The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04/30/99 BAKERSFIELD CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM April 30, 1999 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER ~ ~-'L~7, ~',/:~--. SUBJECT: GENERAL INFORMATION 1. There is a map, enclosed showing growth patterns. The "areas" which show as "hot" are where occupancy permits for new homes have been issued over the last two years. The growth is clearly west, nearly evenly distributed - northwest, due west, and southwest. The proposed Highway 58 ! Kern River Freeway runs through the center of the area. 2. I have enclosed a draft of an item that will appear on the May 12th Council meeting regarding contract amendments with Ogden. I provide it early to solicit any questions or concerns you may have. The amendment deals, in a favorable way, with some lingering construction cost issues and extends the management part of the agreement, not food service, for five years. The extension is due to the favorable experience we are seeing, as well as a need to have bookings extend beyond the life of the current agreement. Please call if you have questions or concerns. 3. Some significant meetings took place this week on the Highway 58 issue. A committee met on the water related aspects and seemed to make good progress. They broke into subcommittees and hope to have things wrapped up in 60 days. We also met with Cai Trans to explore ways to get a meaningful connection of 58 to 99 in the first construction phase without modifying the financial plan. Models will be run and analysis done, but I feel the concepts are promising. A report on project status (without incorporating the above) is attached from Kern COG which I believe you will find to be of interest. 4. This week, Jewel and Motley Crue/Scorpions were booked for summer concerts at the Garden. 5. All owners of single family homes, duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes were mailed a notice of a public hearing to consider a proposed increase in the refuse rate. We are requesting an increase of $ 3.73% per year. A memo is enclosed from Public Works. Honorable Mayor and City Council April 30, 1999 Page 2 6. A joint public hearing on the proposed Redevelopment Plans and Environmental Impact Reports for Old Town Kern-Pioneer and Southeast Bakersfield will be held on Wednesday, May 26th. The meeting notice is enclosed for your information. 7. A response to a Council request to repair pothole damage on Annapolis Drive is enclosed. Resident will be contacted regarding future repairs in that area. AT: rs cc: Department Heads Pamela McCarthy, City Clerk Trudy Slater, Administrative Analyst ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT I MEETING DATE: May 12, 1999 I AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEM: TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED FROM: Alan Tandy, City Manager IT HEAD DATE: Apdl 30, 1999 CITY M~ ~GER SUBJECT: Amendment #1 to Contract Agreement RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Amendr Ogden Entertainment regarding the Centennial Garden and Convention BACKGROUND: This contract amendment ~reement, as follows: a) It to of the management portion of the agreement (not from five to ten years. b) It provi¢ for food service facilities from their own resources, rather than increasi~ c) C langua of the $1.0 million loan the City made to Ogden for food service and .~ession equipr d the incenti clause in years 6-10 of the contract to reward Ogden for over-achievement of ~nancial goals. The option exists in the contract for the City to extend the agreement from 5 to 10 years. It was originally anticipated that the decision on extension would come in year four. Reasons for the exercise of the option at this time are: i~$ April 30, 1999. 1:23PM P:~AdminReports&Related~,dm-1999\OgdenAmend-Admin-033199.wpd ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Page 2 1) Ogden is exceeding our expectations on bookings. We originally projected 102 events for year one. We now believe there will be 120. Ogden signed CSUB as a second anchor tenant. They have signed a multi-year deal with the Nederlander organization to ing us about a dozen concerts a year - Elton John, Aerosmith, Korn, Kenny G, Re Steve Miller, Enrique Iglesias, Jay-Z, DMX, Charlie Daniels, Journey and Forei~ have booked all of the toudng shows: Monster Trucks, Ringling Brothers sy Circus, World Wrestling Federation, Sesame Street, Disney on Ice, Cha ional Bull etc. They also have a multi-year deal with the Los An chibitions ar working on the NBA. They aro also annually king a etc. for the Convention Center. The quality of in the upcoming year. 2) Ogden is working on a sedes of multi-year cross the boundary of the odginal five year term of the agreement. With the ~rona business, we did not know this would be a factor dudng the first year the multi-year deals may have groat benefit to the City and complex, inck of the L.A. Kings agreement through year six and extension ;r otiations are in process with two roller hockey leagues that ;imilar discussions aro taking place with an ind~ in an expansion mode, which would take some years to bring m at. Finally, Ogden is working on a five to seven year boxing des a benchmark 3) Ogden is exceeding improving our balance sheet in the amount of $450,000 and $625,000 during the second fiscal year of ~r operation, a benchmark of $850,000 annual operating loss that that was the contract benchmark, it had actually I appears that the savings will be $200,000 in the first nine 000 in the next year. That is in addition to the difference between ion and the contract amount of $850,000, so the first year actual sawr year is $625,000. The trend is positive. The taxpayers aro The savings is per year for the life of the agreement, and As a part of ,all agreement, as discussed below, Ogden is willing to invest $192,311 of their own n the project. In partial exchange for that, they would like a longer term to t. ~roserves the City's dght, as established in the odginal contract, to make a later ation on the food services and concession element of the contract. We desire moro time ,nitor progress on that aspect, prior to making a decision, and can later either to-negotiate Ogden or go to another vendor. Apdl 30, 1999, 1:23PM P:~AdminReports&Related~Adm-1999\OgdenAmend-Admin-033199,wpd ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Page 3 Payment of Food Service Costs of $192.311 In the contract with Ogden, it was anticipated that costs for food services equipment and concessions would be $1.0 million dollars. The actual costs exceeded that, due to health directives, which were unanticipated, and due to a need to "do it right". It became several events, that portable equipment would be necessary to handle large crowds The City is responsible for building costs of $198,135 for code compliance and Ant was reserved during the construction process, from the odginal budget to Ogden. could request a loan increase of $192,311 but is willing element contract 'amendment. Since a loan increase would be ann] is more advantageous to the City. Language Clarification Ogden believed that the odginal food service ! to be repaid from the City's 35% share of concessions. The City believed concession receipts, then the 65% - 35% split. The clarification is to lage in the City's favor. Incentive Clause Ogden's agreement is ' .~ ark in the contract is based on the City paying $850,000 per year to o tures over revenues. Dudng the first five years of the contract, $350,000 in deficit reduction, 20% of the next $500 and 30% tis amendment for years 6 - 10 would add a $25,000 per Jeflcit is held under $300,000. The increased incentive is ~'s We wish we had more opportunity for such a plan. Bo he balance sheet are all looking good. This amendment should keep those moving. rks April 30, 1999, 1:23PM P:~AdminReports&Related~Adm-1999\OgdenAmend-Admin-033199.wpd AGREEMENT NO.' AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT NO. 98-16 BAKERSFIELD CONVENTION CENTER/ARENA ("COMPLEX") MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT NO. 98-16 is made and entered into on this day of , 1999, by and between OGDEN ENTERTAINMENT, INC., a corporation existing under the laws of the state of Delaware and authorized to do business in the state of California ("MANAGER") and CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, a California charter city and municipal corporation ("CITY"). RECITALS WHEREAS, in January, 1998, CITY and MANAGER entered into Agreement 98-16 ("the Agreement"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, MANAGER is to operate and manage the Bakersfield Convention Center and the Arena ("Centennial Garden"), collectively called "the Complex"; and WHEREAS, the Agreement additionally calls for MANAGER to provide concession and catering services to Centennial Garden; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, MANAGER was to reduce the operating deficit of the Complex; and WHEREAS, MANAGER has been managing and operating the Complex and successfully scheduled shows, conventions and concerts; and WHEREAS, the term of the entire Agreement is five years with CITY having the option of renewing for an additional five-year term; and WHEREAS, MANAGER has secured bookings at the Complex which will appear well into the future - exceeding the five-year term of the Agreement; and WHEREAS, MANAGER has reduced the operating deficit of the Complex beyond that which was contemplated for the first year of operation/management; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Paragraph 2.3.7 of the Agreement, CITY. loaned MANAGER up to One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) funds for the purchase of furniture, - Page I of 6 Pages - fixtures and equipment to enable MANAGER to provide the concession and catering services; and WHEREAS, MANAGER was required to spend $393,968.65 over the anticipated One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) to comply with requisite codes, to integrate the equipment with existing systems and to add portable concession units to accommodate large crowds and CITY has agreed to share that cost with MANAGER; and WHEREAS, MANAGER will absorb $195,833.65 of that cost and CITY will reimburse MANAGER up to $198,135.00 of that cost; and WHEREAS, CITY seeks to clarify any perceived ambiguity in the repayment terms of the Agreement; and WHEREAS, in consideration of its outstanding work in managing and operating the Complex and MANAGER's having to spend in excess of the loan amount to enable it to operate the concession and catering services, CITY desires to exercise its option and extend the term of the Management and Operations facet of the Agreement for the additional five-year term; and WHEREAS, CITY is not in a position, at this time, to extend the Concession and Catering services facet of the Agreement; and NOW, THEREFORE, incorporating the foregoing recitals herein, CITY and MANAGER mutually agree as follows: 1. MANAGER will absorb $195.833.65 of the cost overrun of the Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment for the kitchen/concessions equipment and CITY will reimburse MANAGER $I 98,135.00 of the cost overrun to compensate for unanticipated expenses related to code compliance and integration of the equipment to existing facilities. 2. Para_om.Dh 1.44 of Agreement 98.16 is amended to read as follows: 1.44 "Term" shall mean the Term of this Agreement and any Option Period then in effect. Each facet of this Agreement (Management/Operations and Concession/Catering) shall each have a separate Term, as defined in Paragraph 8.1 herein. 3. Paraf;Iraph 2.3.2.1 of A0reement 98-16 is amended to read as follows: 2.3.2.1 Except as provided in Attachment 7 to the DDA and the Hockey Lease, CITY confers upon MANAGER the right at the Arena throughout the term of the Concession/Catering .facet of this Agreement, as defined in Paragraph 8.1 herein, to operate S:V~RENAV~RENA'PRO~'GR$~gdenamendmentldrS'¥4xl' a e -April 27. 1999 -'; I" g 2 of 6 Pages -- . or contract with others to operate, and conduct a Concession and Catering business through manual service and other methods for the sale of the commodities set forth below: 4. Para_ara_Dh 2.3.7 of Aqreement 98-16 is amended to read as follows: 2.3.7 Furniture. Fixtures and Equipment MANAGER is solely responsible for supplying such furniture, fixtures and equipment to enable it to accomplish the Concessions and Catering services set out in this Agreement. CITY shall advance an amount of money not to exceed ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) from CITY's Equipment Fund for such purchase. The advance shall be reimbursed in equal monthly installments over ten (10) years at seven percent (7%) interest annually payable from the Gross Concessions Receipts. The reimbursement of the monthly amortization cost ($11,611.00) shall be deposited in the Operating Fund pdor to MANAGER and CITY computing or receiving the percentages of Gross Concessions Receipts due them under Section 4.3 herein. MANAGER shall then repay CITY's Equipment Fund from the Operating Fund. Sample calculation of how reimbursement shaft be computed: Gross Concessions Receipts $100,000 Less Reimbursement of Advance $ 11,611 To Operating Fund Commissionable Sales $ 88,389 Commission Rate (35% - per Paragraph 4.3.1) Commission Due CITY (35% x $88,389) $ 30,936 In the event that the total Gross Concessions Receipts in any one month are not sufficient to pay the reimbursement amount, the total'Gross Concessions Receipts shall be deposited in the Operating Fund and the difference between what is owed that month and the total Gross Concessions Receipts shall be carried over to the next month and added to that next month's reimbursement charge. FamilityManagementAgreement S:V~,RENAW~RENA,PRO~,GRS'ogdenamendmentldd3.w~;L. ~127, ~ . - ~'age 3 of 6 Pages - Sample calculation of how reimbursement shall be computed: Month 1 Gross Concessions Receipts $10,000 Less Reimbursement of Advance $ 11,611 To Operating Fund Cornmissionable Sales $ ( 1,611) Commission Rate (35% - per Paragraph 4.3.1) Commission Due CITY NONE* * No commission paid and $1,611 shortfall will be carded forward to following month Month 2 Gross Concessions Receipts $ 50,000 Less Reimbursement of Advance $ 13,222'* To Operating Fund Commissionable Sales $ 36,778 Commission Rate (35% - per Paragraph 4.3.1) Commission Due CITY (35% x $36,778) $ 12,872 '* Includes $11,611 for Month 2 and $1,611 carded forward from Month 1. MANAGER shall own the Concessions and Catering furniture, fixtures and equipment purchased with the funds advanced. In the event that CITY or MANAGER terminates this Agreement or this Agreement expires prior to the total reimbursement of the advance described above, CITY shall have the option of purchasing the furniture, fixtures and equipment from MANAGER by assuming the reimbursement duties herein. 5. ParaqraPh 4.2.2 of Aqreement 98-16 is amended to read as follows: 4.2.2 Incentive. It is anticipated that the Complex, if operated by CITY, would operate at a Net Operating Loss of $850,000.00 annually. Therefore, in addition to the base fee above, MANAGER shall receive an incentive fee relative to the amount of the reduction in Net Operating Loss for each Fiscal Year. MANAGER shall receive an incentive fee of: 1) 10% of the first $350,000.00 in Net Operating Loss reduced; 2) 20% of the next $500,000.00 Net Operating Loss reduction; 3) 30% of any Net Operating Surplus in any one Fiscal Year. Commencing July 1, 2003, MANAGER shall receive an incentive fee of $25,000.00 for even/year the Net Operating Loss Facilit~/ManagementAgreeme~t S:V~.RENAV~RENA.PRO~AGRS~gdenamendmentldrS.w~ _ __ -April27. 1999 -- rage 4 of 6 Pages is below $300,000.00. All of the above incentive formulas are based upon a projected annual Net Operating Loss of $850,000.00. Should the Net Operating Surplus ever reach $350,000.00 in any Fiscal Year, MANAGER's incentive fee will cease and all additional revenues will be used for normal and customary Operating Expenses the following Fiscal Year. 6. Paraqraph 4.3 of Aereement 98-16 is amended to read as follows: 4.3 Concession and Catering Fees. On or before the 20th day of each month, MANAGER shall deliver to CITY a true and correct statement of the Gross Concessions Receipts for the accounting period preceding such month. Prior to any calculations of fees due MANAGER or CITY under this Paragraph 4.3, the reimbursement payment due CITY under Paragraph 2.3.7 herein shall be transferred to the Operating Fund. The fees due the parties under this Paragraph 4.3, shall be calculated after the transferral of the reimbursement payment to the Operating Fund. Simultaneously with the delivery of said statement, MANAGER shall deposit into the Operating Fund the percentage of Gross Concessions Receipts due CITY according to the following schedule (MANAGER shall be entitled to theGross Concessions Receipts not payable to CITY): 7. Paraqra_oh 8.1 of A(]reement 98-16 is amended to read as follows: Term. MANAGER's rights and obligations under Paragraphs 2.3.2 through 2.3.2.10 of this Agreement will terminate June 30, 2003, unless renewed pursuant to this Section 8.1. This facet of the Agreement may be renewed at the option of CITY for one (1) additional five (5) year period, upon terms satisfactory to CITY and MANAGER. Notice of renewal to be provided to MANAGER no less than six (6) months in advance of the termination date. CITY may, at its option, elicit Proposals for the Concession and Catedng services prior to deciding to renew or renegotiate this facet of the Agreement. MANAGER's rights and obligations under all other Paragraphs of this Agreement will terminate June 30, 2008. FacilityManagementAgreement $:V~,RENAV~,RENA.PRO~AGRS~)gdenamendmentldr5.w~L, -April 27, 1999 ' ~age 5 of 6 Pages - 8. All other terms and conditions of Agreement 98-16 shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No. 1 to Agreement 98-16 to be executed, the day and year first-above written. "CITY" "MANAGER" CITY OF BAKERSFIELD OGDEN ENTERTAINMENT, INC. By: By:, BOB PRICE DANNY ZAUSNER Mayor Senior Vice President APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM: PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR BART J. THILTGEN City Attorney By:, By: RAUL ROJAS BART J. THILTGEN Public Works Director City Attorney COUNTERSIGNED: By:, GREGORY J. KLIMKO Finance Director JAN.'is FacilityManagementAgreement S:V~,RENA~ARENA.PRO~AGRS~ogdenamendmentldr5.wpd - Page 6 of 6 Pages - Kern Council of Govemments Apdl 15, 1999 TO: Kern Council of Governments From: Ronald E. Brummett /~ f Executive Director Subject: Route 58 - Report on Project Status J~J.~[.~: At the Kern Council of Governments meeting of March 18, 1999, the Board of Director's requested a report on the status for the Route 58 project. .~[,,,~L~: The Kem COG Board of Director's request that the staff report at the April 15, 1999 meeting on the Project status, including the following: project phasing; project funding; project schedule; public's opportunity to comment on the project; water agencies comments; and options available if project funding is interrupted or diverted from the project. ACTION: Instruct the staff to continue to coordinate with the FHWA, Caltrans, City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, and local agencies to ensure that identified issues are addressed. Kern Council of Governments ~a~ ~Q~h ~m~,~ ~,~im :ti'l(1. R~kerSfield. C_~liforrlia 93301 18OSI 861-2_191 F..~-timil~ IRnc:;t :[?4-R?I ~ TrY IRi'lr~! R~; ROUTE 58 (Centennial Corridor) PURPOSE AND NEED The purpose of the Route 58 Project is to identify and adopt an alignment that will meet the following criteria: · Provide continuity for Route 58 in Kern County, and · Provide an alignment for a multi-modal transportation facilities that reduce congestion on the transportation network in the western Bakersfield. metropolitan area. PROJECT HISTORY The eventual need for a high-capacity transportation facility in the western portion of the Bakersfield metropolitan area has been recognized by state, local and regional planners for several decades. Since 1981, eight (8) different transportation plans and community general plans adopted by the Board of Supervisors, the Bakersfield City Council and the Kern Council of Govemments have contained a freeway corridor through western Bakersfield (Attachment A). Since the adoption of the 1994 Regional Transportation Plan by the Kern COG Board of Directors, the Route 58 project has been listed as the number one pdority project in the Kem Region. In 1990 the California Transportation Commission programmed $45 million for partial acquisition of right-of-way for a future Route 58 freeway west of Route 99. In 1996 the California Transportation Commission directed Caltrans to complete the EIPJEIS so that the Route Adoption Study and EIPJEIS could be submitted to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for review and approval. In February 1998, the Kern COG Board of Directors adopted the 1998 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) that programmed $145 million in Regional Improvement Program (RIP) funcls and $30 million in Interregional Improvement Program (liP) funds to construct Phase 1 of Route 58. In June 1998, the California Transportation Commission adopted the 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program (ST1P) that included $175 million ($145 million in RIP and $30 million in liP funding) for construction of Phase 1 of Route 58. In 1991, Congressman Thomas waS able to include the Route 58 project as a demonstration project ($4.7 million) in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). In 1997, Congressman Thomas was able to include the Centennial Transportation Corddor ($15.7 million) as a demonstration project in the Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21 Century (TEA 21). The Centennial Transportation Corridor includes both Routes 58 anct Route 178 through central Bakersfield. The Tier I ElS is being reviewed by the FHWA. FHWA has requested supplemental information from Caltrans on a historic site and endangered species/habitat issues. The Tier I ElS should be completed by the summer of 1999. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Several alternatives were considered over the course of the environmental ancl engineenng studies for the Route 58 route a0ol~tion. ^ I~rOJect review team consisting of staff from the City of Bakersfield, Count of Kern, Golden Empire Transit District, Caltrans and Kern COG review preliminary analysis for each alternative to determine if they met the purpose ancl neecl identified for trois project. ARematives passing this first level of review were stuciiecl in detail. If during the sui~sequent studies that an alternative did not satisfy the purpose and need for the project, that altemafive was eliminated from further consideration. The table below identifies the alternatives reviewed and withdrawn form further consideration. REASONS FOR WITHDRAWING ALTERNATIVES. FROM FURTHER CONSIDERATION New Trus~mtion Facility on Alignment Alternatives Widen Seventh Kern Trampofl-o ExuUn Route 58 R~ed Road Pood l'ii~hvay South Alipuneat Transit Managc-fr Option Docs not improv~ continuity of' Route 55 Does not reduce 13'aff'ic congestion on local transportation network Unacceptable number of rclocauons Impacts iarEe number of archaeological sites 2 PROJECT PROGRAMMING Proiect Schedule: The following schedule outlines the step and estimated timing to meet the funding programmed in the FTIP adopted by the Kern COG Board of Directors at the meeting of February 1999. 1999 Summer- Tier 1. completed 1999 Fall - Tier 2. begins (2 years) 1999 Fall - Route adoption by the California Transportation Commission. 2000 Fall - Deed preparation and Mapping for right-of-way. 2001 Spring - Begin to purchase right-of-way (18 months) 2001 Fall - Begin Federal review of Tier 2 draft final ElS (3 months) 2001 Fall - Begin preparations of final plans, specifications and engineering (PS&E) 2004 Summer - Begin construction of Route 58, Phase 1. Fundina: The Kern Regional Transportation Financing Program was approved in concept by the Kern COG Board of Directors in 1998 (Attachment B). ConstruCtion Phases: Route 58 (Centennial Transportation Corridor) has been divided into several phases based on funding available during the next eight (8) RTIP funding cycles. 2004 Route 58 Phase 1 - Mohawk to Stockdale Highway. Construct interchanges at Cailoway, Renfro, Allen and widen to four lanes. 2004 Purchase right-of-way from Mohawk to "P" Street. 2006 Purchase right-of-way from "P" Street to Route 58 and Route 178. 2008 Construction Centennial Corridor from Mohawk to "P" Street. 2010 Construct Centennial Corridor from "P" Street to Route 58 and Route 178. 2012 Construct Route 58/178 interchange. 2014 Complete construction from Route 58/178 to Route 58 (east/west) ramps. Attachment B outlines the "funding" cycles not the "construction" schedule. AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES The process of defining and implementing a major transportation corridor is a par~nersnio 13etween Federal, State, regional and local agencies. FEDERAl., HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION: The FHWA is actively involved as a partner in the environmental process and in determining wt~ich design features affect the environment for all federally funded projects. The partnership begins pdor to environmental activities and extends through FHWA's approval of the appropriate environmental documentation. FHWA has delegated responsibility for complying with the environmental process to Caltrans. FHWA monitors Caltrans' stewardship of the process through annual program reviews and product evaluations to ensure compliance with applicable federal requirements. CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION: The CTC establishes fund.priorities for Caltrans and regional transportation planning agencies (Kern COG). The CTC in cooperation with Caltrans'and regional transportation planning agencies (Kern COG) develops a transportation funding program (STIP/FSTIP) that implements the Regional Transportation Plan and the State Interregional System plan. The CTC adopts the final Route Adoption for new routes and certifies the state environmental documents to comply with CEQA. CALT~NS: Caltrans is the Lead Agency for the development of environmental documents for projects on the state highway system. Caltrans is responsibility for the adequacy and objectivity of the draft environmental document, which must reflect the independent judgement of Caltrans. If there are significant impacts involved in the portion of the project under FHWA decision authority, then 1) a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) must be prepared and approved for circulation by Caltrans and FHWA and 2) a Final Environmental Impact statement (FEIS) must be prepared and approved by Caltmns and FHWA. Caltrans is also the Lead Agency for project approval, detailed plans, specifications and engineering. This activity is in cooperation with regional and local agencies. KERN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS: As the federally designated metropolitan planning organization (MPO) and the state designated regional transportation planning agency (RTPA), Kern COG is responsible for the following: · In cooperation with state and local agencies, develop a long range (20 years) regional transportation plan (RTP) that identifies the transportation needs of the region, ancl develops a .. financing and implementation program to meet those needs. The RTP must conform to air quality improvement standards. · In COOl~eration with state and local agencies, develop a transportation funding program (RTIP/FTIP) that implements the long range transportation plan. The FTIP must conform to air quality improvement standards. · Coordinate with state and local agencies the project approval, development of the environmental documents, snd completion of plans specifications and engineering. 4 LOCAL AGENCIES: · Local agencies (cities, county and transit districts) are requirecl to develop long range circulation plans that identify metropolitan and local transportation needs. These local plans should have a defined implementation plan. FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS The Federal environmental process allows environmental impact statements to be developed in a tiered process. The following describes the intent of each tier. TIER 1: The Tier 1 ElS outlines the environmental setting of the ¢orddor and identifies the environmental issues associated with the project alternatives. TIER 2: The Tier 2 ElS document defines environmental mitigation based on specific proiect design requirements, construction and right-of-way acquisition issues. The water issues that have been raised would b~ addressed durinq t;he Tier 2 document development in (;0niunCti0n wil;h the development; of the final enqineerinq plans. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Public participation continues to be an important component of the project development process. The Public Participation Program has four primary objectives: · To obtain broad community input in the environmental study process, · To identify community issues and attempt to respond to issues that are raised, · To assist in achieving consensus on emerging design and mitigation concepts, · To support the NEPA and CEQA mandated public participation process. The major components of the public participation program includes public meetings, workshops and direct mailings. Attachment A has a detailed listing of public meetings, and public workshops that have been held. During the EIR/EIS development, four public open houses have been held (November 1992, August 1993, July 1994, November 1997). The purpose of these open houses is to inform the public about alternative route alignments and to solicit comments and concerns to be acldressed in the environmental review process. These meetings were attended by more than 770 people ancl over 500 comment cards, letters were received. Additional public presentations on the project were given to several additional groups. Attachment A is a Project History that lists the public meetings, public workshops, and public hearings that relate to Route 58. Additional public participation opportunities will be available durinq the Route Acloption by the Califomi~ Transportation Commission and the Tier 2 ElS process. The hearinq and workshops have not beer~ scheduled at this time. 5 ISSUES Through the Tier 1 ElS Public Participation Program, local public agencies and the public identified areas of concern to be addressed dudng the environmental process. This process also assisted in identifying the project alternatives that were then carried forward for evaluation. Key issues are: Social ~nd Economic Considerations: , Community character ancl quality of life, · Impacts to residential and commercial properties, · Property values, · Land use and growth. Environmenl;al Considerations: · Noise · Air Quality · Hazardous Waste · Circulation and Access · Water Quality and Supply · Safety · Recreation and Open Space · Biological Resources · Mass Transit WATER ISSUES The Kern COG staff has review the information submitted to Kern COG at the February, 1998 public headng and March 18, 1999 meetings. In a letter dated March 17, 1999 from the Kern County Water Agency states the following: · The Agency wants to state clearly that we support a proposed east-west freeway, but the proposed alignment does not address our concerns. These must be acldressed before we can support an alignment." The water issues are as follows: 1. The alignment would elirninate the Rosedale-Rio Brave District's best recharge area as well as intake frorn the Kern River, and would likely create other operational problems for the district. 2. The proposed alignment would render some of the Kern Water Bank Authority best recharge areas unusable, thus reducing the abso~tive capacity of Kern County with possible water supply impacts, as well as possible flooding impacts dunng high runoff events. 3. There is an existing Habitat Conservation Plan for the Kern Water Bank Authority. It is imperative that this proposed project not irnpact the Kern Water Bank authority current operating environment as defined in the Habitat Conservation Plan. 4. The Cross valley Canal is operated by the Kern County Water Agency and represents the major west-east conduit for moving water from the California Aqueduct to the metropolitan Bakersfield area. The proposed alignment crosses the Cross Valley Canal in several locations, creating the very real potential for accidents to result in vehicles landing in the canal or spilling hazardous materials into the canal. 5. Operation problems could be experienced by the fact that the proposed alignment goes over the top of the Fdant-Kern Canal's terminus at the Kern River and the Arvin -Edison Water Storage District's intake canal. This area is the central hub of Kern County's water clelivery systems and cannot tolerate any interference. 6. The area of the Kern Water Bank Authority has the possibility of cultural impacts, particularly for the prehistoric native American inhabitants of the land. Of major concern is that Caltrans has not responded to the Water Issues outlined in the public hearing testimony and the letters that have been submitted. Meetines with Water A(~encies: On April 5, 1999, the city of Bakersfield hosted a meeting to discuss the water agencies concerns. Those present included staff members from the city of Bakersfield, Kern COG, Kern County Water Agency and Caltrans. Invited, but not attending was the Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District. Il was decided that a committee of local aoencies ~citv. county. COG and water a0encies} would meet to develop alternative solutions to the water issues. Caltrans would be invited to pprticioate. After Iocala(~reement is reached on alternative solutions, they will be sl~ared with Caltrans Kern COG will host the first meetin=, Water Issues Workshop: Assemblyman Florez is hosting a workshop on the Kern River Freeway on April 9, 1999. This staff report will be mailed prior to that meeting. A report of this workshop will be provided at the Apd115, 1999 Kern COG Board of Director's meeting. IF THE PROJECT DOES NOT PROCEED 1. Traffic in the western portion of the Metropolitan Bakersfield area would increase by 100 percent or more over the forecast traffic (2020), on many of the arterial streets in the Rosedale area, leading to significant congestion. 2. Several developments have been approved by the City of Bakersfield and County of Kern, based on the completion of Route 58. These developments would have to be re- evaluated. 3. Thirty million ($30 million) dollars of liP funding would be reprogrammed by the CTC to other state highway projects in California. 4. The $145 million of RIP funding could be re-programmed during the 2000 RTIP process for other projects in the Kern region. 5. It would take an estimated 8 to 16 years to complete the corridor planning and environmental process to establish a new Route 58 corridor, ready to move ahead for funding and construction. RECOMMENDATION: Continue to coordinate with the FHWA, Caltrans, City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, and local agencies to ensure that identified issues are addressed. This would be accomplished by: · Working with Federal, State and local agencies to complete the Tier 1 EIPJEIS. · Establish a committee consisting of the City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, local water agencies and Caitrans to develop alternatives solutions to identified water issues. This could include replacing ponds or making adjustments to the alignment. · Proceed with the Tier 2 EIPJEIS. 8 ATTACHMENT A Project History Route 58 1958 California Highway Department developed Route 58 corridor alternatives through central and western Bakersfield. 1980 February - A proposed freeway north of the Kern River was shown in the Rosedale Community General Plan adopted by Kern County. Public hearing before the Kern County Board of Supervisors. 1986 October - Kern County adopted an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and General Plan Circulation Element Amendment for the Westside Thoroughfare. Public hearing before the Kern County Board of Supervisors. 1988 June - Kern COG completed the Westside Corndor Study. Public meeting before the Kern Council of Governments Board of Directors 1989 The 2010 General Plan was adopted by the City of Bakersfield and Kern County identifying the Kern River Freeway Corridor. Public hearings before the Kern County Board of Supervisors, Bakersfield Planning Commission and the Bakersfield City Council. 1990 The California Transportation Commission (CTC) programmed $45 million to allow Caltrans to begih the Route Adoption Study and EIR. 1991 The City of Bakersfield Planning Commission and the City Council. and the County of Kern adopted a plan line for the Kern River Freeway. Public hearings before the Kern County Board of Supervisors and the Bakersfield City Council. 1991 During the re-authorization of the Federal Surface Transportation Act in 1991, Congressman Thomas was able to include the Route 58 project as a demonstration project ($4.7 million). 1991 1992 Regional Transportation Improvement Program and Federal Transportation Improvement Program adopted Kern COG Board of Directors. November- Public Hearing 1992 Caltrans began working on the Route Adoption Study and EIR/EIS. 1992 November- Public Open Houses on Route 58 EIPJEIS 1993 August- Public Open Houses on Route 58 EIPJEIS 1993 Federal Transportation Improvement Program August - Public Hearing. 9 1994 July - Public Open Houses on Route 58 EtR/EIS 1994 Regional Transportation Plan October - Public Workshop December - Public Hearing adopted Kern COG'Board of Directors. 1994 1994 Regional Transportation Improvement Program December - Public Hearing adopted Kern COG Board of Directors. 1994 1994 Federal Transportation Improvement Program December - Public Hearing adopted Kern COG Board of Directors. 1995 June - Metropolitan Bakersfield Major Transportation Investment Strategy - Public Open House. Kern River Freeway Corridor identified as major component. 1995 1996 Regional Transportation Improvement Program October .- Public Hearing adopted Kern COG Board of Directors. 1995 November - Metropolitan Bakersfield Major Transportation Investment Strategy - Public Open House. Kern River Freeway Corridor identified as major component in the build alternative. 1996 1996 Regional Transportation Plan and 1996 Federal Transportation Improvement Program January - Public Workshop June - Public Hearing - adoption by Kern COG Board of Directors. 1996 September - Metropolitan Bakersfield Major Transportation Investment Strategy - Public Open House. Kern River Freeway Corddor identified as major component in the build alternative. 1997 Dudng re-authorization of the Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21st Centur~ Congressman Thomas was able to include funding for the Centennial Transportation Corridor ($15.7 million) as a demonstration project. The Centennial Transportation Corridor includes both Routes 58 and Route 178 through central and western Bakersfield. 1997 May - Metropolitan Bakersfield Major Transportation Investment Strategy - Public Open House. Kern River Freeway Corddor identified as major component in the build alternative. 1997 Adoption at Public Hearings of the Metropolitan Bakersfield Major Transportation Investment Strategy by Kern COG, Count of Kern, City of Bakersfield and Golden Empire Transit District. Kern River Freeway Corridor identified as major component in the build alternative. 1997 November - Caltrans conducted a Public Workshop on the Tier 1 ElS. 10 1998 February - Public comment period for the Tier 1 ElS ctosed. 1998 1998 Regional Transportation Improvement Program February - Public Hearing adopted by Kern COG Board of Directors. 1998 1998 Regional Transl:)ortation Plan August - Public Workshop September - Public Hearing adopted by Kern COG Board of Directors. 11 Kern Regional Tr-nspodatlon Financing Program October lgg8 ( In MIIIionl of Dollars ) Funding Summary Including IntmmglonM Improvement Program TIP eYe i_E -+ f998/ 20i) 2004 2006 2008 2010 20t2 20t4 Tofal 2000 RouteS(F $11~' (i) 'S26'* (4) $54 (6&~) S26 (~) $26 (i0) $78 (!!) $78 (12) $78 (13) $481 lip S30 (i) $]4 .(_4) , $]0 (6&8) $14 (9) $14 (10) S42 (l I) $42 (12) $42 (13) $228 Centenl.ial~orrJdor $5 (2&3i :~.'75'**(5&6) $2 (7) ...... $16 Other P, ojects $0. S34 $36 S64 $64 Sl2 Sl2 $12 ~234 Expend, lures RIP Advince $30 (i) $(30) .j . . · R, !:lo,al fmprovcmc,! Program ~ndi,g is cslJmat~ at S9t) ~ ~ ~ · · ( ', mcmJial Co.Jdor lhmding Split 35% lip / 65% RIP Holes: ] R, ,,dc 58 (Kern River I:rc~way) - Build Frccway / Exprcsswa)' from Mo~ Io Sl~c Highway. 2, (' ,mplclc I'SR a,d fief I EIS~IR rot L'c,fcmlial Corridor (east). 3. I , ,mplclc PSR and Ticr I EIS~IR for RoIIIC 58 (~sl). 4, ( ', ,mplclc co.sln~clion of i.lcrchangcs al Calloway Rd., Hc.l'm Rd. and ~len ~, ~ ~dcn lo four la,cs. 5 (' ,mplclc Tier II EIS/EIR for Route 58 (casl). 6. I', ~chasc righl~f-way from Mohawk lo "P" Slrecl. 8 I ,mplclc cmsslmclio, of Ccm~lcmdal Comdor tim, Mohass'k Rd. Io "P" ~1. m 9. i,, ~chasc righl~f-way &om "P" SI. 1o Roule 178 and Roulc 5~. I0. I alslnlcl I'cmcnnial Conidor from "P" SI. Io Rome 58/17S I. 1' ,nsln~cl d~c Roulc 581178 inlerchangc 2. ~ '. ,mplelc, ,mslmclion horn Roulc 581178 Io Roule 58 13. ('.,mplelc, o,slmcliou flora Roule ~8/178 Io Roule 178 Es~i hale $1' million lo do oilier en~ronme,lal sludies · Im I ,les p;~),,ack adva,cc 0f$30 million. · * Im I ,,les $.1 , fillion for 'l'icr II wink for Rome 58 (easl). (~5~. ;md for dghl~f-~y ~. ATTACHMENT C The following technical documents have been completed for Route 58 EIR/EIS: · Kern River Alignment Location Hydraulics Study · Final Geo-technical Assessment Report · Flood Plain Evaluation and Location Hydraulics Study Water Quality · Parking/Circulation Report with TSM · MultimodaFTransit Report · Noise Analysis Technical Report · Air Quality Preliminary Drainage Report · Draft Relocation Impact Report · Energy Analysis Report · Final Visual Resources and Aesthetics Impact Assessment · Kern River Alternative Hazardous Waste Initial Site Assessment · Non-motorized Circulation Impact Study · Traffic Operational Analysis with TSM · Final Natural Environment Study · Background Socioeconomic Study 13 BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director DATE: April 29, 1999 SUBJECT: PROPOSITION 218 MAILERS All owners of single family homes, duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes were mailed a notice of a public hearing that will be held on June 16, 1999 to consider the proposed increase in the trash fee of 3.73%. The notices were mailed via first class postage by Hall's Letter Shop, as attested by their sworn affidavit, on record at the City Clerk's Office. The proposed increases are as follows: Present Rate Proposed Increase Single family homes $134.00/yr $139.00/yr $ 5.00/yr Duplexes $242.48/yr $251.52/yr $ 9.04/yr Triplexes $363.72/yr $377.28/yr $13.56/yr Fourplexes $484.96/yr $503.04/yr $18.08/yr The actual number of first class notices that were sent out on Wednesday, are broken down as follows: Number of Owners Single family 56,161 Duplexes 1,503 Triplexes 533 Fourplexes 1,200 Total 59,397 Only the owners of record, as identified by the Kern County Assessor~s~~ill .. receive a notice, since they are the only ones allowed to vote. RECEIVED' T P:\WP\MEM\r_prop2lS.mem.wpd APR 3 0 CiTY MANAGER'S OFFICE ~B'.A K E R S F I E L D April 23, 1999 Mr. Alan Tandy City Manager City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Avenue _.. Bakersfield CA 93301--7- ~ Subject: Old TOwn Kern-Pioneer Redevelopment Project Southeast Bakersfield Redevelopment Project To All Affected Taxing AgenCies: Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Bakersfield and the Bakersfield Central District Development Agency will hold a joint public hearing on the proposed Redevelopment Plan and Environmental Impact Report for the Old Town Kern-Pioneer Redevelopment Project and on the proposed RedevelopmentPlan and Environmental Impact Report for the Southeast Bakersfield Redevelopment Project on Wednesday, May 26, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Bakersfield City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301. The boundaries of the proposed Project A~ieas are enclosed. Sincerely, ~~.~~ ..... John F. Wager, Jr. ' Economic Development Director Cir.,of Bakersfield * Economic and Communi~ Development Department _ 515 Truxtun Avenue · BaKersfield · California 93301 (805) 326,3765'~ Fax (805)328-1548 · TDD (805) 324-3631 B A K E R S F I E L D 26 de Abril de1999 AVISO DE UNA AUDIENCIA PUBLICA UNIDA POR EL CONCILIO DE LA CIUDAD I)E BAKERSFIELD Y LA AGENCIA DE DESARROLLO DEL DISTRITO CENTRAL DE LA CIUI)AI) DE BAKERSFIELD SOBRE EL PLAN DE REURBANIZACI(~N PROPUESTO PARA EL PROYECTO OLD TOWN KERN-PIONEER POR ESTE MEDIC SE INFORMA que el Concilio Citadino de la Ciudad de Bakersfield y la Agencia de Desarrollo del Distrito Central de la Ciudad de Bakersfield llevarfi a eabo una audieneia pfiblica conjunta para considerar y actuar sobre el Plan de Reurbanizaci6n propuesto para el Proyecto de Reurbaniza¢ion Old Town Kern-Pioneer (el "Plan de Reurbanizaci6n') a la siguiente hora y lugar: Fecha: 26 de mayo, de 1999 Hora: 7 p.m. Lugar: C~nara del Concilio de la Ciudad, Sal6n de la Ciudad de Bakersfield, 1501 Avenida Truxtun La agencia estfi proponiento adoptar el Proyecto de Reurbanizaei6n Old Town Kern-Pioneer, el cual incluye aproximadamente 1,970 acres de tierra en dos sub-greas no-contiguas (unidas, el "Area Proyecto). Los limites del Area Proyecto se muestran en el mapa adjunto. Una descripci6n completa legal del Area Proyecto esta disponible en forma gratuita en la Oficina de Recepci6n de la Ciudad, (en el Bakersfield City Hall), ubocada en el 1501 de la avenida Truxtun, Bakersfield, CA 93301. Generalmente, los prop6sitos de proyecto propuesto son: eliminar 6 disminuir las condiciones de deterioro, proveyendo mejoras pfiblicas que son necesarias, ayudando al desarrollo de nuevos usos, ayudando en la rehabilitaci6n de las propiedades existentes, aumentando 6 mejorando la vivienda de las personas de bajos-y moderados-ingresos y logrando otras actividades de mejora autorizadas por la Ley de Reurbanizaci6n Comunitario de California. Al disminuir las condieiones de deterioro en el Area Proyeeto, el Plan de Reurbanizaci6n facilitanl la rehabilitaci6n de los edificios existentes y el desarrollo de nuevos usos, todo lo cual sera consistente con el Plan General de la Ciudad de Bakersfield. El Plan de Reurbanizaci6n incluye la autoriza¢i6n para la compra de la propiedad a traves del uso de dominic eminente. En la audiencia pfiblica del 26 de mayo de 1999, todas las partes interesadas, ineluyendo a cualquier persona que niegue que existe deterioro 6 que tenga cualquier objeci6n al Plan de Reurbanizaei6n propuesto 6 la regularidad de cualquiera de los procedimentos previos, puede comparecer y ser escuchado y puede demostrar la raz6n por la cual el Plan de Reurbanizaci6n propuesto no deberia ser adoptado. Previo a la mencionada audiencia pfiblica, cualquier persona tambi6n puede entregar un escrito en la Oficina de Recepci6n de la Ciudad de Bakersfield estableciendo las objeciones al Plan de Reurbaniza¢i6n Propuesto 6 la regularidad de cualquiera de los proeedimientos previos. Si &sea confront,ar el Plan de Reurbaniza¢i6n en la torte usted no podrfi haceflo a menos que se oponga verbalmente en la audiencia pfiblica 6 entregando las objeciones escfitas en la Ofieina de Recepci6n en la, 6 previo a la, audiencia pfiblica. Adem/,s, si eualquier corte desafia el Plan de Reurbanizaci6n,6 cualquier otto aspecto del proceso del reurbanizaci6n, usted estar/limitado a tratar s61o aquellos asuntos que usted 6 alguien mas mencion6 en la audiencia ptiblica descfita en este aviso, 6 por correspondencia escrita entregada en la Oficina de Recepci6n en, 6 previo a la, audiencia pfiblica. A la hora descfita arriba para la audiencia pfiblica, el Coneilio de la Ciudad procederfi a escuchar todas las objeeiones esefitas y orales al plan de Reurbanizaei6n propuesto, y actuar como eonsidere aporopiado. Despu6s del eierre de la audieneia pfiblica, el Concilio de la Ciudad puede introducir la ordenanza aprobando el Plan de Reurbanizaci6n Propuesto. E1 plan de Reurbanizaei6n propuesto, las Reglas y Regulaeiones para la Implementaci6n de la Ley de Ayuda para Reloca¢ion de California, las Reglas de Parti¢ipa¢i6n Actuales y Prefereneias para los Propietarios, Operadores de Nego¢ios y Renteros y otros documentos relacionados estfin disponibles para revisi6n publica en la Oficina de Recepci6n. El Reporte de la Agencia de Desarrollo del Distrito Central al Concilio de la Ciudad referente al Proyecto de Reurbanizaci6n Old Town Kern-Pioneer estar~ disponible en la oficina de Recepci6n de la Ciudad el 5 de mayo de 1999. EMITIDO POR ORDEN DEL Concilio de la Ciudad de Bakersfield y la Agencia de Desarrollo del Distrito Central de la Ciudad de Bakersfield. ( Oficina de Recepci6n de la Ciudad de Bakersfield Seeretaria de la Agencia de Desarrollo del Dislrlto Central de la Ciudad de Bakersfield. Y City of Bakersfield · Economic and Community Development Department 515Truxtun Avenue · Bakersfield · California93301 · Redevelopment Hotline · (661)864-1000 · Corrected SP JPH OTK-P.wpd Publish: 4/28/99, 5/5/99, 5/12~J3, 5/19/99 B A K E R S F I E L D April26,1999 NOTICE OF A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD AND THE CENTRAL DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ON THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE OLD TOWN KERN-PIONEER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Bakersfield and the Central District Development Agency of the City of Bakersfield will hold a joint public hearing to consider and act upon the proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Old Town Kern-Pioneer Redevelopment Project (the "Redevelopment Plan") at the following time and place: Date: May 26, 1999 Time: 7:00 p.m. Place: City Council Chambers, Bakersfield City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue The Agency is proposing to adopt the Old Town Kern-Pioneer Redevelopment Project, which includes appLo~xjmate!y_1.,.970 acres of_ land in two non-contiguous sub-areas (together, the "Project Area"). The boundaries ~f the projec-~-,~re~ ~e ~(~r~-~r{ ~-i-{e~c~l~m~a~pT-A 'full Ii, gal' ~lescription'of the Project ...... Area is available free of charge at the office of the City Clerk, Bakersfield City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301. Generally, the purposes of the proposed project are to: eliminate or alleviate blighting conditions by providing needed public improvements, assisting the development of new uses, assisting the rehabilitation of existing properties, increasing or improving Iow- and moderate-income housing, and pursuing other improvement activities authorized by the California Community Redevelopment Law. In alleviating blighted conditions in the Project Area, the Redevelopment Plan will facilitate the rehabilitation of existing buildings and the development of new uses, all of which will be consistent with the City of Bakersfield General Plan. The Redevelopment Plan includes the authority to purchase property through the use of eminent domain. At the public hearing on May 26, 1999, all interested parties, including anyone denying the existence of blight, or having any objection to the proposed Redevelopment Plan or the regularity of any of the prior proceedings, may appear and be heard and may show cause why the proposed Redevelopment Plan should not be adopted. Prior to said public hearing, any person may also file in writing with the City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield a statement of objections to the proposed Redevelopment Plan or the regularity of any of the prior proceedings. If you wish to challenge the proposed Redevelopment Plan in court you may be precluded from doing so unless you object orally at the public hearing or by delivering written objections to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. Further, in any court challenge to the Redevelopment Plan, or any other aspect of the redevelopment process, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. At the hour set forth above for the public hearing, the City Council shall proceed to hear all written and oral objections to the proposed Redevelopment Plan, and act as appropdate~--After-the-close-of-the public hearingi-the Ci~, Counci! may introduce the ordinance-approving the proposed Redevelopment Plan. The proposed Redevelopment Plan, the Rules and Regulations for Implementation of the California Relocation Assistance Law, the Rules Governing Participation and Preferences for Owners, Operators of Businesses and Tenants, and other related documents are available for public inspection at the office of the City Clerk. The Central District Development Agency's Report to the City Council regarding the proposed Old Town Kern-Pioneer Redevelopment Project will be available in the City Clerk's office on May 5, 1999. GIVEN BY ORDER of the City Council of the City of Bakersfield and the Central District Development Agency of the City of Bakersfield. (~_~ ~/.~ ~~. j~0 (' City Clerk, City of Bakersfield and Secretary of the Central District Development Agency, City of'Bak'ersfield City of Bakersfield · Economic and Community Development Department 515 Truxtun Avenue · Bakersfield · California 93301 · Redevelopment Hotline · (661)864-1000 · · Corrected JPHNOT-OTK.P.wpd Publish: 4/28/99, 5/5/99, 5/12/99, 5/19/99 23RD Z O F- F- z LU LU n,' U.I LU F- LU O3 O3 ~'-- TRUXTUN AVE ~ O O 16TH ~ ........... BNSF RR ITTE ST ---EUREKA 14TH - WILLIAMS ST o3 O I-- ILl LU (/) I VIRGINIA AVE GATEWAY DRIVE uJ CASA LOMA //' DRIVE o~ZUJ zZ , PLANZ RC '" WHITE L PACHECO ROAD -- 0 V4 V2 mile s:~redvarea\seprojectmap.cdr Bakersfield Central District Development Agency SOUTHEAST BAKERSFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PROPOSED PROJECT AREA B A' .K E R S F I E L D 23 de Abril de 1999 AVISO DE UNA AUDIENCIA PUBLICA UNIDA POR EL CONCILIO DE LA CIUDAD DE BAKERSFIELD Y LA' AGENCIA DE DESARROLLO DEL DISTRITO CENTRAL DE LA CIUDADDE BAKERSFIELD SOBRE EL PLAN DE REURBANIZACI~N'PROPUESTO PARA EL PROYECTO SUDESTE DE BAKERSFIELD PORESTE MEDIO SE INFORMA que el Concilio Citadino de la Ciudad de Bakersfield y la Agencia de Desarrollo del Distrito Central de la Ciudad de Bakersfield llevarfi a cabo una audiencia phblica conjunta para considerar y actuar sobre el Plan de Reurbanizaci6n propuesto para el Proyccto de Reurbanizacion Sudeste de Bakersfield (el "Plan de Rcurbanizaci6n") a la s!guiente hora y lugar: Fecha: 26 de mayo, de 1999 Hora: 7 p.m. Lugar: CJmara del Concilio de la Ciudad, Sal6n de la Ciudad de Bakersfield, 1501 Avenida Truxtun La agencia est~i proponiento adoptar el Proyecto de Reurbanizaci6n Sudeste de Bakersfield, el cual incluye aproximadamente 4,600 acres de tierra en dos sub4reas no~contiguas (unidas, el "Area Proyecto). Los iimites del Area Proyecto se mucstran en el mapa adjunto. Una descripci6n completa legal del Area Proyecto esta disponible en forma gratuita en la Oficina de Recepci6n de la Ciudad, (eh el Bakersfield City Hall),. ubocada en el 1501 de la avenida Truxtun, Bakersfield, CA 93301. Generalmente, los prop6sitos dc proyecto propuesto son: eliminar 6 disminuir las condiciones dc dctcrioro, proveycndo mejoras pfiblicas que son necesarias, ayudando al desarrollo de nuevos usos, ayudando en la rehabilitaci6n de las propiedades existentes, aumentando 6 mejorando la vivienda delas personas de bajos-y moderados-ingresos y logrando otras actividadcs de mejora autorizadas pot la Ley de Reurbanizaci6n Comunitario de California. A1 disminuir las condiciones de deterioro en el Area Proyecto, el Plan de Reurbanizaci6n facilitar~ la rchabilitaci6n de los edificios existcntes y el desarrollo de nuevos usos, todo 1o cual sera consistente con el Plan General de la Ciudad de Bakersfield. El Plan de Reurbanizaci6n incluye la autorizaci6n para la compra de la propiedad a traves del uso de dominio eminente. En la audiencia pfiblica del 26 de mayo de 1999, todas las partes interesadas, incluyendo a cualquier persona que nieguequc existe deterioro 6 que tonga cualquier objcci6n al Plan de Reurbanizaci6n propuesto 6 la regularidad de cualquiera de los procedimentos previos, pucde comparecer y ser escuchado y puede dcmostrar la raz6n por la cual el Plan de Reurbanizaci6n propuesto no deberia set adoptado. Previo a la mcncionada audiencia pfiblica, cualquier persona tambi~n puc& entregar un cscrito en la Oficina dc Recepci6n de la Ciudad de Bakersfield establecicndo las objeciones al Plan de Reurbanizaci6n Propuesto 6 la rcgularidad de cualquiera de los proccdimientos previos. Si &sea conffontar el Plan de Rcurbanizaci6n en la corte usted no podrfi haccrlo a menos quc sc oponga verbalmcnte en la audiencia pfiblica 6 entregando las objeciones escritas cn la Oficina dc Recepci6n en la, 6 previo a la, audiencia pfiblica. Adem~s, si cualquier cortc dcsafia el Plan dc Rcurbanizaci6n,6 cualquier otto aspecto del proceso del rcurbanizaci6n, usted estar~ limitado a tratar s61o aqucllos asuntos que usted 6 aiguien mas mencion6 en la audiencia pfiblica descrita en este aviso, 6 por correspondencia escrita entregada en la Oficina de Recepci6n en, 6 previo a la, audiencia pfiblica. A la hora descrita arriba para la audicncia pfiblica, el Concilio de la Ciudad procederfi a escuchar todas las objecioncs cscritas y orales al plan de Reurbanizaci6n propuesto, y actuar como considere aporopiado. Despu~s del cierre de la andiencia pfiblica, el Concilio de la Ciudad puede introducir la ordenanza aprobando el Plan de Reurbanlzaci6n Propuesto. El plan de Reurbanizaci6n propucsto, las Reglas y Regulaciones para la Implemcntaci6n de la Lcy de Ayuda para Relocacion de California, las Reglas de Participaci6n Actuales y Preferencias para los Propietarios, Operadores de Negocios y Renteros y Otros documentos relacionados esffm disponibles para rcvisi6n publica en la Oficina de Recepci6n. El Reporte dc la Agencia de Desarrollo del Distrito Central al Concilio dc la Ciudad refcrcnte al Proyccto dc Rcurbanizaci6n Sudcste de Bakersfield cstar~ disponible en la oficina de Reccpci6n de la Ciudad el 5 dc mayo dc 1999. EMITIDO POR ORDEN DEL Concilio de la Ciudad de Bakersfield y la Agencia de Desarrollo del Distrito Central de la Ciudad de Bakersfield. Oficina de Recepci6n de la Ciudad de Bakersfield y Secretaria de la Age 'a de Desarrollo del Distrito Central dC Ciudad de Bakersfield. City of Bakersfield * Economic and Community Development Department 515 Truxtun Avenue * Bakersfield · California 93301 · Redevelopment Hotline · (661)864-1000 · SP JPH S£:wpd -. Publish: 4128199, 5/5/9~, 5/12/99, 5119199 Espa~ol en el lado reverso B A I(. F. P, S F I E l., D April23,1999 NOTICE OF A JOINT PUBLIC HEARING BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD AND THE CENTRAL DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ON THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SOUTHEAST BAKERSFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT 'NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Bakersfield and the Central District Development Agency of the City of. Bakersfield will hold a joint public hearing to consider and act upon the proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Southeast Bakersfield Redevelopment Project (the "Redevelopment Plan") at the following time and place: Date: May 26, 1999 Time: 7:00 p.m. Place: City Council Chambers, Bakersfield City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue The Agency is proposing to adopt the Southeast Bakersfield Redevelopment Project, which includes approximately 4,600'acres of land in two non-contiguous sub-areas (together, the "Project Area"). 'The boundaries of the Project Area are shown in the accompanying map. A full legal description of the Project Area is available free of charge at the office of the City Clerk, Bakersfield City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301. Generally, the purposes of the proposed project are to: eliminate or alleviate blighting conditions by providing needed public improvements, assisting the development of new uses, assisting the rehabilitation of existing properties, increasing or improving Iow- and moderate-income housing, and pursuing other improvement activities authorized by the California Community Redevelopment Law. In alleviating blighted conditions in the Project Area, the Redevelopment Plan will facilitate the rehabilitation of existing buildings and the development of new uses, all of which will be consistent with the City of Bakersfield General Plan. The Redevelopment Plan includes the authority to purchase property through the use of eminent domain. At the public hearing on May 26, 1999, all interested parties, including anyone denying the existence of blight, or having any objection to the proposed Redevelopment Plan or the regularity of any of the prior proceedings, may appear and be heard and may show cause why the proposed Redevelopment Plan should not be adopted. Prior to said public hearing, any person may also file in writing with the City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield a statement of objections to the proposed Redevelopment Plan or the regularity of any of the prior proceedings. If you wish to challenge the proposed Redevelopment Plan in court you may be precluded from doing so unless you object orally at the public hearing or by delivering written objections to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. Further, in any court challenge to the Redevelopment Plan, or any other aspect of the redevelopment process, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing. At the hour set forth above for the public hearing, the City Council shall proceed to hear all written and oral objections to the proposed Redevelopment Plan, and act as appropriate. After the close of the public hearing, the City Council may introduce the ordinance approving the proposed Redevelopment Plan. The proposed Redevelopment Plan, the Rules and Regulations for Implementation of the California Relocation Assistance Law, the Rules Governing Participation and Preferences for Owners, Operators of Businesses and Tenants, and other related documents are available for public inspection at the office of the City Clerk. The Central District Development Agency's Report to the City Council regarding the proposed Southeast Bakersfield Redevelopment Project will be available in the City Clerk's office on May 5, 1999. GIVEN BY ORDER of the City Council of the City of Bakersfield and the Central District Development Agency of the City of Bakersfield. City Clerk, City of Bakersfield and Secretary of the Central District Development Agency, ~,L~ty of Bakersfield City of Bakersfield · Economic and Community Development Department 515 Truxtun Avenue · Bakersfield · California 93301 · Redevelopment Hotline · (661)864-1000 · JPHNOT-SE.wpd Publish: 4/28/99, 5/5/99, 5112/99, 5/19/99 500' 1000' 1700' S:\REDVAREA\OKPROJECTMAP. CDR ~ Bakersfield Central District Development Agency / OLD IOWN KERN - PIONEER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ,," PROPOSED PROJECT AREA / ,US ST z ! z - / ~- Z Z ~--J / z 0 / ¥' z ~z 0 / .~ Z --GOODMAN O / o 36TH ST / LINCOLN ST 20TH TRUXTUN AVENUE 16TH STRE BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGEI~ ~ ,/ / FROM: RAUL ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: APRIL 28, 1999 SUBJECT: ANNAPOLIS DRIVE - POTHOLE REPAIRS On this date, the Streets Division crews have patched the potholes as reported in the area of 3212 Annapolis Drive. A section of Annapolis Drive is full of alligator cracks. This section with alligator cracks will require a dig-out; therefore, staff will schedule the work for June 1999. G:\G ROU PDAT~Referrals~Maggard~AnnapolisDrivePotholes.wpd ;