Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
06/02/00
B A K E R S F I E L D CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORANDUM June 2, 2000 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: ALAN TANDY?~I'~ MANAGER SUBJECT: GENERAL INFORMATION 1. June 27th is the scheduled date for the Board of Supervisors public hearing on the Borba Dairy GPA and Conditional Use Permit. The meeting notice is attached. 2. Responses to questions from the budget hearing on May 22nd are enclosed 3. The County has begun implementation of a curbside greenwaste recycling program similar to the City's. This will significantly increase the amount of material processed at the Mount Vernon Greenwaste Facility. The resulting increase in expense will be covered by new revenue from the County, in excess of the current cost-sharing agreement. Capital expenses for additional equipment and site improvement will be paid up front by the County, and operating expenses will be prorated according to the amount of City/County material received. Negotiations for a three year agreement are nearly complete. 4. We just received notice from the PUC on the priority list for new grade separation projects statewide. Several City projects are ranked where they may be reachable for funding by the State. 5. Responses to Council requests are enclosed, as follows: DeMond · Do research on possible vacation of alley south of 24th Street between Elm and C Streets. · Status on study of possible brick wall blocking south side of 24th Street. Maggard · Provide report on median dividers in northeast; · Feasibility of installing stop sign at intersection of Panorama and University. AT:rs cc: Mayor-Elect Harvey Hall Department Heads Pamela McCarthy, City Clerk Trudy Slater, Administrative Analyst ,~ O MEMORANDUM i CITY I\~AN~GE~'S ~" ~ ~: "' DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUILDING-~ PLANNING Date: May 26, 2000 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager /~ Stanley Grady, Planning Director FROM~.~/. SUBJECT: Notice of Public Hearing: Borba Dairy Project A hearing has been scheduled for June 27, 2000 for the General Plan Amendment and Conditional Use Permit for the Borba Dairies You may have heard about the Borba's decision to have a hearing on their proposal. The attached notice makes it official. Because of the controversial nature of the project I thought you might like to receive a copy of the notice. cc: Jack Hardisty, Development Services Director NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE KERN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS · ~.. :- A public hearing will be held before the Board of Supervisors of the County of Kern on June 27, 2000, at 2:00 p.m., at the Chambers of the Board of Supervisors, First Floor, Kern County Administrative Center, 111 $ Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, to consider the followi.ng request: 1. The application and proceedings are designated as: (a) General Plan Amendment Case No. 3, Map No. 141; (b) Conditional Use Permit Case No. 12, Map No. 141; (c) Conditional Use Permit Case No. 13, Map No. 141 2. The name of the applicant is: George Borba and James Borba by Tschudin Consulting Group (PP99235) 3. The approximate location of the property subject to said proposal is: South side of TaR Highway (State Route 119), between Interstate 5 and the southerly extension of Allen Road, west of Bakersfield 4. The request to be considered is: (a) Amend the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan to rescind the Pacificana Specific Plan and establish a land use Map Code(s) of R-IA (Intensive Agriculture) or a more restrictive map code designation; a proposed realignment of the West Beltway as shown and adopted by the Pacificana Specific Plan; a request to delete the requirement for future arterial road alignments along section lines and future collector road alignments along midsection lines should the Pacificana Specific Plan be rescinded; (b) and (c) Two Conditional Use Permits to allow the establishment of a 4,677-acre integrated dairy operation (Section 19.12.030.A.2) consisting of two dairies of similar design, each occupying approximately 341 acres, and would consist ofa~central dairy bam, l~ge fi'ee stall barns for milking cows, corrals with shade structures for support stock, manure separation pits and wastewater ponds, feed storage facilities, and assorted support buildings. Three to five dwellings would be constructed on each site for owners and/or employees. Each facility would support 7,200 dairy cows, 3,264 dry cows and bred heifers, 1,092 heifers, and 2,730 calves for a total of 28,572 head of cattle at the project site in an A (Exclusive Agriculture) District In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Environmental Impact Report has been prepared. Copies of the Environmental Impact Report will be on file and available for public review in the office of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and the Kern County Planning Department. Persons seeking additional information on this matter should 'contact Kris Cardoza, Associate Planner ((661) 862-8607) and David B. Rickels, AICP, Senior Planner ((661) 862-8611) with the Planning Department. Written comments may be sent to the Kern County Planning Department at 2700 "M" Street, Suite 100, Bakersfield, CA 93301. ,;',,,~sc~ · ' ': '"':; ' ~-' ..._.,~ .,.~- ~--T--c~,,,'~ c~,'r ~ ,. .. ... ,*;..,*.o .... ~. ....... : ,.~..,... i~ .... ;;'*.. _..- BAKERS! '"; ~.'~? i :" '"'.' "~ I. '~ ~,,,,,.. WJ[O~AlCll ~ · TA~I' ..... "' " "; ~,....-.~. '': .../ ..'~ . ~, , . ' ~ j . '( s*,,~;, "' ..- .... ;. ~ ~' ' .. , ~, .J ~ ~.. .- . ..., ....-...::~ ,J, ~ ......-'... ..... · . ,~ . ,, . .. ., ~-., ..... ....... ., ., , ,,'.'~ ,.,t.~. ,,; .......... o,,, . : ~.... .-. :~ ~. ,/.j: ~, ~ ~ ,: ,.,,,,,~..,.,,.,~ .... ,,,~,, ... FY 2000/01 BUDGET WORKSHOP QUESTIONS/RESPONSES Date: May 22, 2000 Question Response Councilmember May 22_ County Veterans' Halls may be rented by non-profit agencies Carson No. 1: Review the policy of charging fees for for $7, not including liability insurance, each "dark" day which use of City-owned facilities by non-profit are days the facility would typically not be operating and may organizations and compare with County policies vary depending on the facility. A higher fee is charged the for charging fees and use of Veterans' Halls. remaining days. A $15 per hour fee is charged to non-profit agencies of City-owned facilities, not including liability insurance. There is no restriction on the time of use for this facility rental. There are also minimal charges for tables and chairs. Council sets the fees and they may be changed by Council action. Staff is not recommending any change in the facility rental fees. No. 2: Provide status of availability of Emerald The manufacturer sent a wrong part to the District, which was Couch Cove Park play equipment, sent back for exchange. The incorrect part was sent again. The District decided to have this second part modified by a local welder to expedite completion of the project, which is estimated to be two weeks. The fencing around the equipment is done for safety reasons. No. 3: Provide any plans for future Jefferson Park is being considered as part of the DeMond improvements at Jefferson Park. implementation plan of the Recreation and Parks Master Plan and specific planning for improved aquatic facilities. FY 99-00 CIP Budget contains $61,675 for replacement of the Jefferson pool heater and filter, and resurfacing of the pool. This work has not yet been bid. No. 4: Provide a schedule / matrix of rates for The Public Works Department has submitted a schedule of Carson commercial refuse pick-up, rates for commercial refuse pickup. No. 5: Prepare analysis of the Graffiti Program The Anti-Graffiti program has established a 48-hour response Maggard level of service and quantify the need for, or time to remove graffiti. During FY 99-00 3,715 work orders plans for, additional staffing and/or equipment, if have been prepared, with a monthly increase since December. any. Staff suggests evaluating the level of service over the next six months and providing a report to Council in December 2000. No. 6: Provide update 178 / Fairfax property Funds are budgeted in the CIP budget for the Environmental Maggard acquisition. Document/Project report and to purchase the necessary parcel. A Post Office has been proposed for the area. Public Works and Property Management will review the issue to see if both uses can be accommodated. No. 7: Prepare analysis of adding street Staff is recommending 3 additional street sweepers and 3 Salvaggio / Rowles sweeper(s) to improve frequency of street operators for FY 2000-01 to lower the street sweeping cycle to sweeping cycle with chart showing cost and an 18-20 day sweeping cycle. To fund this request, staff is service impacts with addition of one, two or recommending the use of $260,000 from F¥99-00 Council three sweepers and operators. Provide Contingency; $135,000 set aside for the Public Information / alternatives for funding both capital and Lobbyist position, $76,300 from the F¥2000-01 Council operational expenditures with analysis of impact Contingency and $110,000 from the Refuse Fund Revenue for of such expenditures on future rates, a total estimated cost of $581,300. If this request is approved, the refuse rate for FY 2001-02 will have to increase an estimated 1.44% or $2.01 per single family dwelling to cover the ongoing operating costs of the sweepers. No. 8: Prepare letters to be sent to legislators Staff has provided information and letters to our local Maggard / Rowles regarding funding assistance for closure of the legislators requesting funding assistance from the State of the Panorama Landfill. approximately $10 million in costs for closure of the Bakersfield (Panorama) Sanitary Landfill. The letters also provide brief background information on the landfill and steps taken by the City to remediate environmental issues at the site. No. 9: Provide a timeline for completion and There is $50,000 in the FY 99-00 CIP budget for beginning the Couch status of Hageman Flyover Project. Schedule a ' PSR, which is anticipated to be complete by the summer of workshop on this item. 2001. The next phase, the Environmental Document/Project Report is budgeted for FY2000-01 at $210,000. The plans and specifications will be prepared next, which will take another year. The earliest construction could begin is three years from now. Staff will schedule a workshop to provide further information on the project. No. 10: Review the possibility of printing a Staff will prepare a report working through the details of Sullivan notice with the street sweeping schedule in implementing such a program which will provide various Bakersfield Californian. alternatives for the Council to consider. No. 11: Prepare plan for future funding This matter is being referred to the Budget and Finance Rowles Panorama Landfill closure. Committee for discussion. No. 12: Provide information on the failure rate Since it's inception in 1992, the FTHB program has loaned Mayor Price for first-time homebuyers and the HOME about $2.2 million, with the total number of loans about 773. Programs. Of this amount, 59 have defaulted, with a default rate of 7.5%. The annual state default rate for FHA loans is 3%. Since the inception of the HOME program, $5.9 million has been loaned to eligible homeowners, with the total number of loans being 405. Of this amount, 6 have defaulted, with a default rate of 1.48%. No. 13: Provide information on strategies to The City has entered into agreements with local agencies and Maggard increase the City's water recharge capability, water districts to provide for more continuous use of the Kern River bed for discharge. Since 1977, the City has invested well over $2 million to expand the recharge capability. The proposed Northeast Water Treatment Plan will ultimately provide for up to 60,000 acre feet of water. Approximately 46 acres have been purchased in key areas of the flood plain. Additional areas are being investigated as potential recharge sites. Additional funding from proposition 13 and other State funds are being pursued to further increase the City's ground- water recharge capacity. RECEIVED lC, AY 2 5 2OOO DEPARTMENT OF RECREATION AND PARKS CiTY MANAGER'S O- DATE: May 25, 2000 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Stan Ford, Director SUBJECT: FY 2000/01 Budget Workshop Responses 1. Review the poficy of charging fees for use of city-owned facilities by non-profit organizations and compare with County policies for charging fees and use of Veteran's Halls. County Veterans Halls may be rented by non-profit agencies for a minimum fee on "dark" days. "Dark" days at the California Avenue Veterans hall are Wednesdays and Fridays (they vary by location). On those two days only, a fee of $7 is charged and liability insurance must be provided. A higher fee applies on all other days of the week and for any schedule of regular weekly or monthly use. Recreation and Parks has a reduced fee schedule for non-profit rental at both Silver Creek and Martin Luther King, Jr. Centers. The Strong/Green room at MLK is frequently used. The charge is $15 per hour for non-profits and $40 for private use. Liability insurance is not required unless alcohol is consumed or the event is large and social in nature, such as a dance. Rental of tables and chairs includes set-up in the configuration of the user's choice, take-down, and storage. Tables are $1 and chairs 25¢ for non-profits for all-day use. The private-use charge is $2 for tables and 35¢ for each chair. Council sets the fees and these may be changed by council action. No increase in room rental fees is currently proposed bythe department. A decrease in MLK rental fees is not being recommended: the current department goal is to utilize the center fully with programming, such as after school programs and senior activities, rather than promote increased use by non-profits. P:\0001 budget response.wpd December 17, 1999 (4:37PM) May 25, 2000 Page 2 2. Provide status of availability of Emerald Cove Park play equipment. According to NBRPD Planning and Construction Superintendent Colon Bywater, the manufacturer has twice shipped an incorrectly manufactured part, which is currently being modified by a local welder. Installation of the modified part and completion of the rubber ADA surfacing is expected in the next two weeks. As is done by the city, NBRPD fully fences a playground under construction until construction and inspection are complete. This is done for safety reasons. 3. Provide any plans for future improvements at Jefferson Park. The FY 1999/00 CIP budget contains $61,675 for replacement of the Jefferson pool heater and filter and re-surfacing of the pool. The work has not yet been bid: An evaluation of all city pools is being completed with regard to current condition and current requirements for pool flow rate, filter turnover, etc. Following the study, a recommendation will be developed for Council so that existing dollars can be expended in a way that optimally promotes aquatic recreation. Jefferson Park playground equipment has been replaced in recent years, therefore this park is not currently slated for playground improvements. The Recreation and Parks Master Plan has identified recreation infrastructure needs for the city as a whole. Although recommendations for specifically siting improvements was not within the scope of the plan, Jefferson is centrally located in an area of need and will be the number one priority in the planning of improved aquatic facilities. The department is currently formulating a plan which will be presented to Council for implementation of community priorities such as community centers, water parks, and sports facilities as recommended in the master plan. cc: John W: Stinson, Assistant City Manager Darnell Haynes, Assistant to the City Manager P:\0001 budget response.wpd December 17, 1999 (4:37PM) B A K E R S F I E L D ® 1990 ~ER S OFFICE TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Stan Ford, Director of Recreation & Parks ~ DATE: May 23, 2000 SUBJECT: EMERALD COVE PARK EQUIPMENT -- COUNClLMEMBER COUCH Allen Abe talked to Colon Bywater, Planning and Construction Superintendent, at North Bakersfield Recreation and Park District regarding the fencing around Emerald Cove Park playground equipment. When the District began installation of the playground equipment over a month ago, they discovered the manufacturer sent them a "arched chain climber" that was intended to be installed in a Fibar surfacing material but North Bakersfield's project was going to have a poured in place rubber material surfacing installed. The part was shipped back to the manufacturer and they in turned shipped the "correct part" to the District. Again, it was the wrong part. As of this moment No. Bakersfield Rec. & Park District is having the "arched chain climber" modified by a local welder. Within the next two weeks, the "arched chain climber" and the rubber surfacing material will be installed at Emerald Cove. The fencing was erected around the playground area under construction to keep everyone out and off the uncompleted equipment for safety and liability reasons. The fencing will come down once the project is finished. -I RECREATION AND PARKS ' 4101 TruxtQn Avenue o Bakersfield ° California · 93309 ~ _. (661) 32_6.-FUNN ° Fax (661) 861-0864 B A K E R S F I E L D 2rPt'M~G[a.so:- PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director DATE: May 24, 2000 SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 2000101 BUDGET WORKSHOP RESPONSES Per the inquiries from Councilmembers listed in your May 23 memo, we are submitting the attached schedule of rates for commercial refuse pickup for item #1. ~/,~Z'/~.,~:smp c: Kevin Barnes, Solid Waste Director Attachment: Commercial Rate Sheet Smp G:\GROUPDAT~SOLIDWASTE~COUNCIL_BUDGET WRKSHP RESP.wpd May 24, 2000 FY 1999-2000 TRASH & RECYCLING RATES, PER MONTH Bin Size I B I N P I C K U P D A Y S P E R W E E K I * Bins with compacted (c.y.) I' 1 2 3 4 5 61 trash are charged City Hauling Fee 1.5 63.22 79.02 125.12 174.51 227.19 284.26 THREE TIMES the County Gate Fee 12.99 25.98 38.97 51.96 64.95 77.94 standard bin rate. 76.21 105.00 164.09 226.47 292.14 362.20 · * Illegal container City Hauling Fee 2 79.02 98.77 156.40 217.87 283.72 354'.50 impound fee is: County Gate Fee 17,32 34.64 51.96 69.28 86,60 103,92 $56.21 96.34 133.41 208.36 287.15 370.32 458.42 plus $1.00 per day. City Hauling Fee 3 94,82 118.52 187.67 261.21 340.23 424.74 *** Split billing service County Gate Fee 25.98 51.96 77.94 103.92 129.90 155.88 charge is: 120.80 17o.48 265.61 365.13 470.13 580.62 $5.35 per month. Cardboard recycling 64.16 80.19 96.23 nla n/a nla No gate fee · *** Manual can service " was. discontinued in 1998. I Automated cads can only be Single family $138,00 per year ~ $11.50 per month picked up once per week. County fee $57,00 per year $4.75 per month Small cart 11.58 $195.00 per year $16.25 per month County Gate Fee 2.77 14.35 Multifamily per unit $124.86 per year $10.41 per month County fee $45.60 per year $3.80 per month Large cart 14,49 Additional cart fee ~ $3.95 $47.40 per year (min. 1 year billing) County Gate Fee 4.16 Solid Waste Division's rate 56.21 per hour 18.65 Unscheduled bin service 56.21 for the first bin Unscheduled bin service 10,71 for each additional bin 2 small carts 23,16 Charge to lock bins 5.52 (service to prevent illegal use by others) County Gate Fee 5.54 Split billing servlce 5.35 (per mo. per business to share container) 28.70 Compactors 196.73 per haul 2 large carts 28.98 County Gate Fee 8.31 ~Open top Rolloff for trash: 37.29 lOne-time delivery 68.46 NoTes: ~Haul, per load to landfill 165.97 4.33 Average number of weeks per month (52112) ~County gate fee 29.00 per ton $2.00 Landfilling per cubic yard or $0.01 per gallon ~Rental after 7 days 5.03 per day 202 # of gallons per cubic yard ~Open tod Rolloff for recyclables: $0.01 Landfill cost per. gallon ~One-time delivery 68.46 64 gallons -- 2, 32-gallon cans o~' 1 small cart ~ Haul, per hour to recycler 56.21 per hour 96 gallons = 3, 32-gallon cans or 1 Large cart ~Gate fee varies 128 gallons = 4, 32-gallon cans or 2 small carts IRental after 7 days 5.03 per day 192 gallons = 2 Large cads 3.73% FY 1999-2000 Fee increase (commercial) I Office I. Pickups Per Week 2.99% FY 1999-2000 Fee increase (residential) '1 RecyclingI I I 2 [ Large cart 16.24 32.47 05/24/00 $:IBUDGET~RATES.wb3 MAY 2 5 2OO 1 B A K E R S F I E L D .... ~ I PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY IV]AN~GEF}'S 0':":".',~ t MEMORANDUM DATE: May 25, 2000 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR//~~~ SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 2000/01 BUDGET WORKSHOP Questions/responses ANTI-GRAFFITI (Maggard - Ward 3) Councilmember Mike Maggard requested staff prepare analysis of the Graffiti Program level of service and quantify the need for, or plans for, additional staffing and/or equipment, if any. The Anti-Graffiti program has established a 48-hour response time to remove reported graffiti. During the current fiscal year a total of 3,715 work orders have been prepared. Since December 1999, we have seen a significant increase in the number of work orders received per month. During the current fiscal year, the response time for graffiti.- removal has been between one day and five days. The response time does have some variables such as employee leave and equipment breakdowns. Staff suggests evaluating the level of service for graffiti removal over the next six months and providing a report to City Council in December 2000. G:\G ROU PDAT~Referrals~vlaggard~budque$2000-01 GRAFFITI.wpd MAY 2 5 2000 CITY MANAGEfl'S Oi- · PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, City Manager FROM: RAUL ROJAS, Public Works Directo~ DATE: May 25, 2000 SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 200012001 BUDGET WORKSHOP QUESTION RESPONSE Councilmetnber Maggard - Ward 3 Councilmember Mike Maggard requested staff provide an update regarding the acquisition of property for the proposed interchange at Fairfax Road and State Route 178. The Project Study Report (PSR)s approved for this project in 1997. The preferred alternate specified in the PSR was a partial cloverleaf option which required the acquisition of property in the northeast quadrant of the proposed interchange. This property had been for sale for quite some time, and staff decidedthis past January to propose in the CIP budget funding the Environmental Document/Project Report as well as budgeting funds to purchase this parcel necessary for the interchange. Just recently, staff became aware of a Post Office being proposed for the same property needed for the interchange. Even though this project is not actually approved as part of the budget yet, the Property Management Division has been contacted and is just beginning the acquisition process with some preliminary research. As more information becomes available, it will be forwarded. The Property Division has been made aware of Councilmember Maggard's desire to work with the Postal Service regarding this site and see if both uses can be accommodated. cc: Jacques R. LaRochelle, Engineering Services Manager i BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: May 26, 2000 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ~ SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 2000/01 BUDGET WORKSHOP Questions/responses STREET SWEEPERS (Salvaggio, Rowles) Councilmembers Mark SalVaggio and Randy Rowles requested staff prepare analysis of adding street sweeper(s) to improve frequency of street sweeping cycle with chart showing cost and service impacts with addition of one, two or three sweepers and operators. Provide alternatives for funding both capital and operational expenditures with analysis of impact of such expenditures on future rates. The attached schedule provides alternatives for funding both capital and operational expenses associated with adding from 1 to 3 street sweepers and operators. The schedule also summarizes the impact of each of the 3 scenarios on estimated future refuse rates. Since ,the Proposition 218 notices have already been mailed to property owners for Fiscal Year 2000/01, funding alternatives were identified which would have no impact on the proposed 2000/01 refuse rate. The rate increases shown on the attaChed schedule would be deferred until the 2001/02 fiscal year. It is important to note that these amounts exclude any future rate increases resulting from inflationary., service growth or other unanticipated factors. · The City currently has a purchase order to purchase 2 sweepers. Staff has contacted the vendor to ensure they could supply an additional 3 diesel air sweepers. The response was affirmative. The lead time to acquire these sweepers is estimated to be 4 to 6 months. Each diesel sweeper would cost $135,000 per unit. This schedule reflects operational costs for only 8 months of the 2000/01 year because of the lead time needed in acquiring the vehicles. ---Page I of 2 Pages--- There is currently $270,000 in Council Contingency remaining for the 1999-2000 Fiscal Year. Depending on the number of sweepers desired, these funds could be used to pay the capital costs of equipment acquisition. The proposed 2000/01 budget includes approximately $415,000 in uncommitted Council Contingency. This does not include the $135,000 set aside for a Public Information/Lobbyist position. If 3 sweepers and operators are approved, the funds for the Public Information/Lobbyist position ($135,000) would be used to purchase a sweeper and $66,300 of the uncommitted contingency funds could be used to fund a portion of the operating costs as illustrated on the attached schedule. These one-time contributions from Council Contingency would not be paid back by the Refuse Fund under this scenario. This would leave a remaining uncommitted Council Contingency amount of $348,700 for Fiscal Year 2000101 ($415,000 less the $66,300). Staff also has determined that revenue estimates in the Refuse Fund were understated and upon further review anticipate $110,000 in additional revenue from service fees. These funds are recommended to fund operating costs associated with the additional sWeepers. The attached schedule shows that the 2001/02 refuse rates would increase from a range of $0.67 to $2.01 anr~ually, depending on the number of sweepers and positions. approved. Again, this increase would be in addition to any increase due to inflationary, service growth or other factors which would impact future rate amounts. Following is a summary of the impact on the current 25-28 working day residential sweeping cycle under the 3 scenarios described in the attachment: · Adding 3 operators and sweepers yields a 18-20 working day sweeping cycle; · Adding 2 operators and sweepers yields a 20-23 working day sweeping -' cycle; and · Adding 1 operator and 1 sweeper yields a 23-25 working day sweeping cycle. For your information, a general rule of thumb used by staff is adding 110 street miles generates the need for one additional sweeper and operator to maintain an acceptable sweeping cycle. Attachment .............. ~.~,~, ..... .~ ---Page 2 of 2 Pages--- Alternatives for funding 1 to 3 additional street Sweepers and operators I 1 sweeper and 2 sweepers and 3 sweepers and I operator 2 operators 3 operators Total one-time costs 135,000 270,000 405,000 Total annual costs 87,700 175,400 263,100 Reduce annual costs for the 2000/01 FY- position will not be needed until sweepers are in service-4 to 6 month lead time on sweepers, (28,900) (57,900) (86,800) Total costs 193,800 387,500 581,300 Recommended funding alternatives: 99/00 council contingency 83,800 270,000 270,000 00/01 council contingency-Public Info Officer 7,500 135,000 Increase in revenue estimates for the 110,000 110,000 110,000 Refuse Fund after subsequent review Additional amount needed from 2000/01 council contingency 66,300 193,800 387,500 581,300 Current sweeping cycle of 25/28 working days would be reduced to... 23/25 20/23 18/20 Important note for the 2001/02 budget year: Impact on residential refuse rates in the 2001/02 fiscal year of adding these positions and sweepers Estimated Percent Impact on Annual Rates 0.48% .0.96% 1.44% Estimated Dollar Impact on Annual Rates $0.67 $1.34 $2.01 BAKERSFIELD CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE ME:MORANDUM May 26, 2000 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: TRUDYSLATER, ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST Ill ~ ~ HEARING RELATING TO PANORAMA SANITARY LANDFILL Staff has provided information for letters to our local legislators requesting funding assistance for closure of the Bakersfield (Panorama) Sanitary Landfill. The letters also provide brief background information on the landfill and steps taken by the City to remediate environmental issues over the years. The Mayor's letters are attached. (M0005261) BAKERSFIELD CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE MEMORAND-UM May 25, 2000 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: TRUDY SLATER, ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST Ill ~~ SUBJECT: SANITARY LANDFILL AND BROWNFIELDS INFORMATION Yvonne Hunter, League o~California Cities, indicates the $125 million in the Governor's budget for brownfields is d~fi_~ni~ely not meant for landfill caps. She is not aware of any other state funding sources currently in existence for qualifying brownfields. Yvonne believes there is~legislation which was passed a number of years ago which dealt with the process but p?ovided no funding. I have a call in to Mr. Hal Thomas, DTSC legal counsel (916) 323-4910, regarding .proposed brownfield legislation. Mr. Alan Gordon, Deputy Director of Legislation, DTSC, (916) 324-0912 indicated Mr. Thomas was not planning legislation and that there were no existing state or federal funds for brownfields or sanitary landfill caps that he was aware of. However, there is $125 million in brownfields funding in the Governor's proposed budget, $125 million in the Senate's-proposed budget, and $50 million in the Assembly's budget. He encourages letters to our legislators asking for as much funding as possible. The Governor's budget proposes funding for 1) site evaluation; 2) cleanup; and 3) environmental cleanup insurance. He indicated Assemblymember Florez has been very supportive of such funding efforts. I also have a call in to Dorothy Rice, with DTSC Site Mitigation Unit, (916) 323-3556 who might have more information on sanitary landfill cap funding sources. Jake indicated redevelopment monies (i.e., tax increment) can be used in redevelopment areas for brownfields, which are essentially blighted by definition, but he is not aware of grants or other funding available for this purpose. (M0005251) cc: John W. Stinson Jack Hardisty May 26, 2000 The Honorable Roy Ashburn California State Assembly " Capitol Building ~4158 Sacramento, CA 958!4 /.~ Dear Assemblyman~~'/::~'~ ~'/' · ' ' The City of Bakersfield and the County of'Kern hope you will be able to help us with funding for the capping/closure of the 135-acre former Bakersfield Sanitary Landfill, an environmental safety issue affecting us all and one on which the City and County have been working closely together. This lan'drill has been inactive for the last 17 years, predating Eastin legislation which required set asides for landfill closures. . During the time the landfill has been inactive, the City has installed a mitigating gas system for $1.0 million and conducted burn dump mitigation in the amount of $1.3 million. These mitigation efforts have burdened Oar cash flow significantly. Approximately $10 million will be needed to close the landfill with the necessary sanitary landfill cap and other mitigations. The City and County mutual agreement to share closing costs is a win-win situation for the community. Unfortunately, both of our local agency budgets constrain us from accomplishing the desired closure-and the State's mandate-to cap the landfill and resolve this long-standing environmental safety issue. With the budget surplus the State is experiencing, we are respectfully requesting financial support for the Bakersfield Sanitary Landfill closure project. We would also appreciate your help ~n sponsoring legislation,'possibly attached to another bill, which would provide us with the necessary funds. -This, too, would be a win-win situation which would help our local community and also the State in enhancing environmental safety. Thank you for whatever assistance you can provide us. Yours truly, Mayor (L0005251) cc: City Council · City Manager A. Tandy Public Works Director R. Rojas Administrative Analyst T. Slater 1501 Truxtun Avenue · Bakersfield, California 93301 · (661) 326-3770 ° Fax (661) 326-3779 E-mail address: mayor@ci.bakersfield.ca.us ( ali rnia ® May 26, 2000 The Honorable Dean Florez California State Assembly Capitol Building #5135 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Assemblyman F, Jer~. The City of Bakersfield and the County of Kern hope you will be able to help us with funding for' the capping/closure of the 135-acre former Bakersfield Sanitary Landfill, an environmental safety issue affecting us all and one on which the City and County have been working closely together. This landfill has been inactive for the last 17 years, predating Eastin legislation which required set asides for landfill closures. During the time the landfill has been inactive, the City has installed a mitigating gas system for $1.0 million and conducted burn dump mitigation in the amount of $1.3 million. These mitigation efforts have burdened our cash flow significantly. Approximately $10 milliOn will be needed to close the landfill with the necessary sanitary landfill cap and other mitigations. The City and County mutual agreement to share closing costs is a win-win situation for the community. Unfortunately, both of our local agency budgets constrain us from accomplishing the desired closure-and the State's mandate--to cap the landfill and resolve this long-standing environmental safety issue. With the budget surplus the'State is experiencing, we are respectfully requesting financial support for the Bakersfield Sanitary Landfill closure project. We would also appreciate your help in sponsoring legislation, possibly attached to another bill, which would provide us with the necessary funds. This, too, would be a win-win situation which would help our local community and also the State in enhancing environmental safety. Thank you for whatever assistance you can provide us. (..B'o b Price Mayor (L0005251) cc: City Council City Manager A. Tandy Public Works Director R. Rojas Administrative Analyst T. Slater 1501 Truxtun Avenue · Bakersfield, California 93301 · (661) 326-3770 ° Fax (661) 326-3779 E-mail address: mayor@ci.bakersfield.ca.us May.26, 2000 The Honorable Jim Costa CalifOrnia State Senate Capitol Building #5100 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Senator C~~.. L~,~ The City of Bakersfield and the County of Kern hope you will be able to help us with funding for the capping/closure of the 135-acre former Bakersfield Sanitary Landfill, an environmental safety issue affecting us all and one on which the City and County have been working closely together. This landfill has been inactive for the last 17 years, predating Eastin legislation which required set asides for landfill closures. During the time the landfill has been inactive, the City has installed a mitigating gas system for $1.0 million and conducted burn dump mitigation in the amount of $1.3 million. These mitigation efforts have burdened our cash flow significantly. Approximately $10 million will' be needed to close the landfill with the necessary sanitary landfill cap and other mitigations. The City and County mutual agreement to share closing costs is a win-win situation for the community. Unfortunately, both of our local agency budgets constrain us from accomplishing the desired closure-and the State's mandate--to cap the landfill and resolve this long-standing environmental safety issue. With the budget surplus the State is experiencing, we are respectfully requesting financial support for the Bakersfield Sanitary Landfill closure project. We would also appreciate.your help in sponsoring legislation, possibly attached to another bill, which would provide us with the necessary funds. This, too, would be a win-win situation which would help our local community and also the State in enhancing environmental safety. Thank yoU for whatever assistance You can provide us. Bob Price · Mayor (L0005251) cc: City Council City Manager A. Tandy · Public Works Director R. Rojas Administrative Analyst T. Slater 1501 Truxtun Avenue · Bakersfield, California 93301 · (661) 326-3770 · Fax (661) 326-3779 E-mail address: mayor@ci.bakersfield.ca.us C alifarnia ® May 26, 2000 The Honorable Charles Poochigian California State Senate Capitol Building #2054 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Senator Poochigian: The City of Bakersfield and the County of'Kern hope you will be able to help us with funding for the capping/closure of the 135-acre former Bakersfield Sanitary Landfill, an environmental safety issue affecting us all and one on which the City and County have been working closely together. This landfill has been inactive for the last 17 years, predating Eastin legislation which required set asides for landfill closures. During the time the landfill has been inactive, the City has installed a mitigating gas system for $1.0 million and conducted burn dump mitigation in the amount of $1.3 million. These mitigation efforts have burdened our cash flow significantly. Approximately $10 million will be needed to close the landfill with the necessary sanitary landfill cap and other mitigations. The City and County mutual agreement to share closing costs is a win-win situation for the commUnity. Unfortunately, both of our local agency budgets constrain us from accomplishing the desired closure-ahd the State's mandate--to cap the landfill and resolve this long-standing environmental safety issue. With the budget surplus the State is experiencing, we are respectfully requesting financial support for the Bakersfield Sanitary Landfill closure project. We would also appreciate your " help in sponsoring legislation, possibly attached to another bill, which wOuld provide us with the necessary funds. This, too, would be a win-win situation which would help our local community and also the State in enhancing environmental safety. Thank you for whatever assistance you can provide us. Yours truly, Mayor ('L0005251) cc: City Council City Manager A. Tandy Public Works Director R. Rojas Administrative Analyst T. Slater 1501 Truxtun Avenue · Bakersfield, Califomia 93301 · (661) 326-3770 ° Fax (661) 326-3779 E-mail address: mayor@ci.bakersfield.ca.us NAY 2 5 20OO B A K E R S F I E L D CE'PC ~ANAGEW~ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, City Manager FROM: RAUL ROJAS, Public Works Director DATE: May 25, 2000 SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 2000/2001 BUDGET WORKSHOP QUESTION RESPONSE Councilmember Couch - Ward 4 Councilmember David Couch requested staff provide an update regarding the status and completion of the Hageman Flyover Project, and requested staff schedule a workshop on this item. In the Capital Improvement Program for FY 1999-2000, $50,000 was budgeted for beginning work for the Project Study Report (PSR) for the Hageman Road Flyover. However, before staff could begin the report, the metropolitan area PSR funded through KernC©G and just now being initiated by URS Greiner came about. In this PSR, one of the "Systems Approach" projects to be studied was the State Route 204 connection to State Route 99. As the Hageman Flyover is directly affected by this connection, and as much coordination would be required between the two separate studies so that they would be consistent, it made sense to staff to just "piggy-back" the Hageman Flyover PSR with the Metro PSR and have it a part of that PSR. Discussions with URS Greiner have already occurred regarding this proposal, and any additional funding they may need to accomplish this task are proposed to come from the FY 99-00 budgeted funds. The PSR is currently anticipated to be complete by next summer. The next phase of the project would then be the Environmental Document and Project Report which would take at least another year to complete. Following this phase would be the preparation of plans and specifications, which Would probably take about another year so that the earliest construction could begin would be at least 3 years out from today. Staff will continue to provide progress reports on the PSR as information becomes available. Staff will also schedule with the City Clerk a workshop in the near future to further discuss the Hageman Flyover. cc:: Jacques R. LaRochelle, Engineering Services Manager ~ NAY 2 5 2000 B A K E R S F I E L D PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: MAY 25, 2000 SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 2000/01 BUDGET WORKSHOP Questions/Responses POSTING OF STREET SWEEPING SCHEDULE ICouncilmember Jackie Sullivan requested staff review the possibility of printing a notice with the Street Sweeping Schedule in The Bakersfield Californian. With sufficient personnel and equipment, posting of a Street Sweeping Schedule is a feasible option. Staff will prepare a report working through the details. This report will provide various alternatives, along with the pros and cons of these alternatives. The report will be provided to Council as soon as possible. G:'~G RO U P DA'l~Referrals'~ullivan~Swee~ngSchedulePosting,w~d ~ Economic and Community Development Department ,-- M E M O R A N D U M ANAGER ~ OF~:~C .: May 25, 2000 TO: Jake Wager, Economic Development Director FROM: George Gonzales,~munity Development Coordinator II SUBJECT: Defaults on Hous~g Programs - First Time Homebuyer (FTHB) and Housin~l Rehabilitation As requested, a summary of defaults for the above noted programs are listed below. FTHB Program The FTHB program provides one-half of the downpayment and closing costs for FHA insured loans. Total assistance provided per loan is $3,500 however the average amount is $2,800. Since the inception of the City Assistance program in 1992, total expended is about $2.2 million in City funds (about $54.1 million in private funds was leveraged). The total number of loans made to date is about 773. Of this amount 59 have defaulted. The default rate is about 7.5% (59/773). The annual state default rate for FHA loans is 3%. The City defaulted loans have been accumulating since the beginning of the program. Housing Rehabilitation The Housing Rehabilitation program provides Iow interest loans to HUD eligible homeowners to make health and safety code related improvements to their homes. Since the inception of the Single Family Rehabilitation program in 1978-79, total expended is about $5,991,355 in City funds. The total number of loans made to date is 405. Of this amount 6 have defaulted. The default rate is about 1.48 % (6/405). please let me know if you have any questions regarding these programs. S:\GEORGE\housingdefaults.wpd MEMORANDUM CITY MAN~uER May 25, 2000 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Gene Bogart, Water Resources Managgr,~ SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 2000/01 BUDGET WORI~SHOP QUESTIONS/RESPONSES The following is in response to a City Council question from the Water Resources Department budget hearing on Monday, May 22, 2000: Question #1 (May 23, 2000 Memo): Provide information on strategies to increase the City's water recharge capability (Maggard). Re sponse: In accordance with the City' s adopted water policies, and the goals outlined in the Kern River Plan element of the 2010 General Plan, ground water recharge has continued to be a maj or priority item of the City. It is the stated goal of the City Council to put more water, more often in the Kern River Channel through the Bakersfield area. To this end, City has entered into agreements with local agencies and water districts to provide for more continuous use of the Kern River bed for recharge. Recent examples are the December 31, 1996 Pioneer Project Joint Operating Agreement which encourages others to recharge their water in the Kern River and the November 1999 Kern River Parkway Water Management Agreement which focuses the recharge efforts of ID4 and City to be timed with the May-September recreation period. Recent increases in recharge capacity available to the City included the following: 1) Since acquisition of the 2800 acre property in 1977, City has invested well over two million dollars to expand the recharge capability of the facility, and is now capable of recharging up to 200,000 acre feet annually. May 25, 2O00 Subject: Fiscal Year 2000/01 Budget Workshop Questions/Responses 2) The proposed Northeast Water Treatment Plant will ultimately provide for up to 60,000 acre feet of Kern River water for delivery to City residents. The benefits of direct diversion from the Kem River are multi-faceted; surface water delivery effectively shuts off groundwater wells, providing for immediate recharge. The elevation of the new treatment plant will allow for "gravity" flow distribution to many other areas of metropolitan Bakersfield, encouraging greater use of surface water and less reliance on groundwater pumping. 3) Through the use of Prop 204 funds, approximately 46 acres have been purchased in key areas of the Kern River floodplain. We are now doing feasibility studies to determine which of these areas will be converted to groundwater recharge basins. 4) As a result of the recent passage of Prop 13, additional areas are being investigated as potential recharge sites. With the re-charge facilities now available to the City of Bakersfield, it is estimated that the re-charge capacity is over 275,000 acre feet annually. MR:sr S:X2000MEMOS~FY0-01 BudWkspQuestions BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director ~ DATE: May 24, 2000 SUBJECT: CHARGES FOR COUNTY-GENERATED GREENWASTE The County has historically paid the City for its share of expenses associated with the Mt. Vernon Greenwaste Facility, under a yearly agreement. The current agreement, which has a maximum of $450,000, covers only the material self-hauled to the facility by County residents, gardeners, etc., and not curbside greenwaste cart material. With implementation of the County's greenwaste cart program, next year's agreement will cover both kinds of materials. Accordingly, the total charge to the County will have two parts. The Self-hauled material, with its existing method of load counting and cost sharing, will remain as is. This is possible because individual loads can be counted for each jurisdiction. On the other hand, loads of greenwaste from residential carts collected by private haulers may contain a mixture of City and County material. Therefore, measuring and charging for County curbside material will use a different method. When considering the County's curbside material, we must account for processing costs as well as capital costs for ramping up facility capacity. With regard to both of these, certain costs will occur regardless of the amount of County curbside material actually received. Thus, it would not be appropriate or prudent to simply charge by the ton. Doing so could result in under funding, so some floor costs must be established. Floor costs would include capital investments and fixed costs for City equipment. In addition to flooring capital and fixed equipment costs, costs for additional personnel must be covered regardless of the County's tonnage. While it is estimated that the County should produce up to 15,000 new tons annually at full implementation, the cost of 3 new employees to handle this material may need to be spread over less tonnage. For the City to avoid subsidizing the County, any costs beyond those for the current (City only) curbside material operation must be covered by the County, regardless of tonnage. SMP G:\GROUPDAT~SOLIDWASTE\CHARGES-COU NTY GRNWTE.wpd XREF:May 24, 2000S:~MEMOS\MANAGER\CHARGES-COUNTY GRNWTE.wpd P~gl~ ] ' ',t ~ 200~ "CITY M/~,N,,~,.~ -50 ..... ~,~- MEMORANDUM ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER May 24, 2000 SUBJECT: CHARGES FOR COUNTY-GENERATED GREENWASTE For those costs which are directly related to tonnage volume, the City can prorate according to tonnage. Factors such as the different size of City/County carts and urban vs. rural landscape amounts may cause County tonnage to differ from the City's. The average tonnage per home from City-operated routes is tracked. This average is used to estimate the tonnage per home picked up by contract haulers in the City. This estimate is combined with City route data to show the total City tonnage. All other tonnage will be counted as County material. The result is a ratio of City/County tonnage, which takes into account differences in the programs. KB:smp c: Kevin Barnes, Solid Waste Director Attachments SMP G:kGROUPDAT'~SOLIDWASTEkCHARGES-COUNTY GRNVV"FE.wpd XREF: S:\MEMOS\MANAGER\CHARGES-COUNTY GRNWTE.wpd Page 2 May 24, 2000 TABLE OF ESTIMATED COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH ATTACHMENT 1 ? INCREASE IN GREENWASTE FACILITY VOLUME '~ RESULTING FROM COUNTY CURBSIDE PROGRAM (3 YEAR PROGRAM - COUNTY VOLUME ESTIMATED @ 1/3 TOTAL) County-Provided Annual Annual Equipment and Facility Cost Equipment Fixed Cost Variable Cost 1. Enlarge Tipping Area 50% , $50,000 .... Add 4" A.C. over 18" crushed base over compacted subgraded to provide tipping pad for packer trucks. Existing area is 90' x 290', add 290' x 45' area. 2. Upgrade Existing Sorting C~)nveyor Station $140,000 -- $4,000 Replace existing station with a larger station; $180,000 purchase less approx. City to contribute $40,000 toward purchase ($30,000 salvage value for existing unit and $10,000 accrued replacement cost). $140,000 net County cost. No fixed cost charged to County for first 3 years because of purchase up front. City continues to pay $1,000/mo. fixed replacement cost for 15 year service life and retains ownership. After 3rd year, County may participate by paying a prorated portion of the fixed replacement and operating costs. Operating cost remains the same @ $1,000/mo. as current unit because larger unit runs less expensively on electricity rather than diesel engine. 3. Provide Additional 4 yard Loader $190,000 -- $27,60'0 To handle 15,000 ton/yr, of greenwaste sorting, compost production, and pre-market screening $190,000 for new unit; County may choose to provide a used or leased unit. Annual variable cost may be higher for a used unit. Note: County may either purchase outright or finance on its own; City pays no part of acquiring this unit. 4. Provide Additional Roll Off Truck $105,000 -- $18,000 To haul 15,000 tons/yr, of greenwaste and compost to and from windrows, and haul reject material to landfill. Note: County may either purchase outright or finance on its own; City pays no part of acquiring this unit. 5. Increase Existing Compost Turner Use by One Third -- $20,000 $24,000 One third of $5,000/mo. fixed plus $6,000/mo. O & M. 6. Increase Existing Water Truck Use by One Third -- $6,000 $6,000 One third of $1,500/mo. fixed plus $1,500/mo. O & M. 7. Increase Existing Trommel Screen Use by One Third -- $13,200 $6,000 One third of $3,300/mo. fixed plus $1,500/mo. O & M 8. Provide Two Mobile Radios for Loader and Truck $1,400 -- -- Subtotal Equipment and Facility $486,400 $39,200 $85,600 05/30/00 S:\GRNWASTE\COMPOST~TOTAL OF COST IV.wb3 ATTACHMENT 1 ," County-Provided Annual Personnel Cost Equipment Fixed Cost Variable Cost -- $70,000 9. Upgrade Sorting Conveyor Crew -- Change from 10 person labor crew with 8 sorters and 2 ground workers to a 15 person crew with 14 sorters and 1 ground person. -- $36,732 10. Loader Operator (New Position) -- Service Maintenance Worker @ $36,732/yr. -- $49,5O4 11. Roll Off Truck Driver (New Position) -- Heavy Equipment Operator @ $49,504/yr. -- $10,933 12. Trommel Ground Person.(New 1/2 Position) -- 1/2 of Laborer @ $21,866/yr. _- $10,933 13. Windrow Temperature Recorder (New 1/2 Position) -- 1/2 of Laborer @ $21,866/yr. -- $15,970 14. Compost Turner Operator (Existing Position) -- 1/3 of Sanitation Worker II @ $47,91 l/yr. __ $13,731 15. Water Truck Operator (Existing Position) -- 1/3 of Service Maintenance Worker @ $41,1 94/yr. __ $2O7,8O3 Subtotal Labor Totals -- SUBTOTAL OF EQUIPMENT FACILITY AND LABOR $486,400 $39,200 $293,403 Administrative Allocation 5% $1,960 $14,670 TOTAL OF CITY EXPENSES $41,160 $308,073 GRAND TOTAL OF CITY EXPENSES TO BE REIMBURSED BY COUNTY $349,233 05/30/00 S:\GRNWASTE\COMPOST~TOTAL OF COST IV.wb3 Attachment 2 following changes in the FY 00101 budget are required to handle material from the County's new curbside greenwaste recycling program at the Mt. Vernon Greenwaste Facility: Account # Description Budget Amount Change New Budget Total Expenditures 421-4081-585.10-XX Personnel Costs $514,353 $108,102 $622,455 (SMW, HEO, and Laborer) 421-4081-585.30-11 Administrative Allocation (5%) $131,000 $16,630 $147,630 421-4081-585.40-21 Internal Vehicles O & M $714,084 $124,800 $838,884 (Conveyer @ 4,000,.Loader @ 27,600, Truck @ 18,000, Turner @ 44,000, Water Truck @ 12,000, Trommel @ 19,200.) 421-4081-585.50-91 Other Outside Services $294,100 $70,000 $364,100 (Increase Contract Sorting Service by $70,000) Total Expenditures Increase $1,653,537 $319,532 $1,973,069 S:\GRNWASTE\COMPOST~COUNTY GRNWST FY00-01.wb3 1 05/30/00 BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: MAY 31, 2000 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PUC GRADE SEPARATION PRIORITY LIST We have just received the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) priority list for new grade separation projects statewide. Through the efforts of the Greater Bakersfield Separation of Grade District, six projects were nominated in the Metro-Bakersfield area. They include: 1. East Truxtun/Beale/East 19th & Baker Street @ BNSF Rank #3 2. 7~h Standard Road ~ UP Rank #14 3. Q Street ~ UP Rank #16 4. Olive Drive ~ UP Rank #27 5. 7th Standard Road ~ BNSF Rank #38 6. Hageman Road ~ BNSF/UP (Minkler Spur) Rank #54 It is my understanding that 7th Standard Road was funded through a previous cycle. The County, in cooperation with the City of Shafter and the Separation of Grade District is working on this project which also will includes expansion of the existing interchange with Freeway 99. East Truxtun Avenue/Beale Avenue/East 19th Street & Baker Street is an extremely expensive proposal. Under its current arrangement, if the City were to request an allocation, we would be precluded from any other allocations for a period of 10 years. This proposal includes the closure of seven (7) at-grade crossings including East 21 s, Street, Gage Street, Beale Avenue, East Truxtun Avenue/East 19th Street, Baker Street, Tulare Street and Sonora Street. The Q Street project is located on the Union Pacific Line just north of Golden State Avenue. Based on its ranking, this project is reachable. When complete, it would remove the Q Street crossing as well as the 30th Street/M Street crossing near McCarthy Steel. M, ~Carthy ,qteel w0ru. ld .-. be affected. .~C~~ ~ L Olive Drive ~ Union Pacific is located just east of Freeway 99 and will probably not be reached. 7th Standard Road ~ BNSF was nominated by the City of Shafter in conjunction with the Grade Separation District. It too will probably not be reached. Hageman Road ~ BNSF/UP is located within the proposed Hageman Road flyover. Since this will be a new crossing, the grade separation program allows its nomination and can fund up to 50% of construction costs. The Truxtun Avenue extension under the BNSF was partially funded with this same program. It too will most likely not be reached. Attached is the full list of projects on the PUC priority list. If you would like us to actively proceed with any of the project listed, please let me know. Separation of Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Priority Study Exhibit 73 1.99-07-001 REVISED APPENDIX A - Prior/Z7 List by Ranking for Fiscal Years 2000-2001 & 2001-2002 (Page 1 of 3) ~.,,~-~vc,~,..,:; .;.Z.,?.. ,:.~.:,. ,~,,-,.~.3....;.. -j72~;.::~:: ,~.~,.~,.*.,:-.-..,-..?v,,~...'i';¢.-~;~.:-;,v,~;~:~:~: 1 3-~.4 LOS ANGELES CO NO~LES ST - _ 3 BAKERSFIELD B~E-TRU~ON-BAKER (7 Xings) 152~95 21~ St ...... 2-~.6 Ga~ St ....... :.': , -: 2-885.6 Bede Av~ 2-885.75 2-885,~ T~bn Ave ...... .. - 2~5.95 '"' ' ':'- Tu~'St'~.~ 2-886.2 ..z': .... ,:': -- .:._.::~ ..... :~::~'.'[--.[.;, :.::~:;~- 2-~J4 .... ~m st ~:.::.... . "-..- ......... " ,. - .- '- .~~ · ~~~~'~- '.-; ;~ ....... ~,,~w--s~..~ ,. - ~.,,12649 , DA-30.5 W~m Ave .. - DA-3O.9 ' Stevenson Bird - ' DA-32.1 Pas~ Padre P~ 4G-2.6 Pas~ Padre P~ SA-32.65 High St DA-32.7 Mffin St DA-32.8 W~hin~0n Bird 4G-3.2 W~hington BIvd DAB-42.4B Mo~ Ave ' DA-29 9B Mow~ Ave ~'~ .~ui ~ ..... ~'~ .......... 107.~ 9 OR-182.9 IRVINE S~D CANYON AVE 93.71 ~, . ,: ., :~ ~Z;~ - 1~ .... B-516.9 ; MO~C~I-----R ~ONA AVE ou.~ ~ ~~ ~~ ................ ' 71,94 ' 13 ~13 7 PA~DALE · P~MDALE BLVD (SR138) - 69.~ 15 LOS ANGELES CO (2 Xings) .. B~97.28 No~alk Blvd 2-153.1 No~alk Bird 17 B-613.0 . COACHEL~ DI~ON RD 68,08 19 ~17.2 LOS ANGELES CO TURNBU~ CANYON RD .63.45 -4- Separation of Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Priority Study. Exhibit 73 1.99-07-001 · I~ViSED APPENDIX A - PriOrity List by Ranlcingfor Fiscal Years 2000-2001 & 2001-2002 (Page 2 of 3) .. ;~'~: :~4 :_~;:~:~:~ :~-.:~:::~-~,~; ...... ' ......... 63.02 20 SAN JOSE CONSOLIDATION. (3 xings) . . : E~.0 --. .. Bailey~e ;: ..... .- .. E~5.2 RiChmond Ave -.<~ ':~.~ ..... ~- ' E~7 ' ' ' LagunaAve .~:~:'- · ~ :~.. ~ ~~'~g~ ~~" ' -: -.- 58.73 ~ D-92.8 SAN JOAQUIN CO ' ~E~ ~E ,~.~ 24 LOS ~GELES CO 2 ~n~) 56.18 3A-3.4 ~dini B~ 147 1C Bandini B~ 2- . · __ -~ ' . - ~ ~~ .s~ .................. 55.49 ~ -417.93 CAMARI~O ADOLFO RD .. ~ - 28 BB-0.4B WEST WEST CAP,AL AVE ~.37 · SACRAME~O ~mergenc~ Repair ' 30 2~2~ .20 ~ORONA MCKINL~ ST 53.6~ :., 32 -~-4~ 9.92 C~ARILLO ~S POS~S~P~ND ' ' * · ~ 4-~ 32.9 SRTD (~) FLORIN RD 50.98 36 ~393.9 KERN COU~ ROSAMOND BLVD 49.40 38 2-889.5 . SHA~ER ~H STANDARD 47.~7 ~ BBH-487.42 LOS ANGE~S CO S~USON AVE 42.~. 42 36-7.4 CHU~ VISTA E ST 40.62 .. ~ ........ ............. ~ ~~ .~ - ~ E404.246 VE~URA A~O CENTER DR . 38.29 46 B-~10.3 FRESNO COUN~ CHESTNUT AVE 33.55 Separation of Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Priority Study Exhibit 73 1.99-07-001 REVISED APPENDIX A - Priority List by Ranking for Fiscal Year~ 2000-2001 & 2001-2002. (Page 3 of 3) 47 B-281 2 DELANO · GARCES HWY- 49 1~568.8 BANNING HARGRAVE ST . 30.62 51 3A-7.8 LOS ANGELES CO FIRESTONE BLVD . . 27.32 ~ 2-1180.~B · HERCULES '. PA~ AVE .... ' 24.12 ~ PROPOSED .LOS ANGELES CO FLORES ~ 13.87 (1) SR~ - Sac~ento ReDon~ Tr~sit ~s~ct -6- AY 31 20OO BAKERSFIELD "lTV MANAGER'S PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director ~ . ~/ DATE: May 30, 2000 SUBJECT: CENTER DIVIDERS IN THE NORTHEAST Councilmember Maggard recently received a complaint from a citizen, Ms. Shirley Walston, regarding the condition of median islands in the northeast; in particular, Panorama Drive from Mt. Vernon Avenue east to Columbus Street, Columbus Street from Panorama Drive south to Auburn Street, and Mt. Vernon Avenue from Panorama Drive south to Columbus Street. She also complained about the money spent downtown while the outlying areas of the City fall into greater and greater disrepair. The median islands in Panorama Drive from Mt. Vernon Avenue east to Bluff Street, or about one-third of the distance along Panorama that Ms. Walston referred to, has had stamped concrete installed as part of the previous program to enhance median islands. In addition, nearly half of the Mt. Vernon Avenue median referred to (from Panorama Drive south to University Avenue) has also had stamped concrete installed as part of the previous City program. The Community Services Committee recently dealt with the matter of median island enhancement. There are two main issues with enhancing median islands, the first being the cost to enhance the median islands (a stamped concrete median island costs about $450,000 per mile to install) and the second being the cost to maintain any new landscaping installed within an enhanced median island (a mile of median island completely landscaped costs $12,000 per year to maintain). With these two issues in mind, the Committee and City staff created several designs trying to maximize enhancement while minimizing both construction and maintenance costs. Two demonstration projects were constr0cted: on California Avenue between King Street and Owens Street; and on South H Street between Calcutta Avenue and Pacheco Road. The Committee recommended to the City Council that the California Avenue design be used as the standard for enhancing median islands, and the Council adopted this at the City Council meeting of May 24, 2000. Currently, $300,000 is proposed in next year's Capital Improvement Program budget to enhance median islands throughout the City. This funding should be able to enhance just over a mile of existing median island, while there exists nearly 50 miles of streets that either need a raised median island or need the existing median island enhanced such as portions of those Ms. Walston refers to. However, this is a continuing multi-year program and the rate of enhancement is dependent upon the amount of budgeted funding in future fiscal years. The funding for this program is primarily from gas tax revenues, the same funding source the City uses for maintaining streets. When possible, staff will try to "stretch" these median enhancement funds by incorporating median island enhancement into street resurfacing or other street related projects. Staff will also be pursuing grant money as it becomes available for this program. The City Council has requested staff to prepare an itemized list of streets with a prioritization based on criteria such as traffic volumes, whether the street is an entrance point to City, etc. This list should be complete and ready for City Council review shortly. Regarding the downtown enhancement, it should be noted that the majority of the construction funding for the Chester Avenue Streetscape came from Federal and State grants. And that prior to designing the project, there was an assessment district formed by the property owners downtown who agreed to pay for the maintenance of the enhanced landscaping. cc: Jacques R. LaRochelle, Engineering Services Manager !i ~laCk LaRgE:~.he Ie ~ FW: Center Dividers Page From: '"Mike Maggard" <mmagcpa@lightspeed.net> To: "Raul Rojas" <rrojas@ci.bakersfield.ca.us> Date: Thu, May 18, 2000 2:09 PM Subject: Fw: Center Dividers .... Original Message ..... From: Mike Maggard <mmagcpa@lightspeed.net> To: Raul Rojas <rrojas@ci.bakersfield.ca.us> Date: Thursday, May 18, 2000 2:08 PM Subject: Center Dividers I received a phone call today from Shirley Walston (872-4944) who lives near Panorama and Wenatchee. She and her neighbors are complaining about the state of (declining and adyanced) disrepair of the medians along Panorama from Mt.. Vernon east to Colombus, Colombus from Panorama south to Auburn, and Mt.. Vernon from Panorama south to Colombus. They have asked me to find out when the pressed concrete treatment will be throughout this area, and what can be done to curtail the continuing decline of these medians. She went on to complain about all the money being spent down town while outlying areas of the city fall into greater and greater disrepair. Could you or staff respond to her and let me know what answers and comments you have as well. Thanks as always...Mike BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: May 30, 2000 TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ~ - SUBJECT: VACATION OF ALLEY - 24TM STREET Council Referral Record # WF0018476 / 001 ~ C~.un~~~member Patr~c~a DeM~nd reques~ed staff ~~ ~~~k ~n~~ what m~ght be ~nv~~ved ~n vaca~~ng ~he l alley south of 24th Street between' Elm and "C" Streets. As of today, City staff has received no request to vacate an alley in this neighborhood. However, staff will research the alley and prepare a list of potential issues with an alley vacation, based upon earlier experiences with similar requests. A further response will be forthcoming. ---Page 1 of 1 Page--- City of Bakersfield *REPRINT* ,.-~ -~ WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 REQ/JOB: WF0018476 / 001 PROJECT: DATE PRINTED: 5~26~00 REQUEST DATE: 5/24/00 CREW: TIME PRINTED: 11:22:02 SCHEDULE DATES LOCATION: ~'1'~%/~'1': 5~24~00 LOCATION ID: ZIP CODE: COMPLETION: 6/05/00 FACILITY NODES GEN. LOC: FROM: FACILITY ID: TO: REF NBR: REQ DEPT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH REQUESTOR: DEMOND ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL USER ID: RBARNHAR WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DESCRIPTION: VACATION OF ALLEY - 24TH ST. REQUEST COMMENTS ***REFERRAL TO PUBLIC WORKS*** DEMOND REQUESTED STAFF TO LOOK INTO VACATING THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE ALLEY NEAR '24TH ST. Job Order Description: VACATION OF ALLEY - 24TH ST. at~gory: PUBLIC WORKS aSK: RESPONSE TO REFERRAL Assigned Department: PUBLIC WORKS START DATE /' / COMPLETION DATE __/__/__ BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: June 1, 2000 SUBJECT: Update - COUNCIL REFERRAL WF001841'1/001, WARD 2, BLOCK WALL ON 24TM STREET. "DEMOND REFERRED TO STAFF THE ISSUE OF A BLOCK WALL BLOCKING THE SOUTH SIDE OF 24TM STREET FROM ELM TO ALDER STREETS AND WHAT CALTRANS' POSITION IS ON BLOCKING THE STREET." The Traffic Engineers staff completed a traffic volume study of the streets intersecting 24th Street (Highway 178). This information was requested by CalTrans traffic engineers as part of their consideration of allowing walls to block off the sidestreets to 24th Street (Highway 178). The information has been faxed to CalTrans. Traffic Engineering is waiting for a response from the engineers at CalTrans. An update will be prepared when the CalTrans response is received. cc: Traffic Engineering slw: P:\DATA\WP~2000\WF0018411 .Blocl~Wal124th.ref. Update.wpd Page I of 1 BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ~./t_~._~~ DATE: June 1, 2000 SUBJECT: COUNCIL REFERRAL WF0018477/00'1, WARD 3, STOP SIGN INSTALLATION FOR PANORAMA AND UNIVERSITY. "MAGGARD REQUESTED STAFF TO LOOK INTO THE FEASIBILITY OF INSTALLING A STOP SIGN AT THE INTERSECTION OF PANORAMA AND UNIVERSITY." The Traffic Engineering staff completed a traffic stop sign warrant study for the intersection of Panorama and University. The intersection met the volume warrant for a multi-way stop condition. A work order is being prepared for sign and marking installations and modification of existing lane lines and markings. cc: Traffic Engineering slw: P:\DATA\WP~2000\VVF0018477.StopSignlnstallation. Pan_Univ. ref. wpd i RECEIVED .... :'~ "' i~/~ANAGER'S OFF[SE Page I of 1 ~% City of Bakersfield *REPRINT* WORK REQUEST PAGE 1 REQ/JOB: WF0018477 / 001 PROJECT: DATE PRINTED: 5~26~00 REQUEST DATE: 5/24/00 CREW: TIME PRINTED: 11:21:52 SCHEDULE DATES LOCATION: $'l'~u~'l': ~24~00 LOCATION ID: ZIP CODE: COMPLETION: 6/05/00 FACILITY NODES GEN. LOC: FROM: FACILITY ID: TO: REF NBR: REQ DEPT: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL PRIORITY: HIGH REQUESTOR: MAGGARD ORIGIN: CITY COUNCIL REFERRAL USER ID: RBARNHAR WORK TYPE: REFERRAL DESCRIPTION: STOP SIGN INSTALLATION REQUEST COMMENTS ***REFERRAL TO PUBLIC WORKS*** MAGGARD REQUESTED STAFF TO LOOK INTO THE FEASIBILITY OF INSTALLING A STOP SIGN AT THE INTERSECTION OF PANORAMA & UNIVERSITY. Job Order Description: STOP SIGN INSTALLATION at~gory: PUBLIC WORKS asK:· RESPONSE TO REFERRAL Assigned Department: PUBLIC WORKS START DATE / / COMPLETION DATE