The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07/15/05 B A. K E R S F I E L D CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM July 15, 2005 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Alan Tandy, City Manager/~-L,./F~. SUBJECT: General Information 1. We got through the State budget session adoption without damage, but perhaps not the full legislative session. Attached are documents from the League and California Redevelopment Agency showing the submission of a constitutional initiative which would, effectively, destroy redevelopment in Bakersfield and California by removing our ability to use eminent domain. While we rarely use it, the arena, Amtak station, and many other projects would not have occurred had this been in place. The 48-acre downtown walkable community that would improve an older, deteriorated area and create downtown housing would be dead, among many other projects that would eliminate blight and increase the tax base. We obviously need to start an educational campaign, as we are quite sure they must not be aware of the negative significance of this to our community. A copy of the letter sent to our legislators is enclosed. 2. We have been advised by Senator Florez that the meeting with Shafter has been rescheduled to Thursday, August 11th from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. He has made arrangements to use the KernCOG conference room. .3. Donna Kunz, Darnell Haynes, Raul Rojas, and I toured the Stockton redevelopment project this week. It has an arena, future convention center hotel, stadium, parking, and some retail pads for restaurants. The facilities are congregated on the water just off from downtown. Their arena is going to cost over twice what our arena did, due to inflationary price increases and environmental clean up. It opens next winter. The stadium has opened and is being well received by the community. 4. The last concert in the Beale Park summer concert series will be this Sunday, July 17th. Per the attached memo from Dianne Hoover, the concerts have been well attended this summer. 5. The list of street maintenance projects for the week of July 18th is enclosed. Honorable Mayor and City Council July 15, 2005 Page 2 6. Responses to Council requests are enclosed, as follows: Councilmember Carson · Appreciation letter sent to Kern School Federal Credit Union for Camp King contribution; · Inquiry regarding availability of park fees in the Saunders Park area and the feasibility of locating a spray park in the area; Councilmember Benham · Requirements for placement of newspaper vending machines; · Citizen inquiry regarding issuance of a second blue recycling container; · Update on request for placement of a GET bus stop near Games Circle; · Citizen inquiry regarding C Street property at 23rd and 24th Streets; · Investigation of parking issues at 2415 G Street; · Cost and design elements of possible street closures south of 24th Street; Councilmember Hanson · Report on tentative dates for replacement/update of playground equipment at North Campus and Westwold Park; Councilmember Sullivan · Replacement of shrubs on Akers Road and repair of irrigation equipment. AT:rs cc: Department Heads Pamela McCarthy, City Clerk BAKERSFIELD Alan Tandy · City Mana~Jer duly 15, 2005 Via Fax: $£7-5989 T Dean Florez 16~.~..Sen. at _ori'~Strict California State'Se0.ate State Capitol Buildin'g,~Room 4090 Sacramento, CA 95814"~ RE: Opposition to SCA 15 and ACA 22 r/~r~/y Dear Senator Florez: As you are aware, Bakersfield is a community that has made huge strides in attracting new business and jobs, maintaining affordable housing, and creating needed amenities for our citizens. A recent feature article in the Los Angeles Times described Bakersfield as "a vibrant center of California growth". Lifelong residents and newcomers in our growing community enjoy the benefits of a revitalized downtown area with professional sports and entertainment events at Rabobank Arena. We have two state-of-the-art sports facilities in the Ice Sports Center and McMurtrey Aquatic Center. The adjacent Amtrak Station serves as a model regional transportation center. Can you imagine what Bakersfield would be like without them? This week, at the annual State of the City forum, City officials were privileged to inform our business community about the upcoming economic development projects looming on the horizon, including the proposed "South Mill Creek" project. It is a concept to transform an older, deteriorated area of our downtown into a mix of residential and retail areas with parks and trails, making it a safer, appealing walkable neighborhood. Bakersfield is being presented with favorable opportunities to improve and modernize our urban corridor that we have never before experienced. However, if SCA 15 and ACA 22 are passed, our ability to redevelop the blighted areas in our community will virtually be destroyed: We very rarely utilize eminent domain procedures in conjunction with redevelopment projects, but it is a tool that can serve to jump start community revitalization.. The City and the Bakersfield Redevelopment Agency acquired various properties to build the downtown projects I referenced earlier in this correspondence. In some cases, it was necessary for us to initiate eminent domain procedures to move forward. However, the majority of the time, we acquire properties from owners voluntarily, and eminent domain is used only as a last resort. City of Bakersfield · City Manager's Office · 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield · California · 93301 (661) 326-3751 ° Fax (661) 324-1850 Senator Florez July 15, 2005 Page 2 California already has extensive rules governing the use of eminent domain and restricting its use by redevelopment agencies only where there is a clear finding of blight, as defined by State law. California redevelopment law already sets tougher standards for using eminent domain than Connecticut law does. The Supreme Court's recent Kelo decision simply reinforced the rights and obligations of individual states to restrict the use of eminent domain, which California already does. The laws that are in place work; we do not need further restrictions that will unnecessarily bring a halt to redevelopment projects that foster better communities and bring benefit to our citizens. The City of Bakersfield strongly requests that you reconsider your'support of SCA 15 and ACA 22. If passed, the consequences will have a devastating effect on redevelopment in Bakersfield and throughout communities in Califomia. We would welcome the opportunity to meet and further discuss the significance of this issue to our community. Sincerely, City Manager cc: Mayor and City Councilmembers Donna Kunz, Economic Development Director John Shirey, California Redevelopment Association Chris McKenzie, League of California Cities Jul. 14 2885 28:38:19 qia Fax -> 3241858 Alan Tan,lu Page 881 0£ 883 LEAGUE 1400 K Street, Suite 400 · Sacramento. California 95814 OF CALl FOP, N IA Phone: 916.658.8200 Fax: 916.658.8240 C I T I E S Page 1 of 1 DATE July 14, 2005 TO: Mayors and Council Member, City Managers, Fiscal Officers FROM: ' League Executive' Director Chris McKenzie RE: SCA 15 and ACA 22: Newly-Introduced Constitutional Amendments Will Undermine Key Redevelopment Tool This morning Senator Tom McClintock, Assemblymember Doug LaMalfa and several co- authors (see attached list) announced the introduction of SCA 15 (McClintock) and ACA 22 (LaMalfa), identical constitutional amendments that would prohibit local govemments from using eminent domain if it results in a later use of the property by a private party (with a few narrow exceptions for PUC-regulated entities and incidental uses). The senator is using the recent Supreme Court Kelo decision (a case that arose in Connecticut) to assert that that eminent domain strips families of their property and gives it to private economic interests. The League Opposes These Measures. These measures will strip redevelopment agencies of a seldom used, but critical tool that California cities urgently need to build affordable housing for needy families, restore safe communities and generate jobs. Most important, this proposal is a solution in search of a problem. California is not Connecticut: we already have strong laws on the books protecting property owners and restricting the use of eminent domain. Redevelopment agencies may only use eminent domain as a last resort, and only where there is a clear finding of blight, as defined by state law. Land does not qualify simply because it is not being put to its optimum use or may be more valuable for other uses. What You Can Do. With the Legislature starting its summer recess today, you will have a good opportunity to provide your legislators information about why these measures aren't needed in California and how they will hurt your city's ability to build affordable · housing, generate jobs and restore public safety to blighted areas. Here is what we ask that yOu do: · Tell legislators and the media about specific redevelopment projects in yOur city that have included new housing, improved public safety, generated jobs and economic activity. · Explain how eminent domain is a seldom used, but critical tool to bring parties to the table to build affordable housing, remove blight, and create jobs. Attached are some additional talking points and background information. We will provide more information about this issue in the weeks ahead. RECEZVEO: 7/14,/05 5:50PM; ->CZTY OF BAKERSF"rEI_O; #1~59; PAGE 2 .... SCA 15 Co-Authors Senators (13): Sam Aanestad, Dick Ackerman, Roy AShburn, James Battin, John Campbell, Dave Cox, Jeff Denham, Robert Dutton, Dennis Hollingsworth, Abel Maldonado, Bob Margett, Bill Morrow, Charles Poochigian Assembly Members (31): Greg Aghazarian, John J. Benoit, Sam Blakesleel Russ Bogh, Dave Cogdill, Chuck DeVore, Bill Emmerson, Bonnie Garcia, Ray Haynes, Shirley Horton, Guy S. Houston, Bob Huff, Rick Keene, Doug La Malfa, Jay La Suer, Tim Leslie, Bill Maze, Kevin McCarthy, Dennis Mountjoy, Alan Nakanishi, Gloria Negrete McLeod, Nicole Parra, George A. Plescia, Sharon Runner~ Todd Spitzer, Audra Strickland, Van Tran, Tom Umberg, Michael N. Villines, Mimi Walters, Mark Wyland. Why SCA 15 and ACA 22 Are Bad for California California is not Connecticut. When it comes to eminent domain, the only thing these two states have in common is that they both start with the letter "C". The law in California is years ahead of its time and has extensive private property owner protections. These Measures are Job Killers. California is in the midst of an economic recovery, and this bill would kill valuable construction and other jobs that redevelopment projects create. These projects and jobs create' valuable revenue for state government and help with the state budget crisis. These Measures Are Affordable Housing Killers. After the federal government, redevelopment is the biggest funder of affordable housing projects in the state. This bill will make housing in California less affordable and worsen our housing crisis. These Measures Will Lead to More Sprawl, and Undermine Smart Growth Planning. Infill projects will be harder to build, forcing more and more sprawl, leading to greater imbalance between housing and jobs, longer commutes, more crowded highways and greater air quality impacts. These Measures are Bad for Public Safety Because They Will Promote and Preserve Blight. Any beat cop and any citizen know that crime is much worse in blighted areas. It is why law enforcement officials promote graffiti eradication, housing · repair programs, and neighborhood revitalization. This bill will take away one of the most critical tools we 'have to fight crime--removing the blight that gives rise to it. These Measures Are Bad for Families. Every parent needs a good job, affordable housing, and a safe neighborhood in which to raise their children. This bill will hurt the families of California by creating a major obstacle to achieving these goals. ~ 7/'14/05 5:50PM; ->CZTY OF BAKERsF"rELD; #859; PAGE ;3 Jul :[4 2885 26:39:67 Via Pax -> 3241858 Rlan Tand~ Page 883 Of 883 Kelo Decision and the Use of Eminent Domain in Califomia · Contrary to some reports, the Kelo decision deCided by the U.S. Supreme Court last month did not create any "new" law or grant "expanded powers" to local agencies. In its ruling the Court simply confirmed existing law, which says that government may take private property only if it serves a public purpose. · The Court reaffirmed its previous decisions on this topic giving deference to state and local governments (accountable to the voters) to determine what constitutes 'public purpose and reaffirming the aUthority of state and local governments to place further restrictions on the use of eminent domain. · California has extensive rules governing the use of eminent domain and restricting its use by redevelopment agencies only where there is a clear finding of blight. Those rules were significantly tightened in 1993 with passage of AB 1290. · There are specific conditions that must be met in order to'determine if an area or property is "blighted" in California. Land in this state does not qualify for condemnation simply because it is not being put to its optimum use or may be more valuable for other uses. · These protections require agencies to first deal directly with the property owners to ensure they are treated fairly and offer fair market value for their properties. This process must run its course before agencies may consider any alternative. '; State law als°i'equires that a property owner be paid fair market value for his or her property, as well as be provided relocation assistance. · But, again, the majoritY of properties are acquired from property owners voluntarily; and 'eminent domain is used infrequently and only as a last resort. Occasionally, property owners even encourage condemnation in order to take advantage of certain state property tax and federal and state income tax benefits available to the owners of property that is acquired to replace property that is acquired by a government agency through eminent domain. From: Alan Tandy To: Rhonda Smiley Date: 7/15/2005 8:32:40 AM Subject: Fwd: Executive Director's Legislative Update - July 14, 2005 #2 updated version >>> "California Redevelopment Association".<info @ calredeveloo.orQ> 7/14/05 12:29:50 PM >>> FROM: JOHN F~ SHIREY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Legislative Update-July 14, 2005 ~ Today Senators Tom McClintock and Dean Florez and Assembly Member Doug La Malfa introduced bills that would place a constitutional amendment on the ballot that would effectively prohibit the use of eminent domain in conjunction with most redevelopment projects. If approved by the voters, his measure would amend the state constitution to prohibit the use of eminent domain unless the condemning government entity will own and occupy the property to be acquired. The bills are SCA 15 and ACA 22. Accompanying this Update is a copy of the bill language. Joining Senator McClintock and Dean Florez as co-authors on the bill are Senators Sam Aanestad, Dick Ackerman, Roy Ashburn, James Battin, John Campbell, Dave Cox, Jeff Denham, Robert Dutton, Dennis Hollingsworth, Abel Maldonado, Bob Margett, Bill Morrow, Charles Poochigian and Assembly Members Greg Aghazarian, John J. Benoit, Sam Blakeslee, Russ'Bogh, Dave Cogdill, Chuck DeVore, Bill Emmerson, Bonnie Garcia, Ray Haynes, Shirley Horton, Guy S. Houston, Bob Huff, Rick Keene, Doug La Malfa, Jay La Suer, Tim Leslie, Bill Maze, Kevin McCarthy, Dennis Mountjoy, Alan Nakanishi, Gloria Negrete McLeod, Nicole Parra, George A. Plescia, Sharon Runner, Todd Spitzer, Audra Strickland, Van Tran, Tom Umberg, Michael N. Villines, Mimi Walters, Mark Wyland. This legislation is in reaction to the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London, a decision that has been widely misreported as having created new law or expanded local government powers when the Court simply confirmed existing law and reaffirmed 50 years of previous Supreme Court decisions on the issue. It did not affect California law or practice. Nevertheless, the emotions and fears of people that are easily raised by this issue signal the need for this threat to redevelopment to be taken very seriously. The Legislature will begin its summer recess today for a month. This is a good opportunity to meet with your legislators to express your opposition to this legislation. Below are some general talking points about the issue, but you need to point out local community improvements that were made possible because of the ability to use eminent domain. You also need to stress how seldom eminent domain is used in your community and only as a last resort. In addition, if you have self-imposed restrictions on the use of eminent domain in your redevelopment plans--something many agencies have donc be sure to point that out. This Proposal la A Solution In Search Of A Problem. California is not Connecticut. While this measure may successfully garner a few headlines, the simple, fact is that California already has strong laws on the books protecting property owners and restricting the use of eminent domain. Redevelopment agencies may only use eminent domain as a last resort, and only where there is a clear finding of blight, as defined by state law. Land does not qualify simply because it is not being put to its optimum use or may be more valuable for other uses. There is a lengthy process that must be followed before an agency can consider filing an eminent domain action with a court. These laws are working. We don't need this new proposal. Measure Ignores the Reality in California. California redevelopment law sets a tougher standard for using eminent domain than does Connecticut law. As a result, the Kelo decision will have very little - if any - effect on how we operate. The Supreme Court's decision simply reinforced the rights and obligations of individual states to restrict the use of eminent domain, which California has done. Measure Could Have Very Real and Damaging Unintended Consequences on Efforts to Revitalize Communities, Build Affordable Housing, and Eradicate Blight for those Neighborhoods Most in Need. By restrictinga seldom used - but important - tool that is sometimes needed to jump-start community revitalization, this measure has the potential to stifle efforts by local governments and redevelopment agencies to build affordable housing, clean up polluted properties, revitalize the most downtrodden neighborhoods in need of help, and create jobs, jobs, jobs. Redevelopment is a significant economic and job-generating resource for California and local communities, responsible for more than $31.84 billion in economic activity and the creation of 310,000 full- and part-time jobs in a single year. More Information on Kelo Decision and Eminent DomainContrary to several news reports, the Kelo decision did not create any "new" law or grant "expanded powers" to local agencies. In its ruling the Court simply confirmed existing law, which says that government may take private property only if it serves a public purpose. The Court reaffirmed its previous decisions on this topic giving deference to state and local governments (accountable to the voters) to determine what constitutes public purpose and' reaffirming the authority of state and local governments to place further restrictions on the use of eminent domain. California has extensive rules governing the use of eminent domain and restricting its use by redevelopment agencies only where there is a clear finding of blight. Those rules were significantly tightened in 1993 with passage of AB 1290. There are specific conditions that must be met in order to determine if an area or property is "blighted" in California. Land in this state does not qualify for condemnation simply because it is not being put to its optimum use or may be more valuable.for other uses. These protections begin with a lengthy redevelopment plan adoption process (9-12 months minimum) that requires notification of property owners and specification of whether and how eminent could be used. After plan adoption, property owners must be offered the opportunity to participate in the project development. The law then requires agencies to first deal directly with the property owners to ensure they are treated fairly and offered fair market value for their properties. This process must run its course before agencies may consider any alternative, such as dropping the project or proceeding to use eminent domain. State law requires that a property owner be paid fair market value for his or her property, as well as be provided relocation assistance for the owner and tenants, if any. Most properties are acquired from property oWners voluntarily; eminent domain is used infrequently and only as a last resort. If you have a comment send an email to ishire¥@calredevelop.orq Attachment PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT STREET MAINTENANCE SECTION - WORK SCHEDULE WEEK OF JULY 18, 2005 Resurfacing in the area north of Auburn Street, west of Fairfax Road (Highland High area). Resurfacing in the area west of Mt Vernon Avenue, south of Columbus Street. Will complete the resurfacing of Beech Street between 24th Street and Spruce Street. Street sealing in the area south of Rosedale Highway, west of Coffee Road. CITY OF BAKERSHELD RECEIVED Recreation gtParks TM CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE DATE: July 14, 2005 TO: Alan ~andy, City Manager FROM: Dianr~'~(~over, Director Recreation and Parks SUBJECT: Final Beale Band Concert The first four (4) band concerts were well attended with each concert averaging about 375 people. The cool weather and the good music were factors in the high attendance numbers. Staff has received many compliments regarding this summer concert series. Our final concert this summer July 17th will be dedicated to the late Colonel Wesley Moore who conducted these concerts from 1964 to 2001. RECEIVED JUL 14 2005 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE BA_ K E R S F I. E L D Department of Recreation and Parks Date: July 13, 2005 i' To: Alan Tandy, City Manager ' pt.t~C' FrOm: Dianne Hoover, Director of ReCreation & Parks Subject: Letter to Kern Schools Federal Credit Union Referral # 001183 - Ward 1 Councilmember Carson requested staff draft a letter of appreciation to Kern Schools Federal Credit Union for their contribution to the Camp King Program at the Martin Luther King Center. See letter attached. RECEIVED lJUL 14 ~'005 CiTY MANAGER'S OFFICE Department of Recreation and Parks Date: July 13, 2005 To: Alan Tandy, City Manager FrOm: Dian r, Director Of Recreation & Parks Subject: Park Fees Referral # 001184 - Ward 1 Councilmember Carson requested staff to researCh whether park fees are available in Saunders Park area and report back. Investigate the feasibility of a spray park in this area. Councilmember Carson requested staff research the availability of park fees in the Saunders Park area and thefeasibility of a spray park in this area. Staff researChed the availability' of park development funds in zone two for the construction of a spray park at Saunders Park. The current balance of revenues in zone two have been committed to WestwOld playground equipment in the 2005-06 Capital Improvement Project. It is anticipated that zone two will have additional revenues available for new projects similar to Saunders Spray Park in the 2006-07 fiscal year. MEMORANDUM CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE July 14, 2005 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER ~ _ __ FROM: VIRGINIA GENNARO, CITY ATTORN ALAN M. SHAW, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY SUBJECT: YELLOW CURBSlDE CONTAINERS COUNCIL REFERRAL NO. 001177 Councilmember Benham requested staff investigate if bright yellow containers used for real estate circulars in downtown area are permitted and regulated. Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 12.44.010 prohibits the use of City sidewalks for the display of merchandise for sale. "Newspaper vending machines" are required to obtain an "encroachment permit" from Public Works. Public Works reviews these locations before granting the encroachment for obstruction to pedestrian traffic, including persons with disabilities. Code Enforcement removes (abates) non-permitted newspaper stands from City sidewalks after notice and hearing. Customarily, the City has treated real estate circular display containers as "newspaper vending machines." If there are particular sites that a Councilmember wants checked to see if proper permits were obtained, please let us know. VG/AMS:Isc cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council S:\COUNClL\Referrals\05-06 Referrals\Benham\RealEstateAds.doc RECEIVED .... * 3 7005 A K E R S F I E L D CiTY MANAGER'S OFFICE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director///-.t.,.___...~ DATE: July 11, 2005 SUBJECT: CURBSlDE RECYCLING BLUE CONTAINERS Referral No. 1178 COUNCILMEMBER BENHAM REQUESTED STAFF TO RESPOND TO CITIZEN'S LETTER REGARDING CURBSIDE RECYCLING PERTAINING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SECOND BLUE CONTAINER. Staff responded to Mr. Montgomery's June 14th email (copy attached) with the attached letter. C:\DOCUME~1\lskinner\LOCALS~1\Temp\GWViewer\Reff¢1178 Response-BLUE CONTAINERS.DOC B A K E R S F I E L D PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1501 TRUXTUN AVENUE BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 (661) 326-3114 RAUL M. ROJAS KEVIN BARNES DIRECTOR, CITY ENGINEER SOLID WASTE MANAGER duly 8, 2005 Stephen Montgomery 2115 1st Street Bakersfield, CA 93304 Re: Curbside Recycling Dear Mr. Montgomery, On behalf of City Council Member Sue Benham, I would like to offer a response to your June 14t" email on this subject. With regard to the billing, it is unfortunate that our system must generate quarterly statements for those accounts which prepay annually. However, we anticipate that most people will eventually pay on a quarterly basis rather than on an annual basis. Quarterly billing is a happy medium, between annual billing which is most efficient and monthly billing which is least efficient yet desired by many people. It's a tough balance, because some people who might have signed up for service are on a tighter budget and can't pay three months at a time. When the curbside program was initiated, it was helpful to have annual payments, for two reasons -cash flow to start the program, and customer dedication to help carry the program. With regard to the pick up schedule, service every other week was chosen in order to reduce costs; otherwise the service fee would have been a greater deterrent to recycling. Trash service must remain on a weekly schedule for health and safety reasons. The large blue cart is sufficient for nearly all regular household recycling, and is not intended to hold all of the extra recyclables from special events or large amounts of packaging from occasional large purchases. For the service level to handle these in stride, it would have to be much more costly than the present system. Therefore, when residents have extra amounts, we encourage the use of drop off recycling or holding some over until the next blue cart service. That way, we hope to keep the rate Iow enough to attract subscribers. I hope this helps answer your concerns. If there are questions, please contact me at (661) 326-3114 or email at Kbarnes~,ci.bakersfield.ca.us. Thanks again for recycling. Sincerely, Kevin Barnes Solid Waste Manager Cc: Sue Benham C:\DOCUME-l\lskinner\LOCALS~l\Temp\Stephen Montgomery 7-8-05.doc July I 1, 2005 SOLID WASTE DIVISION 4101 TRUXTUN AVENUE (661) 326-3114 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93309 Fax (661) 852-2114 Page 1 of 1 Subj: Solid waste recycling (blue can) Data: 6/14/2005 11:56:47 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time From: samonty_~pacbell.net To: .s~e_n~h_a__rn4_kid s@ aol ._q_om_. Hi Sue, In the interest of cost we should study the method of billing participants in Bakersfield's solid waste blue can recycling program. As a matter of convenience, some, including I, opt to pay the bill annually even though there is no discount involved. Regardless we all continue to receive quarterly statements of account. If the city, and I presume the county, could adopt a billing program that could eliminate positive balance statements there should be some savings in production and postage costs. Regarding the program itself, I find ironic that the determination of scheduled pickup of solid waste for that minority who participate in residential recycling has left an imbalance in the service needed. As you know, brown cans are emptied weekly but the blue can emptied every other week. The funny thing here is with a blue can taking specific classes of material my brown can goes out largely empty, Now that I have requested and received a smaller brown can it still usually goes out only 1/3 full. That blue can on the other hand is always brimming to overflowing. What brought this to mind now is after entedaining about a dozen people Sunday evening and having made two purchases of large equipment that left me with large cardboard boxes to cut up, my can is already full and I still have another week to go before pickup. My brown can will go out in the morning with one closed plastic bag of domestic trash in the bottom. In the blue can the cardboard and plastic is compacted but those wine bottles are a little tougher to flatten. <G> It would be easier to rationalize waste pickup to match the need if we could follow the practice typical of mid and large cities in California and adopt a comprehensive residential recycling program. At present with those participating in a residential recycling program it is impractical to arrange a different pick-up schedule to suit the need of those with blue cans. Blue can pick-up is. an overley schedule for a small minority in addition to the comprehensive scheduled pickup of both brown and green cans. Thanks and best wishes. Steve Stephen Montgomery 2115 1st Street Bakersfield CA 93304-2707 Land: 661-324-3522 Mobile: 661-496-6585 Tuesday, June 14, 2005 America Online: Sbenham4kids B A K E R S F I E L D CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director ~ DATE: July 11, 2005 SUBJECT: GET BUS STOP NEAR GARCES CIRCLE Referral No. 1179 COUNCILMEMBER BENHAM REQUESTED STAFF FOLLOW UP ON GET'S RESPONSE TO RELOCATE BUS STOP AT GARCES CIRCLE TO BETTER MEET NEEDS OF PASSENGERS USING WHEELCHAIRS. PLEASE CONTACT CITIZENS WHO BROUGHT THIS TO OUR ATTENTION AND KEEP THEM INFORMED. Mr. Emory Rendes, of Golden Empire Transit, confirmed that the new bus stop located south of Garces Circle is in place. It was installed last month, shortly after the request by the City. The name and other contact information of the citizen(s) who initiated the complaint is unknown. No contact was made at this time. GET officials noted that members of the public are always welcome to attend meetings of the Golden Empire Transit District Board of Directors to bring service questions and requests to the attention of GET. The GET Board meetings are held the first and third Tuesday of each month and begin at 5:30 p.m. at GET offices, located at 1830 Golden State Avenue. They may also be contacted by telephone at 324-9874. C:\DOCUME~1\lskinner\LOCALS-1\Temp\Ref~1179 Response-GET BUS STOP Garces Circle. DOC CiTY OF BAKERSFIELD PUBUC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director~/~~. DATE: May 27, 2005 SUBJECT: GET BUS STOP NEAR GARCES CIRCLE Referral No. 1150 [COUNCJLMEMBER BENHAM REQUESTED STAFF WORK WITH 'GOLDEN EMPi~,'j TRANSIT TO FACILITATE MOVING OF THE BUS. STOP NEAR; THE GARC'E~ CIRCLE AT 30TH AND F STREETS TO A SAFER LOCATION, · Mr. Emory Rendes, at Golden Empire Transit (GET), was' contacted by the Traffic Engineer with the request for a new, or relocated, bus stop in the area of the 30th Street intersection with Chester Avenue, south of Garces Circle. GET will review the location for appropriateness and safety as a bus stop and make changes, if possible. GET bus drivers can usually accommodate passengers with stops in-between official bus stop, where possible. GET officials also encourage riders to contact their office directly, with route change or bus stop change requests and other problems, to better serve their clientele. C:~X)CUME~I~giomm'~.,OCAL$-I \T~p~l l$O-g~ ba~ st~p near garc~ cJ,'cle, doc RECEIVED ,~c~ 1 zl ?005 A K E R S F I E L D CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director~/'~-''~~'' DATE: July 11, 2005 SUBJECT: "C" STREET ABANDONMENT Referral No. 1180 COUNCILMEMBER BENHAM REQUESTED STAFF TO CONTACT CITIZEN REGARDING PROPOSED STREET VACATION/ABANDONMENT REQUESTED AT "C" STREET PROPERTY WHERE 23RD AND 24TM STREETS MERGE. The Public Works staff has set up a meeting with Mr. Olivieri prior to the Council referral. This meeting was held on Wednesday, July 13, 2005. At this meeting, it was explained to Mr. Olivieri that, unknown to the staff members processing Mr. Olivieri's road vacation request, there was a proposed transportation improvement project for this portion of the 23rd/24th Street corridor. Since this project could involve the realignment of 23rd and 24th in the vicinity of "C" Street, it would be unwise for the City to vacate right-of-way only to find later that it was needed for a road re-alignment and have to pay to get it back. Staff is refunding Mr. Olivieri's fees and is actively pursuing with Mr. Olivieri and alternate solution for the development of the "C" Street property. C:\DOCUME~l\lskinner\LOCALS-l\Temp\Reffil 180 Response-C Street Abandonment. DOC ......... Page 1 of 2 Sue, Benham From: "Anthony Oily/er/' <AnthonyO~oliviedcommercial.com> To: <sbenharn~sbcgtobal.net> E, ent: WednesdaYi July 06, 2005 8;33 AM Attach: Exhibit B.PDF; 24th & C Street.pdf Subject: Proposed Road Abandonment Dear Mrs~ Benham, Thank you for taking time to talk with me this afternoon regarding the proposed street vacation/abandonment I have requested from the City of Bakersfield. As mentioned, I am the owner of 2129 24th Street and 2324 "C" Street. The "C" Street property is located at the westerly tip of where 23m & 24th Street merge. I have made a request to the City of Bakersfield Public Works Department for the abandonment of the portion of "C" Street that is directly adjacent to the property in which I own. The purpose of this request is to accommodate additional parking that is needed for a proposed office building I plan to construct on these two parcels. On March 12, 2004 I wrote a letter addressed to Mr. Rojas requesting consideration of abandonment of a portion of "C" Street. After a considerable amount of time I contacted the City to determine the status of my request. I spoke to Marian Shaw at which time she stated that my original letter was misplaced and that I should send another request along with a check in the amount of $1,235.00, which I did on April 11,2005. Shortly after my new letter and fee were received by the City, the Public Works Department sent a letter to adjacent property owners making them aware of the request. I had several follow up conversations with Mr. Joe Catalan, the Public Works employee assigned to this project, which all indications were my request had merit, all internal departments were okay with the request provided I make a few minor concessions, which I am willing to do, and the next step would be a public hearing. On May 20, 2005 1 received a letter from Ms. Shaw requesting that I forward another check in the amount of $285.00 to the City for a "Public Hearing" fee. I complied and was told that the Public Hearing would be set for June 22nd or July 6th. I called the City today to determine the status of the Public Hearing. I was Informed, by someone that took Joe . Catalan's place, that the Public Works Director has denied my request. They could not articulate why it was denied other than it had something to do with 24th and state funding. I then asked to speak with Ms. Shaw. Once on the line I requested a meeting with Mr. Rojas and Ms. Shaw to discuss the reason for his denial in further detail. Ms. Benham, I am a Bakersfield native and one that takes pride in this fact. My family settled here in 1910 and has been conducting business in Bakersfield in one form or another ever since. My heritage and experience living in Bakersfield are a direct contribution to my success in this community. So needless to say I have a strong vested interest in the betterment of Bakersfield. This is why it may appear I was a bit short on the telephone when discussing this issue. I cannot express in words how frustrating it is to go through this process for this long, pay over $1,520.00 in "fees" and get the response I received today. My goal is to take an "eyesore" of a property and transform it into something new and attractive. I plan to relocate my office in a portion of the building so I intend to develop a project that I can take pride in. Once complete I believe the project will be an enhancement to the Downtown area and something the entire community will be pleased with. The request of the street abandonment will enable me to do this. Without it I can't build the project I intend and therefore regrettably will most likely leave the property is its current state. As I see it this is an opportunity to do something positive for Downtown Bakersfield. By constructing a new office building in the downtown area I will be adding to the revitalization of the area, addrng more commerce and removing older unattractive property that has seen better days. I believe both the City and I win here. You assistance is appreciated in this matter. Please call me should you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Anthony Olivieri 7/6/2005 Page 2 of 2 Olivieri Commercial Group, Inc. 10000 Stockdale Hwy, Suite 145 Bakersfield, CA 93311 (661) 327.12~0, fax (661) 327-1221 anthony@oliviericommercial.com P.S. I can provide documentation of ali l~tters referenced if needed. 7/6/2005 RECEIVED ,.,~:_ 1-: 2005 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE B A K E R S F I E L D CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director DATE: July 13, 2005 SUBJECT: PARKING pROBLEM-2415 "G" STREET Referral No. 1181 COUNCILMEMBER BENHAM REQUESTED TRAFFIC DIVISION TO REVIEW SIGNAGE AND POLICE TO REVIEW TIME ENFORCEMENT AT 2415 "G" STREET REGARDING ENTERPRISE CAR RENTAL PARKING RENTAL VEHICLES IN CITY STREET PARKING SPACES. The Traffic Engineer reviewed the location and confirmed that 2 hour limited parking is posted at the location. The location is outside of the normal Police Department patrol area for daily enforcement of limited time parking. Requests for enforcement of parking time violations can be directed to the Police Department Traffic Section, Phone 326- 3882. The Police Department has been requested to monitor this parking location for time limit violations. C:\DOCUME-1\lskinner~LOCALS~1\Temp\Ref~1181 Response-Parking Problem.DOC Harvey & Laura Brockmeyer 328 Western Drive Bakersfield, CA 93309 Telephone & Fax 661/324-4338 e-mail: LHBrock@aol.com July !, 2005 City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Att: Traffic Division My husband and ! are patients at Crosstown Family Dentistry, 2415 G Street. On both occasions this past month there was no available street side parking which is unusual since the city created angular parking in front of the businesses. Upon entering, after trying to find parking, I was surprised to see the waiting room almost empty. ! asked about all the cars filling the parking spaces and was told they. belong to Enterprise Car Rental next door to Crosstown Dentistry. This is a two hour parking limit zone and the Enterprise cars are parked there all day. How can a private business make city parking spaces their private.parking lot and deprive citizens of parking space? I urge. as a taxpayer, the traffic department look into this and correct the abusive problem. Sincer..ely~, Laura Brockmeyer cc: Councilwoman Sue Benham Bakersfield Crosstown Dentistry 15 A K E R S F I E L D CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director~,~~ ~ DATE: July 11, 2005 SUBJECT: STREET CLOSURES Referral No. 1175 COUNCILMEMBER BENHAM REQUESTED STAFF TO PROVIDE COST AND DESIGN ELEMENTS OF POSSIBLE STREET CLOSURES AT MYRTLE, SPRUCE, PINE, CEDAR, A, AND B, STREETS TO THE NEIGHBORHOODS. Staff has prepared and attached a sample typical plan and cost estimate for the closure of' one of the above streets along the south side of 24th Street. The sample plan includes an ornamental fence between the closed street and 24th Street. S:\TED\2005 memos\Re~1175 Response-Street Closures. DOC RIGHT HT OF 82.5 R/VV (24TH STREET) ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE OF PROJECT COSTS Title: Typical Tree Street Cul-de-sac Limits: Number: by: T. Wright Prepared: 6/23/2005 by: Sheet Name: S:\TED\2005 spreadsheets\[Tree Street Estimate 1 .xls]Eng'r Estimate CONSTRUCTION COSTS [ estimated UnitI I I Item No. Quantity Measure Item Unit Price Extension Price 1 75 cu. yd. roadway excavation $50.00 $3,750 2 220 If sawcut pavement $3.00 $660 3 240 If minor concrete (curb and gutter) $20.00 $4,800 4 24 cu. yd. aggregate base (class 2) $60.00 $1,440 5 19 ton aspha t concrete (type A) $70.00 $1,330 6 132 If :wrought iron fence $100.00 $13,200 7 31 cu. yd. Imported Borrow $40.00 $1,240 8 1800 sq. ft. minor concrete (sidewalk) $5.00 $9,000 9 1 lump sum sprinkler/landscape repair $2,500.00 $2,500 10 1 each undersidewalk drain $1,500.00 $1,500 11 1100 sq. ft. new landscaPing installation $5.00 $5,500 12 $0 13 $0 14 $0 15 No Right of Way Costs $0 16 No Utility Relocation Costs $0 17 $0 18 $0 Sub-total: $44,920 Contingency: 15% $6,700 CONSTRUCTION COSTS: $51,620 COSTS Engineering/Construction Inspection and Administration $9,292 Professional / Consultant Fees Land Acquisition, Project Permitting, Utility Connection/Extension Fees Fleet / Equipment Sub-total: $9,292 Contingency: 15% $1,40¢ OTHER COSTS: $10,692 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE OF TOTAL PROJECT COST: $62,312 RECEIVED JUL 14 2005 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE Department of Recreation and Parks Date: July 12, 2005 .. To: Alan Tandy, City Manager From: Dianne Hoover, Director of Recreation & Parks Subject: Replacement of Playground Equipment Referral # 001182 - Ward 5 Councilmember Hanson requested staff investigate replacement or update of playground equipment at N. Campus Park and Westwold Park. Please expedite a schedule. The amount of $150,000 was budgeted for the 2005~2006 fiscal year to update portions of playgrounds in many of our parks including Campus Park North and Quailwood Park. Tentative dates for developing and installing the improvements at Campus Park North and Quailwood utilizing city staff are as follows: Community Meetings -late summer '05 Procure Equipment - late fall '05 Install Equipment - winter '06 Open to Public - spring '06 Westwold Park received a total of $256,200 to rehabilitate the existing playground during the 05/06 budget cycle. Tentative dates for developing and installing the improvements utilizing the formal bid process are as'follows: Community Meetings -late summer '05 Project Engineering - early fall '05 Advertise Project - late fall '05 Council Project Award - early winter '05 Install Equipment - late winter '05 Open to Public - spring '06 RECEIVED JUL 1 ~, 2005 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE Department of Recreation and Parks Date: July 42, 2005 To: Alan Tandy, City Manager From: Dianne Hoover, Director of Recreation & Parks Subject: Dying Shrubs Referral # 001187 -Ward 6 Councilmember Sullivan requested staff investigate why the newly planted shrubs at the sump on Akers Road are dying. Check watering and replace plants. After investigating this concern, staff found the irrigation clock malfunctioning. We removed the dead or dying shrubs and replaced them with four (4) new photinia shrubs. In addition, we repaired the irrigation clock. We will continue to monitor the newly planted shrubs.