost worksheet. It was
stated by the City Manager's that the analysis appeared to be one sided and that
- -�.
a
both si des of the equati on needed to be 1 ooked at. There was di scussi on about the
impact on annexations on development and the need to provide services efficiently
and eliminate duplication. A set of principles for providing governmental
services was developed and sent to the County and City Manager's for review and
comment.
Joe Drew sent a letter dated January 27, 1994 which responded to the principles
by saying they represent a"starting point for discussions for developing a long
term strategy..., but leave the issue of tax sharing in the near term
unresolved."
In that same letter it was stated that only annexations which were in process as
of October 1993 would continue to be processed und�r the forme.r tax sharing
agreement, and that annexations subsequent to October 1993 are to be negotiated
on a case by case basis using the county's proposed tax sharing agreement. It
appears that the Administrative Office in unilaterally implementing the new
policy without the approval of the Board of Supervisors or adequately responding
to the concerns of cities.
On February 17, 1994 John Hendrickson, Steve West, Gail Waiters and I attended
a meeting to discuss further the annexation policy at the County Administrative
Office with Joe Drew and Adel Klein representing the County.
Joe Drew mentioned our common adversary of a declining revenue base and other
impacts to the City and County tax bases due to shifts of property taxes to
schools. He indicated that approximately 60.7% of the Property tax now goes to
schools as a result of last years state budget shifts. He discussed the negative
impact annexation has on County revenues and that the County can't afford to
continue their past annexation policies. He did discuss that a mutually
beneficial solution to the problem needs to be developed.
John Hendrickson recapped the main points from our last meeting which included:
1) Devising a mechanism to address the disparity between the amount of
property tax received by different cities, i.e. Arvin which receives
a very small percentage and Bakersfield which receives a larger
percentage.
2) Devising a mechanism to determine who provides services to an area and
what are the real costs and how are they allocated across the
community.
3) Development of a tiered approach to revenue allocation for annexations
based on the type of area or land use of the area to be annexed, i.e.
vacant land would be treated differently that developed land or
industrial differently that residential.
There was considerable discussion about these items. The County pointed out
their ability to provide services at a lower per capita cost than cities. We
pointed out that cities generally provide a much higher level of services than
that provided by counties due to the urbanjrural differences of the people
served.
. �
�
z.
The County seemed focused on the loss of revenue rather than the provision of
services. Steve West suggested that a service delivery model be considered
rather than a cost of services model. There was discussion about the fact that
most residential development doesn't pay for itself and must rely on retail,
commercial or industrial uses to share the cost of delivering services. As an
example the County relies on property taxes from oil properties to subsidize the
services it provides county wide. In Cities retail and commercial properties
subsidize residential development to some extent.
The meeting ended with Steve West offering to develop a model to reflect his
service delivery approach. The County did not change their prior position re.
negotiation of each annexation not already in process as of last October. I
called Adel Klein to make sure of that understandir.g a.nd she confirme� that was
sti "� � the case.
It seems that the County intends to hold cities hostage until their tax split
demands are met. They do not intend to hold off implementing their tax sharing
plan until a mutually acceptable resolution between cities and the County has
been arrived at. They have little or no recognition of the hardships this
decision places on cities and developers due to the uncertain and capricious
manner of negotiations they are pursuing. They are creating a situation where
cities cannot adequately plan for potential development which will or might occur
in a city depending on the outcome of this one-sided negotiations process. The
potential adverse impacts of the County's evershifting policy is significant and
should be appropriately responded to by the Cities.
�
/
�
�
Y t+ ' _ �
Mayor's Economic Development Discussion Group
Present:
Mayor Price
Cathy Butier
Ann Gutcher
Richard Russell
Kay Meek
George Martin
Gail Waiters
Phil Gaskill
Ray Watson
Patrick Benitez
Carol Williams
February 15, 1994 Meeting
MINUTES
Kevin McDermott
Manuel Arriola
D�lores Slade
Greg Whitney
Jake Wager
Judy Salamacha
Jim Meadows
Joel Klipp
Gil Anthony
Tony Ortega
Mayor Price asked everyone to introduce him/herself.
Ray Watson discussed the first meeting of the Mayor's Committee for Bakersfield's
�sion Statement. Members of this subcommittee are Mike Fisch, Kevin McDermott,
George Martin, Don Lindsay, Ray Dezember, Judy Salamacha, Tony Ortega, Deloris
Slade and chairman Ray Watson. A copy of the agenda of this meeting is enclosed.
The vision subcommittee would like your comments on the items on the agenda. A
retreat to deal with some basic issues of the vision plan process will be held Friday,
April 8th through Sunday, April 10th at Stallion Springs. Kate Tandy of the
Bakersfield Californian will act as the facilitator at this retreat. Another meeting of the
subcommittee will be held on February 22nd to finalize details of the retreat.
George Martin gave an update on the 1994 Business Conference. A new 150,000
square foot tent is being built which will have ventilation and allowance for artificial
light. It wil! be 240 feet wide and 740 feet long. A mailing will be sent out March 1 st
announcing the speakers and entertainers for this year who will include the three
astronauts who walked on the moon, Henry Mancini and negotiations are continuing
with Paul Anka. George said over 11,000 tickets were sold to this year's conference
just days after the 1993 conference. Mayor Price asked George if some of the same
things, i.e., Mayor's tent, tours, hotel desks, etc. could be repeated this year and he
responded affirmitively. A committee including Joe! Klipp, Kay Meek, Greg Whitney,
Jake Wager, Jackie Belluomini, Chris Frank, Cathy Butler and Naomi Allen was
formed to begin preparations for this year's conference.
�s.. �.
Economic Development Discussion Group Minutes
Page 2
February 15, 1994
Ann Gutcher spoke about the California Countryside Festival taking place on October
1 st of this year in East Bakersfield. The railroad history of the area will be the focus
of the festival. The Bakersfield Symphony will perform in addition to other groups.
This event has generated a lot of enthusiasm and support in the community.
Cathy Butler said the DBA just completed its membership drive which was very
successful. Membership has tripled.
Jake Wager briefly discussed business retention efforts being made.
Mayor Price said there will not be a meeting of the discussion group in March. The
next meetinq will be Tuesday, April 19th in the Bank Roam of the Convention
Center. Please call 326-3770 if you will be able to attend.
y
AGEAIDA
I. Mission statement of the t4ayor's Committee for Bakersfield's
Vision Statement.
II. Organization name.
III. Geographic area of concern.
IV. Committee representation:
(examples)
A. Business - types, size
B. Local government
C. Education
D. Ethnic �
E. Civic organizations - Chambers, DBA, etc.
F. Arts and culture
G. Other community non-profit
H. Law enforcement, courts, probation
I. Other
V. Criteria for committee representation
A. Financial
B. Time
C. Numerical limitations
D. Selection process
� 4
f
VI. Issues to be addressed �
(examples)
A. Downtown redevelopment
B. Southeast and East Ba}�ersfield
C. Transportatior. '
D. Arts, culture, sports, recreation, festivals
E. Youth - gar.gs, drugs, pregnancy, recreation, self esteem
F. Education
G. Crime prevention
H. Mobilization of resources - community groups, churches
I. Role of city in economic development - incentives
J. Living in a multicultural environment
K. Environment - natural resources, waste management
VII. Conference length and setting .
VIII.Facilitator
IX. Budget and financing
X. Other
XI. Next meeting date and agenda
Los Angeles - Bakersfield c�
High Speed Ground Transportation Feasibili�y Study ��,�,�rr�s
February 9, 1994
PVBI.IC NOTICE
T G°3[�C�C�9�!1C�D
��� � 2 G��J�
�o� �Q�a����� ���o��
VNhat is being The California Department of Trar��portation (Caltrans) has begun
s�udied? a large-scale project concerning ��ae development of a statewide
high speed ground transportatio� system. One element of the
r.n.!'::jQ.^.� 6v $ viiE"j`��i i�Gea�E�la� �e"�-°!� �.^. ^.s�.^.'?ef:�:.^,�^J, � 'J� �a C�.°c�.:vS
and Bakersfield by high speed raii. The study examines
aiternative routes, train technoiogies, and possible environmentaf
impacts.
Why this notice? Comments frpm the public an� their representatives are an
important part of the feasibility �$�dy. Public workshops on the
feasibility study will be held at th� foilowing locations:
Bakersfietd
Sania Clarita Valley
Los Angeles/
San Femando Valley
Antelope Valley
Beate Memori�8 �ibrary Mar. 2 5-9 p.m.
701 Truxtun Ad��ue
Slerra Vista Jr. High School Mar. 3
19425 Stillmor� St., Canyon Country
Burbank Library
110 (Vorth G1e�aoaks
Palmdale Cultural Center
704 Easi Palmdale Boulevard
Mar. 15
Mar. 16
5-9 p.m.
4-8 p.m.
5-9 p.m.
All loca�ions are accessi�is 'td l(1!3 1`I$e'aieii.SNj,cG'. v'F'i&�ISii Z�aTiSiaivo� ti'r:ii t3ci
available.
NVhat's available? At the workshops, maps and information on stations, alternative
route alignments, train technologies, the environmental study, and
statewide high speed rail policy will be available.
9Nhere you come in The feasibility study wiil address pubiic concerns and ideas
regarding high speed rail. You can submit your comments at any
of the workshops, or by mail to the address below.
�ontact For more information about this study, contact Mark Archuieta,
Senior Transportation Enginee�, Caltrans, 120 S. Spring Street,
Los Angeles, CA 90012 or (2�3) 897-6010.
� .
:�
�_Q � ��
❑��`
D �� ��1� Of 5�������1 C�D�OC��
� �� 1400 K STREET o SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 0(916) 444-5790
Calilornia Cities
Work Toge�her
DATE: February 18, 1994
TO: Mayors and City Managers
����� V ��
i
��'� � � �°'�-� I
��;� ,
c��� �Q��aC���°� Oo ��Uc��
RE: Challenge to Local ?.uth�rity to A�lopt Fire and Panic Safety Building
Standards for Single-Faynily I)wellings
A recent lawsuit (Mission Development, LT'D.¢ et al.. v. Citv of Vallejo) has successfully
challenged the city of Vallejo's authority to adopt a resadential fire sprinkler ordinance.
In the Memorandum on Order Granting Motion for Sumxnary Judgment for the Valle. jo case
Superior Court Justice Dennis Bunting stated, "the �ourt reluctantly finds that neither I-�ealth
and Safety Code Section 13143.5 nor 18941.5, nor any other statutory provision presently
authorizes a city to mandate automatic fire sprir�kler sys�e�ns in residential dwellings, unless
and until building standards relating to fire ancl panic safety are adopted by the Fire
Marshal and contained in the California Building Sta,xasiards Code."
Over 320 California jurisdictions have adopted residentia.l fire and life safety requirements
more stringent than provided in the California �uilding 5tandards Code relating to single-
family dwellings. The League supports the ability of jurisdictions to adopt such local
requirements.
In response to this court case, please send a. Ietter to Ron Coleman, State Fire Marshal,
asking his department to adopt draft building standard� relating to fire and panic safety for
residential dwellings as provided in Health and 5a%ty ��de Section 17921. A sample letter
has been enclosed for your convenience.
Please send your letters to:
Ron Coleman
California State Fire I!�[arshal
7171 Bowling Drive, Suite 600
Sacramento, CA 95823
If you have any questions about this issue, ple�se conta�� �'om Johnson, Fire Marshal, Napa
and League Fire Chiefs Department Legisla�iee �,iais�n, at 707/257-9590.
:�
SAMPI.E 1L�'�"�'�R
To: 12on Coleman, State Fire Marshal
From:
City
Subject: Fire and Panic Safety Regulations for Single-Family Residences
Over 320 California jurisdictions have adopted residential fire and life safety requirements
more stringent than provided in the California �uilding Standards Code relating to single-
family dwellings. The League supports the ability of jurisdictions to adopt such local
requirements. The recent court case Mission Develo�ment, L'I'd�. et al., v. City of Vallejo
has successfully challenged the City of Vallejo's ability to enact an ordinance for fire
sprinklers.
In the Memorandum on Order (sranting 11�otion for �u�nary dudgment, Superior Court
Justice Bunting stated, "the court reluctantly finds that neither �-iealth and Safety Code
Section 13143.5 nor 18941.5, nor any other statuiory provision presently authorizes a city to
mandate automatic fire sprinkler systems in residential dwellings, unless and until building
standards relating to fire and panic safety are adopted by the Fire Ivlarshal and contained
in the California Building Standards Code."
We respectfully request that the State Fire Marshal i�nmediately draft building standards
relating to fire and panic safety for residential dwellings as provided in Health and 5afety
Code Section 17921.
H:\pub�jl\f�remisc\legbul.fm