HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/30/02 B A K E R S F I E L D
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
MEMORANDUM
August 30, 2002
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
~ Alan Tandy, City Manager
FROM:
SUBJECT: General Information
1'. On Wednesday, September 11th, at 9:00 a.m., the Police and Fire Departments will
be holding a "Service of Remembrance" for the Americans killed and injured in the
terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center Towers, the Pentagon, and United
Airlines Flight #93 that crashed in Pennsylvania one year ago. The 30-minute
service will be held in front of the Police Department. You will be receiving your
invitations next week.
2. The preliminary agenda for the joint City/County meeting on September 9th at 5:30
p.m. is attached. The County is hosting this meeting, including dinner for the
Board of Supervisors and the City Council, which will be at 4:30 p.m. in the Third
Floor Multi-Purpose Room. The meeting will be telecast live on KGOV.
3. Attached is a copy of a Council Resolution regarding the policy for signs located
within the Kern River Parkway. Per the request of the Kern River Parkway
Foundation, we are distributing it to the Council and the Veteran's Memorial Park
Committee.
4. The MIS Division, which currently has some very cramped quarters in the lower
level of City Hall, will be moving some of its offices across the street from City Hall
to the Borton, Petrini & Conron Building. Fourteen employees will relocate next
week, which will leave approximately half of the division remaining at City Hall.
The new location affords those employees some much needed work space but still
allows them to be close enough to provide service to the other City facilities.
5. Per the enclosed memo from EDCD, the Bakersfield Music Theatre is in
compliance with the terms of their loan agreement with the City for the seCond year
of their five year term.
6. The monthly CIP report from Public Works is attached for your information.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
August 30, 2002
Page 2
7. Responses to Council requests are enclosed, as follows:
Councilmember Carson
· Traffic study of Belle Terrace and El Toro Streets to determine possible need
for a four-way stop to replace the one-way stop;
· Traffic study of intersection of Kincaid and Texas Streets to determine possible
need for a stop sign;
· Feasibility of adding a curb at 1010 Bell Terrace;
Councilmember Benham
· Traffic study of intersections at H an 2nd and H and 8th Streets to determine
possible need for stop signs;
· Repair of pot holes on the bike path;
· Report on the feasibility of continuing the rehabilitation of 19th Street with the
addition of more street lamps, trees and grates;
Councilmember Couch
· Status report on the City's request to San Joaquin Railroad for crossing repairs;
· Status of the Coffee Road access issue, amended to include the possibility of
severing access from Northshore/Southshore.
Councilmember Salvaggio
· Report on the history of the City's purchase of the Airpark, including funding
sources and improvements made to the facility, per a citizen request;
· Status report on citizen request to provide information on the City performing
paving and resurfacing vs. private sector;
· Update on the Highway 99/White Lane interchange project.
AT:rs
cc: Department Heads
Pam McCarthy, City Clerk
Trudy Slater, Administrative Analyst
DRAFT
Joint Meeting of the
Kern County Board of Supervisors and the Bakersfield City Council ~c~o~ ~..~f
Monday, September 9, 2002 - 5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
A dinner buffet will be served at 4:30 p.m. in the 3rd Floor Multi-Purpose Room for elected and appointed
City and County officials. The public may attend and observe.
This meeting will be televised live on Cox and Time Warner Cable Channel 16, and Falcon ~abl¢ Channel 44.
An Assisted Listening device is available in the Board Chambers through the Clerk of the Board and City Clerk.
Board of Supervisors Chambers, 1115 Truxtun Avenue, 1st Floor,'Bakersfield
Benham Hall Perez Salvaggio Patrick
Ca~ ~~,~son
Mag~ Pennell [ ~,~arra.
McQuis~ McCarthy
Sulliv~.~"
STAFF STAFF 1 I Jones Tandy
. [ Podium J _ Barmann Thiltgen
CITY COUNCIL BOAKD-OF SUPERVISORS
Harvey Hall, Mayor Steve A. Perez, Chairman,.Second District
Mark Salvaggio, Vice Mayor, Ward 7 Jon McQuiston, Supervisor, First District
Irma Carson, Ward 1 Barbara Patrick, Supervisor, Third District
Sue Benham, Ward 2 Vacant, Supervisor, Fourth District
Mike Maggard, Ward 3 Pete H. Parra, Supervisor, Fifth District
David Couch, Ward 4
Harold Hanson, Ward 5
Jacquie Sullivan, Ward 6
CITY STAFF COUNTY STAFF
Alan Tandy, City Manager Scott E. Jones, County Administrative Officer
Bart Thiltgen, City Attorney Bernard C. Barmann, County Counsel
Pamela A. McCarthy, City Clerk Denise Pennell, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
MEETING FORMAT
This joint proceeding will be Chaired by Board of Supervisors Chairman Steve A. Perez. The governing bodies may take action during
this session on the agenda subject matter, receive and file materials related to the agenda topic, and/or give direction to staff.
PUBLIC COMMENT PROTOCOL
Persons may address the Governing Bodies on any agenda topic during the discussion of that item. People wishing to make comments
on any matter not on this agenda but under the jurisdiction of the Board or Council, may make comments during the Public Presentations
portion of the meeting. Statements are limited to 2 minutes per speaker. Speakers are requested to state their name before making the
presentation. The Chairman, at his discretion, may limit the total time allotted to public comment to assure that all agenda items can be
completed. Due to logistical complexities, video tapes will not be shown during this meeting.
Written comments are encouraged. Provide twenty (20) copies of written material to the Clerks at the time of your presentation, or send
written communication addressed to the Board of Supervisors, 1115 Truxtun Ave., Bakersfield, CA 93301, or the City. Council, 1501
Truxtun Ave., Bakersfield, CA 93301 in advance of the meeting.
/
DRAFT
O NOTICE OF SPECIAL JOINT MEETING
OF THE
KERN COUNTY-BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND
BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Kern County Board of Supervisors and the
Bakersfield City Council will hold a Special Joint Meeting on Monday, September 9,
2002 from 5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., in the Board of Supervisors Chambers, 1115 Truxtun
Avenue, Bakersfield, California. Dinner will be provided for City and County elected and
appointed officials in the 3~ Floor Multi-Purpose Room at 4:30 p.m., at their option. The
public may ~ttend and observe.
Estimated
Time
5:30 p.m. 1. FLAG SALUTE
2. ROLL CALL
3. OPENING REMARKS BY CHAIRMAN STEVE A. PEREZ
4. OPENING REMARKS BY MAYOR HARVEY HALL
5:~0 p.m.5. PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS - Persons may address the Governing Bodies during
this.portion of the.meeting on any matter not on this agenda but under the.jurisdiction
of the BoaCd o~ Supervisors or City Council. The Ch_airman, at his discretion, may
limit the total time allotted to this portion of the meeting to assure that all agenda
items can be. completed. Statements are limited to 2' minutes per speaker,
Please state and spell your name for the record.
e:~5p.r,.6. A. Proposed Criteria for Evaluating High Speed Rail Station Terminal Location
(City Agenda .Item) - Recommended Action: Approve
6:50p.m. B. Status Report on West Side Parkway and Freeway Systems Study (Joint
Agenda Item) - Recommended Action: Hear City and County Staff Presentations
7:15p.m. C. Status Report on Meadows Field Airport Terminal Project (County Agenda Item)
- Recommended Action: Hear County staff Presentation
7:30 p.m.. D. Status Report on Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Update (Joint Agenda
Item) - Recommended Action: Hear City and County Staff PresentatiOns
7:45p.m. E. Status Report on Joint Playground Project at the Metropolitan Recreation Center
(County Agenda Item) - Recommended Action: Hear County and City Staff
Presentations
e:oop.m. F. Proposal from Council Member Carson for Development of a Workshop
Regarding Conflict of Interest for City and County Officials (City Agenda Item) -
Recommended Action: Refer to City Attomey and County Counsel
Joint City / County Meeting Agenda
September 9, 2002
Page Two
8:15p.m. G. Proposed 2003 Schedule for Joint Meetings (Joint Agenda Item)-
' Recommended Action: Approve
8:20 p.m. 7. CLOSING COMMENTS BY CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND BOARD MEMBERS
8. CLOSING COMMENTS BY MAYOR HARVEY HALL
9. CLOSING COMMENTS BY CHAIRMAN STEVE A. PEREZ
10. ADJOURNMENT
B A K .E R S F I E L D
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
MEMORANDUM
August 30, 2002
TO: Alan Tandy, City _Manager
FROM: John W. Stinson('~, ,~S~lstant City Manager
SUBJECT: Information regarding sign policy for Kern River Parkway
Attached is a letter and copy of a Council Resolution I received from Rich O'Neil,
President of the Kern River Parkway Foundation regarding the policy for signs
located within the Kern River Parkway. He has requested that it be distributed to the
Council, staff and the veteran's organization. I have also attached a copy of the staff
administrative report and the Community Services Committee reports that
accompanied the resolution when it was adopted by the Council in 1995.
cc. Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Veteran's Memorial Park Committee
Bart Thiltgen
Alan Christensen
Jack Hardisty
Gene Bogart
Stan Ford
S:~JOHN\Sign policy Kern River Parkway.doc
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT'
TO: Honorable Mayor' and Ci~ Council ~PP~O~D
F~OM: Communi~ Se~ices ~~T ~~
DATE: Janua~ 11, 1995 C~W A~O~Y'~~
SUBJECT: Communi~ Se~ces Committee Report No. 1-95 regarding Policy for signs ~thin the Ke~
River 'Par~ay.
1. Resolution adopting policy for signs located ~thin the Kern River Par~ay.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends acceptance of report and adoption of the resolution.
BACKGROUND:
The Council requested the Community serVices Committee consider the issue of signs proposed tO be
located within the Kern River Parkway. The Committee reviewed two drafts of a policy document which
would govern the kinds of signs within the Parkway. The Committee also consulted 'with the Kern River
Parkway Foundation, a community interest group, and the City's Citizen's Park and Recreation
Committee. Both these grOUps made comments on the drafts and now recommend adoption of the
attached policy resolution.
Because of the uniqueness of the Parkway and that the property owned by the City is typically zoned for
flood-plain purposes, only very limited signage is allowed. However, in those instances where signs are
allowed, such as to denote a parking area, call box, or donation of an amenity, the attached 'resolution will
· provide clear criteria for the types, size, design, materials, quantity and purpose of signs proposed for the
parkway. The policy is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, including the
Kern River Plan Element and the Kern River Parkway Plan, and local ordinance.
The. Committee recommends the Council adopt the resolution.
\KRS.AR
January 11, 1995, 3:44pm
CITY OF ~AKERSFIELD
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE ~i~ ~'~ '3
REPORT NO. 1-95
JANUARY .25, 1995
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ~
SUBJECT: REsoLuTION .'ADOPTING_ SIGN POLICY WITHIN THE KERN RIVER
PARKWAY ~ ~
At its meeting of March 9, 1994, Council referred to the Co~La~,unity
Services Committee, a request by the Kern River Foundation to
install a monument sign~on the Kern River Parkway. The Committee
met with staff and Foundation members to review this issue. The
Committee recommended approval of the sign with a stipulation that-
because the sign ordinance does not have specific criteria for the
Parkway, policies should be established.
In July, 1994, a policy was prepared and reviewed by the Citizen's
Community Services Advisory Committee, Rich O'Neill, from the Kern
River Parkway Foundation and Staff from the Community Services and
Water Departments.
The Committee reviewed two drafts which would govern the type of
signs to be used in the Parkway. In those instances where signs
are allowed, such as to denote a parking area, call box, or to
denote an amenity, the proposed Resolution will Provide clear
criteria for the types, size, design, materials, quantity and
purpose of signs proposed for the Parkway. The policy is
consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan,
COMMUNITY sERVICES.COMMITTEE' - -.'
REPORT NO. 1-95
Page -2-
.including the Kern River Plan Element and the Kern River Parkway
Plan, and local ordinance. ~' ' '.. '
'With the above information in mind, the Community Services
Committee recommends the City Council accept this report and
approve, the ResOlution adopting policy~ for'signsi:l°ca~d' in"~he
Kern River Parkway.
.ResPectfully submitted,
~Councilmember Irma Carson, Chair
Councilmember Mark SalVaggio'
Councilmember From Ward 6 Vacant
. F4 VEEF AUG 2 8
PA Fi K WA Y
F O U N [] A T I O N
August 23, 2002
TO: City Manager's Office
Attention Alan Tandy or JOhn Stinson
Ref: Naming and Signing Theme and Ordinance for the Kern River
Parkway and Rio Vista Park
Dear Mr 'Tandy. and Councilmembers;
Attached is a copy of City Council Resolution 14-95 which
defines the criteria, policies, and ordinance for the naming theme
for parks and other elements withi, h the Ker.n River Parkway. All
names and signs within the Parkway including Rio Vista Park shall
be of a historical and cultural nature that "directly relates .to the
River Parkway".
Would you please share a copy of this Resolution 14-95 with
your staff, the City Council, and the Veteran's Organization?
This naming and sign theme was signed by the City Council
on Janurary 15, 1995. It was derived from much work and public
input by thousands of Citizens of Bakersfield who participated
in the development and adoption (.1:983=19~95) of the Kern River Plan
Element and the Kern River Parkway Plan.
Thank you for your continued support of the Kern River
Parkway as we look forward to assisting in its growth and
enhancement.
President
Kern River. Parkway Foundation
cc: Recreation and Parks
14-95
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS AND ADOPTING
POLICY FOR SIGNS LOCATED WITHIN THE KERN
RIVER PARKWAY.
WHEREAS, at several of its meetings, the Community Services Committee of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield considered policy for signs proposed to be located
within the Kern River Parkway; and
· WHEREAS, said Committee determined that it is in the best interest of the
public's health, welfare and safety to adopt a sign policy regulating the type, material,
design, size, quantity, location and purpose of signs proposed to be located within the
Kern River Parkway; and
WHEREAS, adoption and implementation of a policy for signs within the Kern
River Parkway provides convenient method to regulate signs consistent with local
ordinance and the Metropolitah Bakersfield 2010 General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Council may from time to time amend such policy, if necessary;
and
WHEREAS, a draft sign policy for the Kern River Parkway was distributed to the
Kern River Parkway Foundation, a community interest group, and the Citizen's Parks
and Recreation Committee for comment; and
WHEREAS, comments received were duly considered and, if necessary, the draft
sign policy was revised accordingly; and
WHEREAS, the Kern River Parkway Foundation, and the Citizen's Parks and
Recreation Committee recommend the sign policy attached herein as Exhibit "A" to be
adopted by the Council; and
WHEREAS, the sign policy is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010
General Plan, including the Kern River Plan Element and the Kern River Parkway Plan;
and
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations rela. ting to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and the City of Bakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures
have been duly followed by city staff and the Council; and
WHEREAS, adoption and implementation of a sign policy for the Kern River
Parkway is exempt from CEQA in accordance with Section 15305(3)(d), Class 5, of City
Resolution No. 212-92; and
WHEREAS, the Council has considered and hereby makes the following findings:
· 1. The .Community Services Committee recommends adoption of the sign
policy for the Kern River Parkway, as shown on attached Exhibit "A".
2. Adoption and implementation of said sign policy promotes the public's
health, welfare and safety.
3. Adoption and implementation of said sign policy for the Kern River
Parkway is exempt from CEQA in accordance with Section 15305(3)(d), Class 5, of City
Resolution No. 212-92;
4. Said sign policy is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010
General Plan, including the Kern River Plan Element and the Kern River Parkway Plan,
and local ordinance;
5. Said sign policy may be amended from time to time when the Council
determines it necessary. '
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY and found by the Council of the
City of Bakersfield' as follows:
1. The above recitals and findings, incorporated herein, are true and
correct.
2. The City Council hereby approves and adopts the sign policy for the
Kern River Parkway as shown on attached Exhibit "A".
...... 000 .......
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and
adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on
JAN ~ ~i N.q_~, , by the following vote:
AYES: COUNC~ DeHOND, CARSON, S~ITH, ~cDERHOTT, RONLES, CHON, SALVAGGIO
NOES: COUNCILHEHBER
ABSTAIN: COUNCILNEMBER
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED ~ 2 5 1~
Vice-Mayor
APPROVED as to form:
JUDY SKOUSEN
CITY ATI'ORNEY
LAURA C!
Assistant City Attorney l
JE:pjt
Janua~ 11, 1995
r~'~igns.kr
EXHIBIT "A"
SIGN POLICY FOR THE
KERN RIVER PLAN ELEMENT
SECTION 1: R~COMMEND~ SI~N CRITERIA
POR SIGNS WITHIN THE KERN RIVER PARKWAY
PURPOSE: The purpose of this Sign criteria for the Kern River
Parkway. is. 1) to promote signs in an orderly and
attractive manner; 2) to provide standards to safeguard
the public welfare, and; 3) ensure signs are consistent
with the Bakersfield Municipal Code and policies of the
'Metropolitan' Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, which
includes the Kern River Parkway Plan.
GENERAL REGULATIONS: '
A. All signs are required to:
1. Conform to the aPProved sign criteria, and be
consistent with the Bakersfield Municipal Code Sign
Ordinance and 2010 General Plan policies (Ordinance
and Policy).
a.) Signs shall be limited to those necessary
for directions and premises identification.
Sign size, design, color, texture, materials
and location shall, to the greatest extent
possible,
be compatible with the open space. (Policy)
2. submit plans to the Building Dept. for review and
obtain approval prior to issuance of a sign permit.
-Building Dept. shall consult with the Parks
Divisionand Water Resources Dept.
3. Obtain a sign permit prior to installation.
(Ordinance)
4. Shall conform to City standards..(Ordinance)
B. Signs shall not be allowed (Ordinance and Policy):
1. Within the street right-of-way or to interfere with
the public safety. (Ordinance and Policy)
2. Within 90 feet of the primary floodway line.
(Ordinance and Policy)
C. City Council approval shall be required:
1. If a sign is donated to the City.
2. If a proposal is to name an area as indicated in
"D" below.
D. To propose a name for .an area of the Parkway after a
person/group, place, historical event or other, applicant
shall submit a letter of justification and plans for
review by the City Council. Any proposed name shall have
direct relationship to the Kern River Parkway, and this
relationship shall be ~xplained.in theletter.
1. In accordance with General Plan policy, the
preference is to use neutral (generic) names which
are necessary for directions or premises
identification, such as "Kern River Parkway, City
of Bakersfield," and if applicable, activity unique
to that location (i.e., picnic area, rest stop,
parking). .
la. Upon valid petition to the City Council, a person
or group may ..reqUest to identify or name an area of
the Parkway subject to the following criteria. The
petitioner(s) is responsible for demonstrating
conformance with the criteria.
(1) Requested name must show a clear and
direct relationship to the Kern River
Parkway, ReqUested name may be an
individual, service organization or other
humanitarian entity. An illustration
showing a proposed sign in accordance
with parkway policies may be submitted.
(2) A valid petition shall, at a minimum,
consist of the following: "
' (a) Name, address and phone number
of Petition contact person.
(b) The requested name and a
statement demonstrating the
requested name is directly related...
to the Kern River Parkway,
'consistent with these policies.
(C) Signature, printed name,
address, phone number and date
signed of each person signing
petition insupport of the request.
Kern River Parkway Signs 2
(d) A minimum of 200 signatures from
. persons residing in the Bakersfield
area. (Upon receipt of a petition,
a random check of signatures may be
made to verify support of petition.)
(e) Other information deemed
necessary by the City Attorney.
2. Plans shall include a drawing to scale of the
proposed, sign showing text, design, dimensions,
materials, colors, and proposed location.
This Section does not apply to a sign which only
.indicates the location of.an activity, such as '"picnic-
area,.bike path Or directions."
TYPE OF SIGN CRITERIA RECOMMENDED
MONUMENT Monument signs only. Pylons and billboards are not
allowed. (Ord.inance and General Plan Policy)
· D~ensions: Maximum square footage = 24
-. square feet;
Maximum height = 4 feet; Maximum
base = 16 square feet or no more
than 50% of sign area.
NOTE: Sign Ordinance allows maximum
32 square feet, and maximum 8 feet
high.. The 24 square feet is based
on the Community Services
Committee's approval of the Kern
River Parkway Foundation's sign. The
4 foot height limit seems
appropriate to maintain Clear views.
Materials: Durable natural materials or
materials and colors designed
~ to blend with surrounding
vegetation or structures within
the Parkway. (Policy)
Location & Identify location of main
Parkway features;
Number allow as minimum number as possible.
(Ordinance & Policy)
Text/Copy: Directly related to Parkway.
(.Ordinance & Policy)
Prominently displaying "Kern
River Parkway." Also, include
"City of Bakersfield," and if
applicable, activity unique to
Kern River Parkway Signs 3
location (i.e., picnic area,
· ' rest stop, parking). Prefer
neutral (generic) names.
'Proposals to name an area of
the Parkway' after a person,
company, group or event must
include a letter of
justification.
TY~E OF SIGN CRITERIA P. ECOMMENDED
COMMENORATIV~ Commemorative, memorial plaque, tablet or
cornerstone are exempt from the Sign Ordinance;
however, signs within 'the Parkway should haveCity
Council approval.
Dimensions: .. Maximum 9 square feet; Maximum
height 6 feet.
Material: Durable natural materials or
materials and colors designed to
blend with surrounding vegetation or
structures within the Parkway.
(Policy)
Locatio~ & Identify location of main
Parkway features;
Number allow as minimum number as possible.
· (Ordinance & Policy)
Text/Copy: Directly related to Parkway.
(Ordinance & Policy) Proposals
to commemorate, memorialize or
name an area of the Parkway
after a person, company, group
or event must include a letter
of justification.
DIRECTIONAL OR On-premises, incidental sign designed to.guide
or direct or
IR-FOPd~ATIO~AL provides pertinent information of location or
uses.
Dimensions: Maximum 6 square feet; Maximum
height 6 feet. (Ordinance)
Materials: Durable natural materials or
materials and colors designed
to blend with surrounding
vegetation or structures within
the Parkway. (Policy)
Location & Incidental use.
Number:
Kern River Parkway Signs 4°
Text/Copy: Sign shall not contain
advertising but may have
maximum of 12% of the total
sign.
Cellular Phone Call Box: On premises sign designed to designate
the location of cellular phone call boxes
along the bike path.·
Dimensions: Maximum 3 square feet (2 feet height by
1.5 feet wide), and mounted per City
Engineer standard.
Materials: Durable materials per City Engineer
....... standard.
Location &
Number: As·deemed needed by City Engineer.
Text/Copy: "CALL BOX and number" per City Engineer
stahdard. No advertisement but
sponsoring professional name or logo may
be allowed a maximum space on sign
measuring 6.5 inches high by 1.5 inches
wide perstandard.
SECTION 2: POLICIES ANDORDINANCES
Kern River Plan Element of the General Plan:
Policy 3.2.3 (9). Signs shall be limited to those necessary for
directions and premises identification· Sign
size, design, color, texture, materials, and
location shall, to the greatest extent
possible, be compatible with the open space
character of the area.
Policy 3.·2.3 (10). Advertising signs and billboards shall not be
allowed within the primary or secondary
floodways of the Kern River.
Policy 5.3 (B) (4). All structures, except wells, shall maintain a
minimum setback of 90 feet from the primary
floodway line.
Kern River Parkway Plan:
Chapter 12, Visual Quality Mitigation Measure:
· Design.and site structures in rest, parking and recreation
areas in accordance with the constraints of topography,
riparian vegetation, and other natural features.
· Use of natural materials and colors that blend with the
surrounding vegetation or structures within the parkway.
Kern River Parkway Signs 5
Sign Ordinance IBMC Ch. 17.60)~
Section 17.60.080 (N)(1). No pylon signs are allowed within
the Kern River Parkway. The only signs allowed are monument
signs and directional signs.
Section 17,60.030 Definitions:
· ' on remises sign, ~ncidental
· ,Directional" sign means -p
sign designed to guide or direct pedestrian andJvehicular
traffic. Such signs shall not exceed 8 feet in height or
10 square feet in area. sign shall not contain
advertising but may have 4 square feet of professi0nal
nameidentification or logo.
.......... · ,,MOnument'' sign means a-freestanding identification
sign which is appropriately landscaped. Overall height
shall not exceed 8 feet and
Kern River Parkway Signs
Page 6 of 6
a maximum of 32 square feet. The base or support system
shall not'ekceed 50% of the sign area or 16 square feet.
Sections 17.60.060 through 17.60.080: General and Specific
Prohibitions and Restrictions.
· Memorial plaque, tablet or cornerstone are exempt;
however, a maximum of 10 square feet seems.an appropriate
.size for the Parkway.
· Signs are not allowed within the street right-of-way or
to interfere with the public safety.
· Directional, warning or information sign authorized by
federal, State or municipal authority 'may be exempt.
(Examples of these signs include green or blue
directional signs for the Social Security Office, or food
and lodging signs on freeways.)
· All signs require a Sign Permit issued by the Building
· ' Dept.
Kern River Parkway Signs
BAKERSFIELD
Economic and Community Development Department
MEMORANDUM
August 23, 2002 /~(c'°'' 2~
TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager ~ ~~
FROM: Donna L. Kunz, Economic Development Director
SUBJECT: Employment Status for Bakersfield Music Theatre
Agreement No. 00-140 between the City of Bakersfield and Bakersfield Civic Light Opera (a/k/a
Bakersfield Music Theatre) provided a $50,000 loan to the company for a term of five years.
Twenty percent of the loan will be forgiven for each year the company meets all terms and
conditions of the agreement. These terms included,
· hiring three, and retaining seven, workers from Bakersfield.
· of those workers hired at least 51% must be low- and moderate-income individuals.
Exercising this forgiveness is a ministerial action and, thus, requires no Council action.
The agreement states that the company does not plan on hiring any new employees until Year 3.
However, in Year 2, 5.425 FTE (full-time equivalent employees) were hired, and 2.175 FTE, or
40.09%, were low- and moderate-income individuals. Because the company did not expect to
make any new hires until Year 3, we will begin monitoring for the 51% level beginning in Year
3.
Therefore, Bakersfield Music Theatre has met the terms and conditions required in the agreement
and qualifies to have 20%, or $10,000, of the loan amount forgiven for the second year of the
agreement.
I propose we send a letter to the company which merely reflects the ministerial action of the debt
forgiveness. With approval from you, we will immediately mail the letter.
dI:PAB M T~Forgive 20% of Year 2.wpd
B A K E R S F I E L D' AUG 29
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
MEMORANDUM
August 29, 2002
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: CIP REPORT
Attached please find our monthly report reflecting the status of Public Works CIP
projects.
If you have any questions, please call me at 326-3596.
G:\GROUPDAT~Dani\CIP~nemo Aug 02.doc
s CayJ ta[ Improvement
P b[ic Wot[e, Prooram Sc ei ,/e Fiscal Year a. oo -a, oo _
,,, NUM I I NUM I ' BEGIN (est.) END (est.) BEGIN (est.) END (est.)
T1 K031 KROLL Wy' BRIDGE - W OF GOSFORD RD 5 complete Jul-01 Mar-02 ^pr-02 Jun-02'
T2K033 STREET IMPROVEMENTS; WHITE/ 6 in design Jul-02 Oct-02 Nov-02
DOVEWOOD
T2K020 STREET IMPROVEMENTS; COFFEE RD/ 4 street right-of-way from PG&E required for project Ma?02 Nov-02
DOWNING
E9K011 MOHAWK SEWER CONSTRUCTION 4, 5 under construction Feb-00 Jan-02 Aug-02 Dec-02
PHASE II
TOK144~ SOUTHWEST BIKE PATH 4 under construction Feb-01 Dec-01 May-02 Sep-02
T9K015 SIGNAL NEW, COMANCHE/SR 178 3 bidding period begins 9/4/02 Mar-00 Mar-02 Oct-02 Jan-03
TIK028 STREET IMPROVEMENTS; COLLEGE/ 3 in design, agreement for water facility relocation to City May-01 Sep-02 Oct-02 Dec-02
FAIRFAX Council 7/31/02
TOK013 BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION - OLIVE/ 4 in design Jun-99 Oct-02 Nov-02 Jul-03
CALLOWAY
TIKO07 RESURFAClNG VARIOUS STREETS VAR under construction Jan-01 Jan-02 Aug-02 Oct-02
0o-01
KEN659 WIDEN TRUXTUN AVENUE 2 in design Sep-01 Aug-02 Oct-02 Nov-02
E9K014 MT VERNON TRUNK SEWER IMPROV I construction to begin in September Mar-00 Mar-02 Sep-02 Nov-02
TIK011 SlG NEW AUBURN AT EISSLER 3 under construction May-01 Oct-01 Sep-02
"TIKOO9 SIG NEW MT VERNON AT PANORAMA 3 bids opened, awarded in September Nov-01 Aug-02 Oct-02 Nov-02
T1K024 SIG NEW VERDUGO AT HAGEMAN 4 awarded Oct-01 Mar-02 Sep-02 Nov-02
T2K036 FS #11 MEDIAN & SIG MOD 5 in design, working with Traffic Dept on concept Dec-01 Sep-02 Sept03 ,. 'Sep-03
T2K028 iSIG NEW BRUNDAGE AT WASH 1 in design Feb-02 Sep-02 Oct-02 Dec-02
'r2K023 SIG PLANZ AT REAL 6 in design Jan-02 Sep-02 Oct-02 Nov-02
'r'2K027 SIG PLANZ ATWILSON 5, 6 in design Feb-02 Jul-02 Oct-02 Dec-02
G:\G ROU PDA'IADani\Cl P\Cl P FY 02-03 AUG.xls 1 of 3 8/29/2002
biic works0,-,. Sc/aea. ie l isca{ Year _ooz- _ooz
PROd PROJI/CT TITll/ WARE COMMI/NTS DI=SIGN pHASI= CONSTRUCTION PHASI~
NUM NUM BEGIN (est.) END (est.) BEGIN (est.) END (est.)
E2KOO4 SEWER MAIN BRIMHALL RD 4 completed Jul-01 Nov-01 Mar-02 Jun-02
ETK005 SEWER REHAB MAIN/SO CHESTER I study only Sep-01 Mar-03 Jul-03 Nov-03
study by Ruettgers & Schuler comp;,,~,~
P1K003 HVAC UPGRADE, CITY HALL 2 awarded May-02 Jun-02 Sep-02 May-02
E1K~03 SEWER IMPROV PACHECO#10 7 in design Mar-02 Sep-02 Jul-03 Sep-03
P1H004 FS #4 ELEC UPGRADE 2 Under construction Nov-01 Jan-02 Apr-02 Jul-02
TIK034 MING INTERSECTION EXPANSION 3 in design, Property Management acquiring temporary Dec-00 Feb-02 Sep-02
AT ASHE AND NEW STINE. construction en_sements .
T2K022 MING INTERSECTION EXPANSION ~ 4 working on comments received from CalTrans, design complete Nov-01 Feb-02 Jul-02 Jul-02
AT SR99 continued with right turn lanes on Truxtun Extension
TIK027 ST IMPROV RR CROSSINGS' 3 in design, applications sent to Public Utilities Commission Jan-02 Sep-02 Nov-02 Jun-03
T8K002 BRDG WIDENING WHITE LANE AT SR99 7 project report currently being prepared, in design Mar-02 Nov-02 Feb-03 Dec-03
60% PS&E to be submitted to CalTmns
T2K031 TRAFFIC SIG OLD RIVER RD AT 4 signal to be constructed with City forces Feb-02 Apr-02 Aug-02 Oct-02
RIDGE OAK DRIVE
T7K021 INTERCHANGE ON $R178 3 project report submitted to Caltrans. consultant has begun Jul-99 Jan-03 Jun-03 Nov-04
AT FAIRFAX final design
TOK006 ST WIDENING ROSEDALE HIGHWAY 2 in design Aug-01 Aug-02 Jan-03 Apr-03
PLC020 RIO VISTA PARK 4 in design Mar-01 Jun-02 Aug-02
TOK012 BRIDGE CONST, HAGEMAN AT SR99 2 in design, PSR approval anticipated for September Jul-01 Sep-02
P5C002 LANDSCAPE MEDIANS 6 under construction Jan-02 Feb-02 Feb-02 . Apr-02
COLUMBUS/PANORAMA
TIK022 LANDSCAPE MEDIANS 2 construction completed ' Feb-02 Apr-02 May-02 Jun-02
STOCKDALE HWY/ASHE TO CALIFORNIA
E7K002 SEWER CONST MAIN - 4 completed Mar-00 Sep-00 Mar-01 Apr-02
BUENA VISTA II
· P8H001 FS #15 4 consultant designing project Aug-01 Jul-02 Oct-02 Jul-03
POCO09 CENTENNIAL GARDEN SMOKE 2 under construction Nov-01 Feb-02 Sep-02 Nov-02
HATCH MODIFICATION
TIK023 STREET IMPROVEMENTS; HAGEMAN 4 design complete Sep-01 May-02 Sep-02 Nov-02
advertising for construction
T4K055 STREET MPROVEMENTS: LAKE STREET i 2 design complete, construction by City crews scheduled to start Aug-02 Oct-02
~_.t~_c~ ~=nA'lAn~n \~ P\ClP FY 02-03 AUG.xl s 2 of 3 8/29/2002
PROJ PROJECT TITLE WARD COMMENTS DESIGN PHASE CONSTRUCTION PHASE
NUM NUM BEGIN (est.) END (est.) BEGIN (est.) END (est.)
in Sept., 2002;delay caused by accelerated resurfacing projects
TOK138 CASA LOMA #6 STREET IMPROV'S I construction by City crews scheduled to start in Sept., 2002; Jan-02 Feb-02 ^ug-02 Oct-02
delay caused by accelerated resurfacing projects
T9K012 NORTHEAST BIKE PATH 3 completed
Q9KO03 NATURAL GAS FUELING STATION 2 design complete. Waiting on site placement Oct-02 Mar-03
TOK011 STREET RECONSTRUCTION-WHITE LANE 6 under construction Apr-02 Jun-02
T2K026 TRAFFIC SIG-STINE (~ BEECHWOOD 6 advertise for construction Feb-02 Aug-02 Oct-02 Nov-02
T2K043 TRAFFIC SIG-STOCKDALE ¢~ McDONALD 2,5 in design ' Mar-02 · Sep-02
TRAFFIC SIG-MT VERNON ~ CHURCH 3 design complete, bidding early August Feb-02 Jul-02 Sep-02 Nov-02
E7K012 WWT?#3 HEADWORKS,: ........... ......... ' out to bid
P0C009 CENTENNIAL GARDEN BULLET 2 new contracts have been awarded. Construction now scheduled Sep-01 Oct-01 Feb-02 Apr-02
RESISTANT GLASS [o start in October, 2002, contingent upon events in arena.
opportunity to perform on the control room contract.
TIK032 GOSFORD RD RECONSTRUCT & 5 construction 95% complete Jun-02 Sep-02
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
T2K047 RESURFACE VARIOUS STREETS 2002 4,6 under construction; July02 Sep-02
GOSFORD ROAD/WHITE LANE
T2K048 PANAMA LANE RECONSTRUCT 6,7 bids open August 12th Sep-02 Nov-02
STREET IMPROVEMENTS 4 design complete, advertise Sep-02 Nov-02
OLD FARM ROAD
G:\GROUPDAT~Dani\CIP\CIP FY 02-03 AUG.xls 3 of 3 8/29/2002
B A K E R S F I E L D
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
MEMORANDUM
August 29, 2002
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR~
SUBJECT: BELLE TERRACE AND EL TORO
Council Referral #000186
Councilmember Carson requests staff review traffic at Belle Terrace and El Toro
Streets to determine the need for a four-way stop to replace the one-way stop
presently in place.
Traffic Engineering will perform traffic control warrant studies for the intersection of
Belle Terrace at El Toro Street. Belle Terrace is a major street with a speed limit of
35 miles per hour and enforced with radar by the Police Department. El Toro is a
local residential minor street with a speed limit of 25 miles per hour. Engineering
studies should be completed in 2 to 4 weeks.
G:\GROUPDATXReferralsX2002XCC Mtg 8-21\186-Traffic.doc
E R S F I E L D b,U~
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
MEMORANDUM
August 29, 2002
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: INTERSECTION OF KINCAID AND TEXAS
Council Referral #000185
Councilmember Carson requested staff investigate the need for a stop sign at the
intersection of Kincaid and Texas Streets.
Traffic Engineering will perform traffic control warrant studies for the intersection of
Kincaid at Texas Street. Kincaid is a local street with a speed limit of 25 miles per
hour. Texas Street is a local street with a speed limit of :?5 miles per hour.
Engineering studies should be completed in 2 to 4 weeks.
G:\GROUPDAT~Referrals\2002\CC Mtg 8-21\185-Traffic.doc
B A K E R S F I E L D
MEMORANDUM
August 29, 2002
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTO~~__._
SUBJECT: 1010 BELLE TERRACE
Council Referral #000187
Councilmember Carson referred to staff the feasibility of adding a curb at 1010
Belle Terrace.
Street Division staff surveyed the area of Belle Terrace as requested. While not
directly at 1010 Belle Terrace, an area (approximately 50 feet) was found to be
without curb and gutter west of 1100 Belle Terrace. The elevation difference in this
area is significant and would require the construction of a retaining wall. This would
significantly increase the cost to install the curb and gutter. Staff does not
recommend this work be done at this time, but that it be reviewed for possible
inclusion in the FY 03~04 Capital Improvement Program.
c: Brad Underwood, PW Ops Mgr
Arnold Ramming, CE IV
G:\GROUPDATXReferrals~2002\CC Mtg 8-2 l\187-Streets.doc
B A K E R S F I E LD AU629"~'~
cITY OF BAKERSFIELD
MEMORANDUM
August 29, 2002
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ~ ~,,~
SUBJECT: H STREET INTERSECTIONS 2ND AND 8TH
Council Referral #000193
Councilmember Benham requests staff investigate the need for stop signs at the
intersections of H Street and 2nd, and H Street and 8th Street.
Traffic Engineering will perform traffic control warrant studies for the intersection of H
Street at 2nd and H Street at 8th Streets. H Street is a major street with commercial
office and retail uses on the frontages. The speed limit is 40 miles per hour and
enforced with radar by the Police Department. Past requests have asked for stop
signs for speed control. Stop signs cannot be used for speed control in the State of
California. Engineering studies should be completed in 2 to 4 weeks.
G:\GROUPDATXReferrals\2002\CC Mtg 8-21\193-Traffic.doc
David Walker
212 H Street
Bakersfield CA 93304
August 20, 2002
COUNCILWOMAN PAT BENHAM
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
1501 TRUXTUN AVE
BAKERSFIELD CA 93301
Dear Ms. Benham
November 20 of last year, I wrote both you and councilwoman Carson a letter requesting that a
stop sign be erected at the comer of 2"a and H Street, and another at 8~ and H Street (both
directions). I received a letter back saying that the matter would be referred to staff.
To date I have not heard anything further. As a City employee myself, I know that oftentimes
things get set aside in favor of something that is considered more important, but ! feel this is
important also. This past Saturday, another accident took place at 2"a & H. This time it involved
three cars: two that were driving on the street that collided, and one of them was diverted into
another car parked at the' curb. There was significant damage to each vehicle, and one of them
was totaled.
When people leave freeway 58 at either the Chester Avenue or the ft Street exit and start driving
on H Street, they must think they are still on the freeway, because that is the way they drive,
often faster than the legal freeway speed of 65. Does someone have to be seriously injured or
killed before action is taken? This is a residential neighborhood!
Please devote some time to thi's issue. I want to see those stop signs erected.
Sincerely,
David Walker
B A K E R S F I E L D
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD . ~rv ~ ., :iCJ
MEMORANDUM
August 29, 2002
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: BIKE PATH POT HOLES
Council Referral #000184
ICouncilmember Benham referred to staff the issue of pot holes in the bike path.
The pot holes near Yokuts Park have been patched. The rough stretch from the
weir to Chester Avenue will be patched Friday, August 30, 2002. The rough part of
the bike path directly under Fwy 99 will have to be ripped out and concrete poured in
its place since the paving machine will not fit under the freeway. This work is being
planned for Winter, 2002.
G:\GROUPDAT~Referrals~2002\CC Mtg 8-21\184-Streets.doc
~,ePatr igace p~
I
conuaend the ~W of B
B A K E R S F I E L D
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
MEMORANDUM
August 30, 2002
TO: Councilmember Benham
THROUGH: Alan Tandy, City Manager
FROM: John W. Stinso~, ~s~sistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Request by Mr. E.G. Berchtold for streetlights, trees and grates
for 19th Street
Mr. E.G. Berchtold of Berchtold Equipment
previously worked with Public Works staff to
improve some old city street light posts located
around their business located on 19th Street
east of Union Avenue. These older style street
light posts are no longer used or operational
and have been replaced by more modern
street lights-such as those shown across the
street. Mr. Berchtold painted the four light
poles around
his business
and replaced the globes. Since the lights no
longer are operational. Mr. Berchtold installed a
Iow voltage solar powered light which provides
decorative lighting. This lighting is not connected
to the City's conduit which still runs through these
light posts and connects to the newer lights that
have been installed to light the area. Staff
prepared a no cost lease for these four lights
which was signed by Mr. Berchtold.
Subsequently, Mr. Berchtold's submitted a request to
continue the rehabilitation of the street lights along 19th
street from Union Avenue to Baker Street. There are
.currently 19 street lights remaining in this corridor. Two
of these lights are in need of an upper half of the pole
which is missing. Mr. Berchtold has asked that these two
lights be repaired and made whole. The needed parts
S:\JOHN\Berchtold 19th Street Memo.doc
-could be replaced from poles at' other locations that are planned to be removed as
they no longer are operational. Once these lights have been. reassembled Mr.
Berch~old would work with the business owners along 19th Street to have the street
lights painted dark green similar to the lights around his business. Mr. Berchtold has
also asked that the City install light globes in these lights as there are currently none.
General Services has indicated the globes cost approximately $100 each. The total
cost would be $1,900 to purchase globes for the 19 lights. Property owners may or
may not decide to install the solar lighting as done by Mr. Berchtold. These lights
are purely decorative and would not replace the newer street lighting that has been
installed. The property owner would be responsible for maintaining the painted pole.
Funding the globes would have to be approved by the City Council. There is some
concern by staff that if the lights are made to look operable, there may be citizen
complaints made to the city should the lights not work or not be properly maintained.
Additionally, the .block of 19th Street
between Kern and Baker Street. does
not have the old lights and Mr. Berchtold
would like four to six old street lights be
installed on this block. In talking with
General Services staff they indicate it is
not practical to relocate the light posts
from one location to another. The old
street lights must have a concrete base
with special fittings to connect the light
post and it would be very expensive to
relocate the light poles since the
hardware is no longer available.
An alternative would be to purchase and install new light
poles that are similar to the old street light poles. These
would be like the ones used for some areas downtown
and are planned for Baker Street. General Service
estimates the labor and material's to install the poles
(without any electrical connection) to be approximately
$4,000 per pole; or between $16,000 to $24,000 for
purely decorative poles for this block. It does not seem
practical for the City to pay this amount of money to
install purely decorative lights that do not provide light,
but simply aesthetics. The property owners (there are
mostly' commercial businesses on this block) may
choose to pay this cost to provide this decorative
amenity to enhance their property. This information was
shared with Mr. Mark Berchtold who agreed that due. to the cost it-may not be
feasible to install the lights on this block.
There was a concern expressed by General Services regarding the old light poles in
this area due to there being energized conductors in the base of each of these
existing poles which are connected to the newer street lights. Staff had planned to
remove the old poles and replace them with splice boxes. If the old street light poles
were leased to various property owners along 19th Street the city would need to
S:\JOHN\Berchtold 19th Street Memo.doc
~secure the access panel at the light base by spOt welding it
shut to prevent access as well as including a clause in the
lease to prevent the lessee from .tampering with the wiring.
Staff would also recommend that the City retain the right to
remove the street light post should it become damaged or
unsafe. It may not be possible to replace these posts in the
future should they become damaged.
Tree Planting:
Mr. Berchtold also made several requests
regarding planting trees along 19th Street and on
Sonora Street. Most of the areas'along 19th street
where there is an existing parkway Strip between
the sidewalk and
the curb have
trees planted in
them. There
are also some
plants in large
concrete planters .in front of some businesses.
Several of the blocks have wide sidewalks that
have replaced the parkway space. Planting
additional trees in these areas would require
cutting out sections of existing concrete sidewalks and installing an irrigation system
in order to plant more trees. Based on staff experience with these similar conditions
in the downtown it is estimated that it would typically cost approximately $ 2,800 to
obtain an encroachment permit, cut the sidewalk for a 4'x4' square, purchase the
tree and a grate and install the irrigation system to plant the tree. It is assumed
based on information provided in Mr.. Berchtold's letter that each property owner
would be responsible for these costs
There is a portion of Sonora Street south of 19th
street adjacent to the 7-Up building where a dirt
parkway remains. Trees could be planted here if
irrigation were available. The area north adjacent
to Pepsi is mostly concrete and sectiOns would
have to be removed as described above in order
to plant trees there.
When trees are planted in the public right of way,
property' owners are required to obtain an
encroachment permit from the city. This is to ensure 'that their work does not
damage or conflict with underground utilities or other public facilities and that they
properly provide for irrigation to maintain any landscaping. The fee typically costs
about $145. Mr. Berchtold has requested that the City waive the encroachment
permit fee. The City may not waive the fee, but could pay the fee on their behalf.
However, payment of the fee by the city could trigger prevailing wage.
S:\JOHN\Berchtold 19th Street Memo.doc
,,, ~' Mr. Berchtold also requested that the City
provide tree grates if they are required. Trees
planted in parkway areas do not require grates.
However, .the Public Works standard for trees
planted within a sidewalk area in the public right
of way requires a steel grate. There are some
areas of the city where there are no grates but
that is because the trees were planted prior to
the adoption of the standard by the city. The
cost of a grate .is about $625-$700 each. If the
city were to purchase these and provide them to property owners, it would Create a
situation where others in the city would expect.the city to provide them with grates in
the future. In addition, since there has been no specific plan showing how many
grates would be needed, there is no way of knowing how much this would cost the
city. This request would need to be better defined before it can be considered fully.
Staff appreciates Mr. Berchtold's interest in further improving the 19th street area. It .
is feasible to allow the property owners to lease the light poles and paint them as Mr.
Berchtold has done, with the requirements listed in the report above. However, staff
does not recommend that the city pay for the encroachment permits, or provide the
tree grates. There are concerns that this would set a precedent for many others who
would expect the city to pay for such similar items routinely required by the City.
The light globes are being replaced primarily for decorative purposes and the city
would not normally .be replacing them. Since this primarily benefits the property
owner they should assume this cost. There may be other ways for the property
owners to offset some of these costs such as grants or since the area is within the
Old Town Kern Redevelopment area there may be funds which could be available
for this purpose. There also could be an issue of prevailing wage requirements
under SB 975 related to any financial assistance by the city towards project
construction, including the encroachment permits Or tree grates. The City Council
and Redevelopment Agency would need to make any determination regarding the
availability of redevelopment financial assistance. This could be referred to a
Council Committee for further discussion of funding possibilities.
I.
S:\JOHN\Berchtold 19th St~'eet Memo.doc
@ Old Lamps ,~ Partial Old Lamps 0 Painted Lamps w/Bulbs
19th St.- Street Lamp Project
BEIT ,HTOLD
I~W HOLLAN:)
EQUIPMENT COMPANY
Since 1910
July 1, 2002
To: City of Bakersfield
Harvey Hall, Mayor
&
Sue Benham, Councilwoman
A Group of business people,'located on 19th Street between Union Avenue and Baker Street, wish to upgrade the area
by planting trees, tixing and painting existing old lights (not electrifying), clean-up and removal of some unsightly things, such
as weeds, etc. and the planting of lawns in some of the curb areas.
· It is felt that this can be accomplished by the citizens themsel~/es and the majority of the expense to be borne by the
property owners.
However, w'- '=, "~; ~ ~'" ""
.... ~ .... s,,,,,v help..,.tm the
A Street lights.
Most of the lights already exist, but ther.e are a few that need repairing, because one half ('/~) is missing. '.t/e are
The Block between Kern Street and Baker Street, has no existing lights. '¥¥e .~'= reques'Jn; .'.ha( ¢,', :r ," .:c. s x .,'~,;
;ich..'s be irs:a/,eJ. Perhaps these could be moved from 18th St., one block south, that is between Kern and Baker Streets.
We do not plan to electrify any of these lights. Some owners may elect to install small solar power which provides
a small glow- some may not choose to do so.
The owners will bear all of the expense of painting the poles - dark green - the same as the lights are painted
downtown.
B Trees
We wish to see trees planted along the curb areas along 19th Street and hopefully on Sonora Street, one block
north and so~th of 19th Street, by the Pepsi building and the 7-Up building.
We expect The Tree Foundation to provide and help plant the trees. The property owners will have to provide
the water source to the trees.
We, at Berchtold's, have planted our'trees on 19th, Sonora, Inyo and 18th Streets, as well as some across
from our 'property in front of residences and apartments.
We have painted our light poles and will do the same across the street on 19th Street from'Sonora and Inyo.
We will also provide funds to paint some of the other poles where the property owner-is reluctant or not financially
able to do so.
Our group will do all of the soliciting Of the propert7 owners to agree to the project.
We are very interested in the beautification of Bakersfield, as indicated by this project, and my heavy involvement
in the establishment of the new Panorama Park. which will finally be started before July 1st.
We respectfully request that the City consider our request·
C Grates
If the city will require a grate at the base of the tree planting in concrete, we ask that the Ct'/or~.,,'ide ~his item,,.
----~,,~~ .__..._._
E. G. Berchtold
jn~v,~Ntr t~¢~[~c'.~n aJ~tr ees. 19
[] BAKERSFIELD
P. O. Box 3098 * Bakersfield, Culifornia 93385 · 330 E. 19th 93305 · (661) 323-78i7 * Fax (661) 325-4059 * ~eco@berctntold.com
[] DELANO * P.O, Box99 * Delano, California93216 * 1300So. Garzoli 93125 * (661) 725-1500 * Fax(661)725-7502
[] SANTA MARIA · 1410 W. Befteravia Road * Santa Maria, California * (805) 922-7g(]5 · Fax (805) 349-0147 · becosm@berchtold.com
B A K E R S F I E L D
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD , '
MEMORANDUM
August 29, 2002
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: SAN JOAQUIN RAILROAD
Council Referral #000191
I Councilmember Couch requested staff provide an update to a citizen regarding San
Joaquin Railroad.
Public Works Department and City Attorney staff have been working with
Councilmember Couch, Assemblyman Ashburn and his staff, Public Utility
Commission (PUC) staff, and personnel from the San Joaquin Valley Railroad
(SJVRR) for nearly two years regarding SJVRR crossings within the City. Over the
past year, Streets Division staff has worked with SJVRR personnel to repair SJVRR
crossings at South H Street, White Lane, Wible Road, Stine Road, and District
Boulevard. However, SJVRR staff changed twice during this period, and with each
change has come a delay to the repair program. Recently, a derailment on their
facility further delayed the.program Repairs to crossings at Lakeview Avenue,
Hughes Lane, Gosford Road, Planz Road, and Buena Vista Road still need to be
completed.
Streets Division staff recently contacted the SJVRR personnel now responsible for
this repair program and they indicate they would like to start back with the program
in a few weeks. However, due to the continual delays in the program, City Attorney
staff has begun preparation of a complaint to the PUC to compel SJVRR to repair
the crossings without delay. Preparation of the complaint includes an investigation,
which is currently underway, by Acclamation Insurance Management Services
(AIM), the City's Third Party Administrator. Staff estimates that the complaint should
be ready for submission to the PUC in October. It is estimated then the PUC may
take 1-2 months to review and act on the complaint.
Cc: Bart Thiltgen, City Attorney
G:\GROUPDAT~Referrals~2002\CC Mtg 8-21\191-Ted. doc
RECEIVED: 8/30/02 12:24PM; ->CITY OF BAKERSFIELD; #296; PAGE 2
B A K 1~ R ~ 1~ I E L D
MEMORANDUM
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER ~
FROM: JACK HARDISTY, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIR
DATE: August 28, 2002
SUBJECT: COFFEE ROAD ACCESS
Council Referral No. REF000189
COUNCILMEMBER COUCH REQUESTED A PREVIOUS REFERRAL REGARDING
ACCESS TO COFFEE ROAD BE CONSIDERED AS A GPA OR SPECIFIC PLAN
AND ZONING AMENDMENT. AREA RESIDENTS WOULD LIKE THIS TO BE
LINKED TO A CONSIDERATION OF SEVERING ACCESS FROM NORTHSHORE
AND SOUTHSHORE, THEREFORE COUNClLEMEMBER COUCH REQUESTS HIS
ORIGINAL REFERRAL BE AMEMDED SO THAT A MORE COMPLETE REVIEW
MAY BE MADE.
Sevedng access from Northshom/Southshore will be considered as part of the
application to be heard at the September 19, 2002 Planning Commission
meeting. The item will go the City Council in November.
JH:MG:djl
CC: Rhonda Smiley, Office Administrator/Public Relations
B A K E R $ F I E L D i
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ,~ j,;~ ?~
MEMORANDUM
August 29, 2002
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ~
SUBJECT: BAKERSFIELD AIRPARK HISTORY
Council Referral #000179
Councilmember Salvaggio requested staff respond to Mrs. Weeks' concerns by
providing a history of the Bakersfield Airpark, the source of funding for the park and
information on any improvements made to the park.
The City purchased the Airpark from Mr. Bender on July 19, 1985. Since that time
the City has obtained several FAA grants which typically require a minimum 10%
match of City funds. These grants were used for property purchase, runway,
taxiway, tie-down, sewer, storm drain, and lighting improvements and development
of areas to construct hangars. The grants received are as follows:
1996 $ 617,236
ALP-09 8125193 $ 282,862
ALP-08 9/26/91 $ 486,178
ALP-07 4~23~90 $1,068,200
ALP-06 9~27~89 $1',072,940
ALP-05 9~28~88 $1,007,023
ALP-04 9/10/87 $1,071,744
ALP-03 9~22~86 $ 2,038,665
ALP-02 6~03~86 $ 67,365
ALP-01 6/19/85 $ 2,096,948
TOTAL $ 9,809,161
The City contribution for property purchase and capital improvements was greater
than the 10% minimum, totaling $1,640,600.
G:\GROUPDAT~Referrals~2002\CC Mtg 8-21\179-Brad. doc
Bakersfield Airpark History
Page 2
August 29, 2002
Since the original capital improvements we continue to maintain the airport to State
Aeronautics and FAA standards. General maintenance has continued such as
sweeping, landscaping, mowing, etc. In addition, while limited, drainage, paving and
building improvements have been made, and an automated fuel facility was
installed. In fact in a partnership effort, staff made improvements to the restaurant
building to accommodate the alterations and new services the operator desired to
provide.
As a point of clarification the former restaurant operator had an account balance
owing of $12,446.42 which includes penalties and interest.
c: Brad Underwood, PW Ops Mgr
G:\GROUPDAT~ReferralsX2002\CC Mtg 8-2 l\179-Brad.doc
REC'D & PLACED ON FILE
AT COUNCIL MEETING OF
Ci~ Co~ M~t~g
G~d Eve~,~ M~r~
I ~ he~ on ~ofKem Co~ ~. At t~ ~ C~ Co~c~ m~t~ ·
~e~ ~,uc~nts were ~ ~ ~ ci~ e~loy~ t~t ~1~ ~y of you ~ to t~
l~ter ~ sp~ of t~ multi ~Hion-do~ ~t ~t t~t w~ ~ed on ~of
B~ersfield M~ci~ A~o~.
Beg~ ~ t~ ~ ~ ~ 1983 ~ t~ ~ ~t ~ 1~3, ~ c~ ~
~c~d 9.5 ~on do~ ~ ~t ~y to ~rove, ~ ~ ~ t~ gemr~ ~
~. ~ ~w ~ ~nt~t, the ~H ~ re~ op~ ~ at 1~ 2013.
Mr. T~y ~t~n~ tMt M wo~d ~ ask~g tM F~ to for~ tM ~, a
m~ $50 0~, ~ ~e ~e~ offS, ~ ~t ~ o~ oft~ ~k ~tM a
prob~m ~ Meadows. Howev~, per ~ Fre~ F~ity of~ F~, t~ p~blem ~
~h M~ows for d~t~ ~t~ p~ ~o t~ ~'s 6~ ofway' M~o~
wm w~ m t~t ti~. M~ows ~ ~ ~ ~c~enm ~ ~cid~ts t~ a~ ~
s~mH g~ ~ ~s ~ t~ ~ ~, ~r F~ ~dq~ ~ Los ~e~s, th~
~ve ~ d~ to forgive t~ ~ ~ t~ w~ ~ a~ to ~ o~n ~ ~e.
'F~ 9~r Rem ofcpntem~p ~ t~ ~ off~s. P~ ~ A~~ for ~
S~0~, ~d t~ ~ ~mp~ ~L f~ ~ ~ co~~te ~
other a~fls ~ the ~ catego~. A~ tg..~ ~i~e~s, you ~t c~ t~
~e ~t '" ~:~ '- C~ D,C or ~ a~:pece as t~t wo~d ~ discr~t~
~ is ~~ ~pEs to o~es. ~es ~ould ~ co~ to S~-M~t~ F~ld,
C~dEr ~ Fr~o or ~era's ~0a. ~ a~Rs ~ c~g $25 br ~o~s;
$g5-95 for Shafleports, if available; T-Hangars $90 tO 200 for large ones; and reetatlgular
hangars run fi-om$200 to $350 again depending upon size.
It behooves the City of Bakersfield to improve the Airpark's ability to generate
income by bringing additional aviation related businesses such as tho~ at ShaRer,
¢
Dela~o~'~ehachapi antl'~~-Ffe~t'~-~ of these have more to offer because they
have been supported and improved by their CRies. They have encouraged and promoted
growth. They are in the black because oftheir efforts. '
Another ¢o~ was that the restaurant owners did not pay their rent/lease.
AcCording to your financ~ records for the past five years, there was no more than about
$500 in bad d~bt until the fire. Then there was a $9500~bfad debt, no reference to whom
As provide the services, and they will come. Pilots fi'om all around the
s!:at¢ will be happy to fly-in, buy fi:~l, eat, servi~ their pl~e, ~d spend money. You
have a chance to make lemonade from the lemons you have picked.
Ms. Carson, Do you want an eye~O~ in your district or do you want something
that can bring you pride? It is up to all of you, but the board needs to be a little more
knowle~eable so as not to fall into the trap of being the dog that is moved by the
wagging tail.
B A K E R S F I E L D "'~, ~1J~;29~'-~ '!
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD *
MEMORANDUM
August 29, 2002
TO: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
FROM: RAUL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: CiTY PAVING PROJECTS
Council Referral #000174
Councilmember Salvaggio requests staff respond to Mr. Troxel's concerns
regarding the City performing paving and resurfacing vs. private sector; explanation
of the decision process; information regarding the differences in required standards
for the City as opposed to the private sector; and if other industries are competing
with the City for work.
Information regarding the general issue of paving by Public Works Department
personnel is currently being accumulated by both Streets Division and Engineering
Division staff. This item is currently scheduled for discussion at the Budget and
Finance Committee meeting of September 12, 2002. Public Works staff will be
presenting a report regarding this topic at that Committee meeting. All of the above
issues will be addressed in the report. Staff has contacted Mr. Troxel and informed
him of and invited him to this Committee meeting. The report will also be distributed
to the full Council the day of the Committee meeting.
G:\GROUPDATXReferralsX2002\CC Mtg 8-2 l\174-Ted, doc
REC'D & PLACED ON FILE
MR. MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL:
MY N~E iS BRAD TROXEL. I OWN AN EMPLOYEE AND LABOR
RELATIONS CONSULTING FIRM HERE IN TOWN. I ~M APPEARING HERE
TONIGHT AT THE REQUEST O? A NUMBER OF ASPHALT PAVING AND
SUPPLY CONTRACTORS TO PRESENT THEIR CONCERNS TO THE COUNCIL.
LET ME POINT OUT THAT i AM NOT ~ EXPERT IN THEIR INDUSTRY; I
HAVE SIMPLY BEEN ASKED TO SERVE AS THEIR SPOKESPERSON, AS
THRSE COMPANIES ARE CONCERNED ABOUT POSSIBLE REPERCUSSIONS
SHOULD THEY APPROACH THE CITY iNDIVIDUALLY. LET ME ALSO
STATE THAT THESE COMPanIES THOROUGHLY SUPPORT THE CURRENT
EFFORT OF CITY LEADERSHIP TO IMPROVE STREETS THROUGHOUT THE
CITY.
BUT OF PARTICULAR CONCERN TO THESE COMPANIES IS AN APPARENT
SHIFT IN THE DIRECTION THE CITY HAS TAKEN REGARDING
RESURFACiNG, MAINTENANCE ~D STREET REPAIR. HISTORICALLY,
THE CiTY HAS MAINTAINED RESIDENTIAL STREETS. IT HAS NOT, IN
GENERAL, PERFORMED MAINTENANCE AND REP~!R ON ~t~JOR ARTERIALS
~ND THOROUGHFARES AS IS NOW BEING PERFORMED iN THE SOUTHWEST.
iT APPEARS THAT WITH THE EXPENDITURE OF $685,000 FOR CAPITAL
EQUIPMENT, AS REPORTED BY THE BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIAN ON JUNE
23, THE CITY HAS NOW MADE THE DECiSIO~ TO COMPETE DIRECTLY
WiTH THESE PRIVATE SECTOR FIRMS.
THE COMP~'IES I REPRESENT EMPLOY HUNDREDS OF SKILLED,
QUALIFIED EMPLOYEES WITH PAYROLLS IN THE TENS OF MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS. THE QUALITY OF THEIR WORK iS HELD TO HIGHER
ST~$DARDS THEN THAT PERFORMED BY THE CITY. THEY CAN PERFORM
THIS WORK A/qD IT BEGS THE QUESTION AS TO W~Y THEY ARE NOT.
THE CITY CHARTER AT ARTICLE X. PUBLIC WORK AND SUPPLIES,
SECTION 136: PUBLIC WORK TO BE DONE BY CONTRACT PROVIDES,
~D i QUOTE: "PROJECTS FOR THE RESURFACING, MAINTENANCE OR
REPAIR OF STREETS, DRAINS OR SEWERS AR~ EXEMPTED FROM THE
.REQUIREMENT OF THIS PARAGRAPH, IF THE CITY COUNCIL DETERMINES
THAT SUCH WORK CAI~ BE PERFORMED MORE ECONOMICALLY'BY A CITY
DEPARTMENT THA_N BY CONTRACTING FOR THE DOING OF SUCH WORK."
JOINTLY AND SPECIFICALLY, WE WOULD LIKE TO Y~OW THE
FOLLOWING:
1o WHY WAS THE DECISION MADE TO EXP~2~D THE ROLL OF THE CiTY
iNTO PAVING ~D RESURFACING PROJECTS TKAT HAVE BEEN
HISTORICALLY PERFORMED BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR?
2. HOW, kND WITH WHAT CRITERIA, DID ?HE COUNCIL DETERMINE
THAT THIS WORK C~{ BE PERFORMED MORE ECONOMICALLY BY A
CITY DEPARTMENT THAN BY CONTRACTING OUT SUCH WORK?
3. WAS THE EXPENDITURE OF $685,000 FOR CAPIT~ EQUIPMENT A
WISE USE OF TAX PAYER FUNDS WHEN THERE ARE AVAILABLE,
QUALIFIED FIRMS WITHIN THE'PRIVATE SECTOR TO PERFORM THIS
WORK?
4. ARE THE PAVING A_ND RESURFACING PROJECTS PERFORMED BY CITY
CREWS HELD TO THE S~MS STANDARDS AND TESTING REQUIREMENTS
AS FIRMS iN THE PRIVATE SECTOR?
5. ARE THERE ANY OTHER INDUSTRIES FOOD SERVICE,
EMS, ETC. - WHERE THE CITY iNTENDS TO COMPETE WITH
PRIVATE SECTOR FIRMS?
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ~:2'~ ~-~'
MEMORANDUM
August 29, 2002
TO: ALAN TANDY, CI~ MANAGER
FROM: ~UL M. ROJAS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ~
SUBJECT: 99~HITE LANE INTERCHANGE PROJECT
Council Referral ~000~92
Councilmember Salvaggio requested staff provide a complete update regarding the
Highway 99~hite Lane interchange project, and concerns with CalTrans and the
on and off ramps.
The City's poAion of the project includes the 24 feet widening of the White Lane bridge
over State Route 99 (SR99) to allow for three thru lanes in each direction and a
dedicated lane for the noAhbound on-ramp; reconstruction of the noAhbound on and off-
ramps; a tra~c signal at the noAhbound off-ramp; the soundwall adjacent to the
Smoketree mobile home park; the construction of a noAhbound ~ 500 feet long
acceleration (or auxilia~) lane for SR 99; and over $400,000 of lands~ping from Planz
Road to the interchange along SR 99. Construction plans for the City's poAion of the
project are 65% ~mplete and will be submitted to Caltrans for their second review (30%
complete plans were already reviewed by Caltrans) next week.
The City began working with Caltrans on this project many years ago. The City needed
to widen White Lane to improve tra~c flow, and Caltrans needed to fix an operational
and safety problem they had with the southbound off-ramp tra~c backing up into the
number 3 lane of southbound SR99. Staff worked closely with Caltrans developing the
scope of the project and coordinating our effo~s. Early on in the project, Caltmns
agreed that their poAion of the project would be to reconstruct the southbound off-ramp
and construct a ~,500 feet long southbound auxilia~ lane along SR99 for the off-ramp.
Caltrans had originally proposed to fund this construction in 2002 using State Highway
Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP) funding, and include their construction
with the City project. However, staff recently learned that Caltrans' poAion of the project
was not funded as paA of the 2002 SHOPP projects, and will have to compete for
SHOPP funding in 2004 against other Caltrans projects. The City has been proceeding
in good faith with the City's poAion of the project and has even offered to assist Caltrans
with su~eying and right-of-way acquisition for their project with them reimbursing us for
the cost, but they have declined these offers. It is disheaAening that Caltrans does not
appear to be as concerned with their safety problem and prioritize their project
accordingly so that it can be funded. Staff is continuing to move fo~ard with the C~ty
project with bidding planned for the Spring of 2003 and construction staAing the
Summer of 2003.
G:~GROUPDA~Ref~als~002~CC Mtg 8-21~192-Ted. doc
B A K E R S F I E L D
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
MEMORANDUM
August 30, 2002
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ALAN CHRISTENSEN, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER ~,~
THROUGH: ALAN TANDY, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS - SEPTEMBER 4, 2002 COUNCIL MEETING
PRE-MEETING
There are eight closed session items: 1) through 4) Conferences with legal counsel regarding existing
litigation; 5) Conference with Real Property Negotiator regarding 900 13th Street; 6) Conference with
Real Property Negotiator regarding 825 14th Street; and 7) and 8) Conferences with Real Property
Negotiator regarding properties at Fairfax Road at Alfred Harrell Highway.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar items are explained by Administrative Reports. Those that should be highlighted
include:
Ordinances:
Item 8i. Ordinance Relatinq to Sewer Use in the Unincorporated Area. The City of Bakersfield has long
held the policy that sewer and water services should not be supplied outside the City limits, thereby
requiring annexation before these services are received. These ordinance amendments establish this
policy and clarify sections of the Municipal Code that did not conform to the annexation policy.
Item 8i. First Readinq of Ordinances relatinq to Appeals of Transportation Impact Fees, and Conditional
Use Permits (CUP) and Zone Chanqes. One chapter of the Municipal Code provides for an appeal to
the County when a developer was denied a transportation impact fee credit. The County does not wish
to be a part of the appellate process, so the ordinance will strike the County's involvement and place the
appeal solely within the purview of the City Council. The second ordinance will clarify the number of
days one has to appeal a decision from the BZA or Planning Commission of modifications of CUP's and
zone changes.
Item 8k. First Readinq of an Ordinance adoptinq a Neqative Declaration and amendinq the zoninq from
A to R1 on 38 acres at the Northeast Corner of McKee Road and Wible Road. The applicant proposes
development on the east side of Wible Road, potentially to develop 275 dwelling units. The project site is
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AUGUST 30, 2002
PAGE ?.
in the process of being annexed to the City, which is anticipated to be completed by the end of this
calendar year.
Resolutions:
Item 81. Resolution of Application for Annexation of Uninhabited Territory. The proposed annexation
consists of approximately 200 acres in two 100-acre areas. One is located at the northwest corner of
Stockdale Highway and Renfro Road, and the second is located at the southwest corner of Pacheco and
Cottonwood Roads.
Item 8p. Resolution Approvinq Destruction of Certain Obsolete City Records. This Resolution
authorizes the Public Works Department to destroy obsolete records and reports. The Government
Code permits destruction of certain public records upon the approval of the City Attorney and a resolution
adopted by Council. The destruction schedule is marked aS Exhibit "A" to the Resolution.
Item 8q. Resolution in Opposition to Proposed Presidential Executive.Order AIIowinq Forei.qn Vehicles to
Operate Within the United States without Adequate Environmental Protections. This resolution is being
brought before Council at the request of Councilmembers Sue Benham and Mike Maggard. President
Bush is proposing within the next few weeks to issue an Executive Order which would open the Mexican
border to cross-border trucking. Along with other border states, this will have an immediate and
extremely negative effect upon the air quality in California, the San Joaquin Valley, and the City of
Bakersfield. The resolution opposes the President's proposal to open the border to foreign trucks not
meeting the environmental standards of the United States. Actions of the type proposed could place
local communities at risk of federal sanctions if clean air deadlines are not met.
Aqreements:
Item 8u. Bakersfield Amtrak Track Inspection and Maintenance. The Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) has determined that the City's track requires twice weekly inspections. FRA requires the owner of
track to either have staff'perform the work, or a contract with an approved inspector and maintenance
company. As a result of reviewing RFQ&P submittals, staff recommends that the inspection Consultant
Agreement for this project be awarded to Niemeyer & Associates, P.C. based on their combination of
qualifications and fee proposal being the most favorable to the City. Additionally, three railroad
maintenance firms submitted time and materials fee proposals that were evaluated based upon travel
distance, time and materials rates, and per diem charges. Staff recommends that the Maintenance
Contract for this project be awarded to Marta Track Constructors, Inc. based upon their overall lowest fee
proposal. The contract has a not-to-exceed amount of $15,000 per. year for maintenance and repair.
These costs are reimbursable under the Public Transit Claim Funds as monitored by KernCOG.
Item 8v. Restoration Community Project, Inc. Infill Housinq Proiect. Due to the declining health of their
executive director, Affordable Homes, Inc. (AHI) was unable to complete their agreement and asked to
be released from the contract. Restoration Community Project, Inc. (RCPI) is recommended to replace
AHI to provide training, education, socialization and empowerment for at-risk youth. Their program is
called Youth Building Bakersfield. RCPI will use $170,789 of the $195,000 in HOME CHDO funds to
purchase and rehabilitate substandard housing in the Southeast Bakersfield Infill Housing target area.
The remainder of funds, $24,211, will be used for eligible CHDO operating expenses, including employee
costs to administer the program. All homes will be sold to Iow income residents and proceeds from the
sale will be reinvested into the program. RCPI will purchase and rehabilitate not less than five homes,
while training ten youths in a_three_year period. The estimated cost to purchase and rehabilitate each
unit is $85,000, which includes on the job training costs. Projects will be located primarily in census tract
22.
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AUGUST 30, 2002
PAGE 3
Item 8w. Contract Chanqe Order Related to the Buena Vista Trunk Sewer Phase II and Wideninq of
Buena Vista Road from San Joaquin Valley Railroad to White Lane in the amount of $91,016.37. During
the course of construction, the Contractor had to remove a substantial amount of dirt that was not clearly
identified on the plans. In addition, driveways on Buena Vista Road need to be regraded and paved to
meet the new roadway grades. The contractor has agreed to accept a lump sum price of $46,016.37 as
full compensation for this change. During the process of construction of the sewer under the roadway on
Buena Vista Road at Panama Lane, soil was discovered that was discolored and had a very strong
petroleum smell. After investigating the Condition, OSHA determined that the soil condition had to be
reclassified, which requires the contractor to employ additional safety measures which were unforeseen
during the bidding process. The contractor has agreed to accept $45,000.00 as full compensation for
employing these unforeseen safety measures. Sufficient funds are available within the project budget.
Bids:
Item 8x. Award Contract to Granite Construction Company for street materials. This contract is used to
provide asphalt material for street repairs. Two acceptable bids were received. Staff recommends
award of contract to Granite Construction in an amount not to exceed $1,200,000.
Item 8z. Accept Bid from Downtown Ford Sales for 45 Police Sedans (40 Replacement and 5
Additional). Three acceptable bids were received. Staff recommends the contract be awarded to
Downtown Ford Sales in the amount of $1,038,887.63.
Item 8aa. Accept Bid from Thorp's Harley Davidson, Inc. for Eiqht Replacement Police Motorcycles.
One acceptable bid was received. Staff recommends award to Thorp's Harley Davidson, Inc. in the
amount of $139,423.28.
Miscellaneous:
Item 8bb. Appointment of Leaque Votinq Deleqate and Alternate to Annual Conference. Each year, the
Council appoints a voting delegate and alternate to represent the City's position on resolutions at the
League of California Cities Annual Conference. The Legislative and Litigation Committee recommend
the appointment of City Attorney Bart Thiltgen as delegate and City Manager Alan Tandy as alternate.
Item 8cc. Revisions to Miscellaneous Departments Civil Service Rules and Requlations. The
Miscellaneous Civil Service Rules and Regulations have been updated to incorporate current
terminology, state laws and clarify language to be consistent with actual practice. Those that have been
updated include Definitions, Veteran's Credits, Additional Credits and Reemployment/Reinstatement
Lists. CCAPE endorses the revisions, and the Miscellaneous Civil Service Board approved them on
August 20, 2002.
Item 8dd. Revised Job Specifications. At the request of the General Services Superintendent, the job
specifications for Electrical Technician I, Electrical Technician II and Traffic Signal Technician have been
reviewed and updated. CCAPE endorses the revisions, and the Miscellaneous Civil Service Board will
review them on September 17, 2002.
HEARINGS
Item 9a. Public Hearinq on Proposed Expenditures of Bureau of Justice Assistance Local Law
Enforcement Block Grant Funds. In June 2002, the Police Department was awarded a $193,332 Local
Law Enforcement Block Grant from the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA). The purpose is to provide
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AUGUST 30, 2002
PAGE 4
local units with funds to underwrite projects to reduce crime and improve public safety. The Police
Department desires to use these funds to develop and implement a Wireless Local Area Network
(WLAN) which would allow the department to remotely upgrade software in patrol vehicle MDC's. The
remaining funds will upgrade the aging communications center radios and consoles. The total program
cost is $214,813, the BJA will provide $193,332 (90%), and the City is required to pay the remaining
$21,481. A number of grant conditions must first be met, including that at least one public hearing be
held.
Item 9b. Continued Hearinq of Concurrent General Plan Amendment and Zone Chancle for the
Northwest Corner of Jewetta Avenue and Brimhall Road. This item was continued by the City Council at
the May 22, 2002, June 12, 2002 and August 21, 2002, meetings in order for the applicant and
surrounding property owners to discuss the project and come to a decision. This amendment to the
General Plan would permit the development of Office Commercial uses on the project site. The City of
Bakersfield has been working with the property owner to acquire right-of-way for the improvement of both
Brimhall and Jewetta Roads. For the property owner's cooperation, staff agreed to request this change
in zone. Opposition from the neighboring residential property owners to the north and west of the project
site surfaced during the Planning Commission hearings. Concerns ranged from location of the office
building to traffic generated by the project. The Planning Commission recommended adoption and
approval of the General Plan Amendment as requested with a condition that the developer submit a
Planned Commemial Development zone prior to development of the site. The Planning Commission
recommended denial of the zone change, The applicant (City staff) is appealing the Planning
Commission's decision in order to receive a zone district designation for the site prior to completion of
the annexation to the city limits. If this action is approved, the City will be able to complete greatly
needed improvements on both Brimhall Road and Jewetta Road. There is no commercial office zoning
within a mile of this site. There is a great need to provide professional office opportunities in this
neighborhood so that people may work close to where they live. Approving a CO/PCD zone district
achieves the intent of both the Planning Commission and the property owner while providing a forum for
the neighborhood to discuss the project when development plans are finalized.
Item 9c. Continued Hearinq of an Ordinance Upholdinq the Decision of the Planninq Commission for the
Southeast Corner of Mt. Vernon Avenue and State Hiqhway 178. This item was continued from the June
26, 2002, July 31, 2002, and August 21, 2002 City Council meetings at the request of. the applicant to
have more time to work out issues relating to road design. Councilman Maggard in his discussion about
the request for continuance expressed concerns he also wanted to address in the hearing. These
included the number of lanes, sidewalks, bus stops and architectural style. The applicant informs staff
that they are very close to resolving the circulation issues. However, at the time this report was written,
no additional information had been submitted.
Ite. m 9d. Resolution Upholdinq the Decision of the Planninq Commission Approvinq the Revised Vestinq
Tentative Tract Map and Neqative Declaration, and Denyinq the Appeal by the Riverlakes Ranch Master
Association. To allow discussions with the applicants and appellants, the hearing was continued from
the August 21, 2002 meeting to September 4, 2002. The RiverLakes Ranch Master Association, the
homeowners association for the RiverLakes development has filed an appeal contending the Negative
Declaration is inadequate in the areas of consistency with the General Plan and the RiverLakes Ranch
Specific Plan (as amended), traffic analysis, population and housing, and public services and recreation.
During the June 6, 2002 public hearing before the Planning Commission, several hours of public
testimony was taken from approximately 20 area residents. Speakers expressed several concerns about
the proposed project including: 1) additional traffic congestion and safety concerns, especially on
Southshore Drive and RiverLakes Drive; 2) lack of street access to Coffee Road from the project site; 3)
use of recreational amenities by apartment residents without membership in the RiverLakes
Homeowners Association; and density. Similar public testimony was taken by the Planning Commission
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
AUGUST 30, 2002
PAGE $
during the July 18, 2002 hearing. As stated in the letter submitted by the RiverLakes Ranch Master
Association appealing the Planning Commission's decision (Exhibit "D"), it is their opinion that the Initial
Study was in error or incomplete. Many of these statements appear to be personal opinions and no
evidence on the record was provided. Staff would recommend the Council affirm the decision of the
Planning Commission, and deny the appeal.
Item 9e. Ordinance Adoptinq the Neqative Declaration and Amendinq the Municipal code for 7.92 Acres
alonq the southwest Corner of Callowa¥ Drive and Norieqa Road. The City Council conducted the first
reading of the ordinance on August 21, 2002. The Council then continued the zone change until the
.September 4, 2002 public hearing. This PCD combining zone would permit the development of any use
allowed by the C-O zoning district. Conditional uses are also permitted in the C-O/PCD; however, once
the PCD zone is effective conditional uses must be processed subject to Section17.64 of the Municipal
Code.
REPORTS
Item 10a. City Manaqer's Report reqardinq the Aquatic Center and Ice Rink Budqet, and the Martin
Luther Kinql Jr. Pool and Jefferson Pool Budqets. The City Manager will give a report on the proposed
budget for the Aquatic Center and Ice Rink, which has one combined budget due to the fact that both
projects share costs and facilities. Rossetti and Associates are under contract to work on the refinement
of the cost estimates. It is estimated at this time to cost between $9 million and $10 million, depending
on the feasibility of the Olympic or competitive elements being constructed. The Kern High School
District has been approached to participate financially. Should they decide not to participate, funds will
be needed through the City's revenue sources.
Staff recommends the following:
1) That the new aquatic facility near 14th at P/Q Street be designed as a top quality zero-entry pool
with water spray elements, slides, diving, and lap lanes. In essence, a small waterpark.
2) That $668,625 be added to the project budget from the following sources: 1) $230,000 reserved for
beautification in that area, 2) $438,625 from "frozen" budget funds.
3) That we continue to advance a plan to replace more of our deteriorated and aging aquatic facilities,
including competitive swim elements, with Proposition 40 money, contributions from the High
School District, and other sources of funds. We will work with a High School District Committee to
bring forward a specific plan for a new aquatic facility with competitive elements. To demonstrate
the sincerity of desire to move to a real plan, we propose to reserve $1.0 million from Proposition 40
money for that purpose.
4) Re-designate $159,285 in block grant funds to the MLK and Jefferson pool projects. These funds
were initially budgeted for a storm drain project that was canceled.
Other more expensive alternatives with more amenities are outlined in the administrative report.
AT:AC:al
cc: Department Heads
City Clerk's Office
News Media File