HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/27/2006 Q NOTICE:. OFSPECIAL .JOINT MEETiNR "~
.OF THE .:.
BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL ·
AND THE KERN COUNTY'
BOARD OF:SUPERVISORs
NOTICE. IS HEREBY GIVEN 'that the BakerSfield CityCouncil and the Kern COuntY:Board.
°f:SuPervisors will h'oid.aSPecial JOint. Meeting on Monday, FebruarY-2?, 2006:, at
5=3OP.m'' in th'e City'C°un~il'Chambers, ~i' 501'~ruxtun AVenue, Baker~iieid' Califbrnia~
Esl~mated
St~t:~irne
5i~op.m.. 1. INVOCATIONby. pastOr Freddie L~ Thomas, Thejerusalem.Missi0n.
2. FLAG SALuTE' by.: Rachel Sanders,.4t".Grade Student at Almondale ElementarY.SChoOl~
.3,: .ROLL CALL:
:4., OPENING REMARKS'BY MAYOR. HARVEY L. HALL
5, 'OPENING REMARKS BY:CHAIRMAN BARBARA PATRICK
5:40p.m. 6. ipUBLIC. STATEMENTS
7,. BUSINESS ITEMS '
6:oo p.m. A. Update:On Federal Highway Funding and LOcal Transportation Project..PriodtY and.
Administration (Th°maS ROads)i (CitY iAgendaltem):.Hear CitySiaff Preser~tation:by
Public Works Director RaUl. Rojas~ RECOMMENDED.ACTION: APPROVE; ADOPT
JOINT RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF AB1858.
6:2o:p.n~. B. Update:on Local Transportation :SafeRoads'Ballot ~Measure; (Joint:Agenda Item) -
Hea~ City Staff Presentation by PubliC.Works Director. RaUl Rojas and County Staff
Presentation by ReSOurce Management AgencyDirector David Price,/11,
-~:40 p.~. Ci Update on General Plan Review process (JOint:Agenda Item) ,~ HearCitY Staff
t~res entation .bY Deveiopment SerViCes DireCtor i S~an. Gra dy,' bountY, sta ·
Presentation bY.Planning Director Ted James~ and PresentatiOn .b~.Vision:2020
Representative~
7:00 p~m D. Report on Fire.Station 65'; (COunty Agenda Item) '~HearCounty. Staff Presentation by
Fire Chief Dennis Thompson and CommentS by'City. Manager Alan Tandy.
7:.~ s p.rnE, Fireworks RegulatiOns: Review: (City Agenda Item) - Hear. City StaffPresentatiOnby
Fire Chief Ron Fraze. ·
7:3Sp~m F. Habitat ~Conservation Program: (JointAgenda Item) - HearCity Staff Presentationby
Development Services;Director Stan GradY and COUnty Staff Presentation by Planning
Director Ted James.
:,:so p.r..G. South BeltwaY. Alignment~ (Joint Agenda Item)-iHear City staff.PresentatiOnby
PUblic. Works Directo/~.Raul Rojas: and County:Staff. Presentation .by Planning'. Director
Ted'Jarnes ar~d RoadS DireCtor.Craig Pope;
7, BUSINESS ITEMS'continued
8:00 p.m. H. Report on: forming :a jOint task. force '(with members:from City/County staff.and related
agencies): to assure respOnsible groWth and planning for the fUture: (County Agenda
Item ) -Hear COunty Staff.Presentation by. ReSource Management Agency Director
DaVid: Price, Iff;
8:~Sp.m. I. Animal'COntml (county. Agenda Item) -'Hear. C°unty Staff PresentatiOn by Resource
Management Agency Director'David Price, Iii~
8:30 p.m. J: Status Report.on Metropolitan Bakersfield Solid:Waste TransferStation.Siting~
(C°ntinue~l 'frOm. 02/28i~)5 &'09/i'9/05 meetings) (joint A'gendaltem)', Hear:City: Staff.
Pr/esentation by.:SOlid-Waste. Director Kevin Bames and County' Staff Presentation by
Waste Management Director Daphne Harley,
8:45 p.m K; Regulating:Body. Art ShOpS, (County, Agenda Item)- HearCountY Staff. Presentation
by Environmental Health SerVices Director Steve McCailey.
9~p.m. 8. CLOSING COMMENTS BY BOARD MEMBERS AND'CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
9:osp,,~, 9. CLOSING COMMENTSBY CHAIRMAN BARBARA PATRICK
9:10p.rn, 10; CLOSING COMMENTS BY MAYOR HARVEY L HALL
11. ADJOURNMENT
i Resp2e;~ff, llY sUbmitt.~d,.
AianTandy
City:Manager
2/t 6v'2006 '12~i7.:PM. :'
WELCOME TO THE JOINT MEETING
OF THE
BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL
AND
KERN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
THE BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL AND THE KERN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WELCOME YOU TO THEIR JOINT MEETING.
HOPEFULLY YOU WILL FIND THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION HELPFUL. IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH
DISABILITIES ACT, THE CHAMBER IS ACCESSIBLE TO PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES. IF YOU NEED SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO
PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING, OR HAVE QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT EITHER PAMELA A. McCARTHY, CITY CLERK AT (661)
326-3767, OR DENISE PENNELL, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AT (661) 868-3585, DURING REGULAR BUSINESS
HOURS.
LEGEND
1 - Irma Carson, Councilmember First Ward 11 - Michael Rubio, Supervisor Fifth District
2 -Jon McQuiston, Supervisor, First District 12 - Jacquie Sullivan, Councilmember Sixth Ward
3 - Sue Benham, Councilmember, Second Ward 13 - Zack Scrivner, Councilmember, Seventh Ward
4 - Don Maben, Supervisor, Second District 14 - Bernard C. Barmann, County Counsel
5 - David Couch, Councilmember, Fourth Ward 15 - Ronald M. Errea, County Administrative Officer
6 - Barbara Patrick, Chairman, Third District 16 - Alan E. Tandy, City Manager
7 - Harvey L. Hall, Mayor, City of Bakersfield 17 - Ginny Gennaro, City Attomey
8 - Mike Maggard, Vice-Mayor, Third Ward 18 - Denise Pennell, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
9 - Ray Watson, Supervisor, Fourth District 19 - Pamela A. McCarthy, City Clerk
10- Harold Hanson, Councilmember, Fifth Ward 20 - Media
Conduct of the Meeting
This joint proceeding will be chaired by the Mayor of the City of Bakersfield, Harvey L. Hall. It will be governed under "Robert's
Rules of Order" on all matters pertaining to parliamentary law.
PUBLIC COMMENTS MAY BE MADE BY THE FOLLOWING GUIDELINES:
Persons may address the Governing Bodies during the Public Statements portion of the meeting, or at the time a specific agenda
item is called. Statements are limited to three (3) minutes per speaker. The public will have the opportunity to comment on any
item on the agenda, however, the Mayor, at his discretion, may limit speakers to fifteen (15) minutes per subject to assure that all
items on the agenda can be completed.
Additionally, you may provide your wdtten comments to the City Clerk, or send wdtten communication addressed to the City
Council, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301, or Clerk of the Board, Kern County Board of Supervisors, 1115 Truxtun
Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301.
...... oOo .......
NOTICE OF SPECIAL JOINT MEETING
OF THE
BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL
AND THE KERN COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Bakersfield City Council and the Kern County Board
of Supervisors will hold a Special Joint Meeting on Monday, February 27, 2006, at
5:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California.
Estimated
Start Time
5:30p.m. 1. INVOCATION by Pastor Freddie L. Thomas, The Jerusalem Mission
2. FLAG SALUTE by Rachel Sanders, 4th Grade Student at Almondale Elementary School.
3. ROLL CALL
4. OPENING REMARKS BY MAYOR HARVEY L. HALL
5. OPENING REMARKS BY CHAIRMAN BARBARA PATRICK
5:4Op.m.6. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
7. BUSINESS ITEMS
6:00 p.m. A. Update on Federal Highway Funding and Local Transportation Project Priority and
Administration (Thomas Roads). (City Agenda Item) -Hear City Staff Presentation by
Public Works Director Raul Rojas. RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVE; ADOPT
JOINT RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF AB 1858.
6:20 p.m. B. Update on Local Transportation Safe Roads Ballot Measure. (Joint Agenda Item) -
Hear City Staff Presentation by Public Works Director Raul Rojas and County Staff
Presentation by Resource Management Agency Director David Price, III.
6:40 p.m. C. Update on General Plan Review Process (Joint Agenda Item) - Hear City Staff
Presentation by Development Services Director Stan Grady, County Staff
Presentation by Planning Director Ted James, and Presentation by Vision 2020
Representative.
7:00 p.m D. Report on Fire Station 65. (County Agenda Item) - Hear County Staff Presentation by
Fire Chief Dennis Thompson and Comments by City Manager Alan Tandy.
7:15 p.m E. Fireworks Regulations Review. (City Agenda Item) - Hear City Staff Presentation by
Fire Chief Ron Fraze.
7:35 p.m F. Habitat Conservation Program. (Joint Agenda Item) - Hear City Staff Presentation by
Development Services Director Stan Grady and County Staff Presentation by Planning
Director Ted James.
7:20 p.m. G. South Beltway Alignment. (Joint Agenda Item) - Hear City Staff Presentation by
Public Works Director Raul Rojas and County Staff Presentation by Planning Director
Ted James and Roads Director Craig Pope.
7. BUSINESS ITEMS continued
8:00 p.m. H. Report on forming a joint task force (with members from City/County staff and related
agencies) to assure responsible growth and planning for the future. (County Agenda
Item) - Hear County Staff Presentation by Resource Management Agency Director
David Price, III.
8:~5 p.m. I. Animal Control (County Agenda Item) - Hear County Staff Presentation by Resource
Management Agency Director David Price, II1.
8:30 p.m. J. Status Report on Metropolitan Bakersfield Solid Waste Transfer Station Siting.
(Continued from 02/28/05 & 09/19/05 meetings) (Joint Agenda Item) - Hear City Staff
Presentation by So/id Waste Director Kevin Barnes and County Staff Presentation by
Waste Management Director Daphne Harley.
8:45 p.m. K. Regulating Body Art Shops. (County Agenda Item) - Hear County Staff Presentation
by Environmental Health Services Director Steve McCalley.
9:00p.m. 8. CLOSING COMMENTS BY BOARD MEMBERS AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
9:05 p.m. 9. CLOSING COMMENTS BY CHAIRMAN BARBARA PATRICK
9:10p.m. 10. CLOSING COMMENTS BY MAYOR HARVEY L. HALL
11. ADJOURNMENT
Respectfully submitted,
/'~ ×/
Alan Tandy
City Manager ?"
S:\CounciI'~,GENDA~005~JT CITY COUNTY Feb 27 06.doc
2/16/2006 12:17 PM
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
I
JOINT CITY/COUNTY I AGENDA SECTION: Business
MEETING DATE: February 27, 2006 I ITEM: '-7, A,
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED
FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director DEPARTMENT HEAD /J/~"
DATE: February 10, 2006 CITY ATTORNEY ¢'"'~'
CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: Thomas Roads Improvement Program (City Agenda Item).
1.) Update on Federal Highway Funding and Local Transportation Project
Administration - City Staff Presentation by Public Works Director Raul Rojas.
2.) Resolution of Support for Assembly Bill 1858.
RECOMMENDATION: Hear staff report and adopt resolution.
BACKGROUND: Due to the efforts of Congressman Thomas, the approval of the SAFETEA-LU
Federal Transportation Bill this past August resulted in the metropolitan Bakersfield area receiving $630
million of federal funding over the next 4-5 years for the construction of the Centennial Corridor Loop, the
widening of SR178 through the Westchester area including an interchange with Oak Street, the North
Beltway (7th Standard Road), the West Beltway, the SR178 freeway, the widening of Rosedale Highway,
the widening of SR178 in northeast Bakersfield, and for the route adoption of the South Beltway.
This program of projects is a massive undertaking even just anticipating conventional timelines. BUt it is
both the Congressman's and the City's desire to construct these projects as quickly as possible, using
creative and innovative processes and compressing the work into a much shorter window than historically
has occurred. The City has leased half of the third floor of the Borton-Petrini Building to house City,
County, Caltrans, and consultant staff who will be working on the program. The Kern Council of
Governments has amended the Federal Transportation Improvement Program for the County to include
an initial $100,000,000 of the Thomas Roads funding to begin the preliminary engineering and the
environmental work for these projects. The City has also entered into a master cooperative agreement
with Caltrans to initiate some of the new and innovative ideas being developed to expedite the delivery of
the Thomas Roads Projects.
Nearly all of the environmental, engineering, and design work for this program of projects will be
completed by consultants. And the City has hired a Program Manager, Parsons Transportation Group,
who will directly manage the consultants preparing the environmental documents, completing the
engineering, and preparing the project designs and construction documents. Key Parsons management
staff will be housed with City, County and Caltrans staff on the third floor of the Borton-Petrini Building, but
Parsons is also leasing half of the fourth floor of the Building for Parsons support staff. Parsons will be
having 8-10 personnel living in Bakersfield and working full time on the program, in addition to 10-20 other
February 15, 2006. 12:24PM
G:\GROUPDA'T'~ADMINRPT~2006\02-27 Joint City_County\Federal Highway Funding.doc
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
staff and a dozen subconsultants who will be called in as needed for workload and for their expertise.
Parsons staff will also be presenting a brief introduction and outlining some of their ideas to expedite
project delivery.
Widening of Rosedale Highway (State Route 58) from 4 lanes to 6 lanes from SR99 west to Allen Road,
and then from 2 lanes to 4 lanes from Allen Road west to Enos Lane is one of the Thomas Roads projects
that will greatly help congestion. Assembly Bill 1858 will authorize the California Transportation
Commission to relinquish these segments of Rosedale Highway from state control to City and County
control, which will then allow the use of local standards for this widening project. Assemblyman McCarthy
has proposed this legislation as another way to expedite project delivery and minimize impacts to adjacent
properties. Under Caltrans standards, the widening would require 10 feet wide outside shoulders and 8
feet wide inside shoulders (next to the median), or an additional total of 36 feet more width than what
exists today. Using City and County standards, the majority of this widening project can be accomplished
within the existing right of way with minimal impact to adjacent businesses. And not having to process
design documents through Caltrans will also expedite the project development process. After the
relinquishment occurs, the route will still be posted and shown on maps as State Route 58.
February 15, 2006, 12:24PM
G:\GROUPDA'ISADMINRP~2006\02-27 Joint City_County\Federal Highway Funding.doc
' ' CITY OFBAKERSFiELD
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Chairperson Patrick and Board of Supervisor Members
FROM: Raul Rojas, City of Bakersfield Public Works Directo~
DATE: February 27, 2006
SUBJECT: FEBRUARY 27, 2006 JOINT MEETING OF THE BAKERSFIELD CITY
COUNCIL AND THE KERN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Agenda 'Item 7.A. - Joint Resolution in Support of AB 1858
At the Bakersfield City Council meeting of February 22, 2006, Councilmember David Couch
(Ward 4) requested that the relinquishment of State Route 204 be included in AB 1858, the
legislation Assembly Member Kevin McCarthy has recently introduced to authorize the
California Transportation Commission to relinquish Rosedale Highway to the City and County.
Currently, State Route 204 is operated and maintained by Caltrans. Due to Caltrans'
standards pertaining to State Routes, they could not approve the concept of the Hageman
Flyover project connecting to State Route 204 (Golden State Avenue). The proposed
Hageman Flyover will connect Golden State Avenue east of State Route 99 with Hageman
Road west of State Route 99, providing much needed congestion relief to the parallel .routes
of Rosedale Highway and Olive Drive. Relinquishment of State Route 204 will allow the
Hageman Flyover project to move forward.
Also, the City requested the AB 1858 legislation include the relinquishment of 24th Street
(State Route 178) in the Westchester area where widening of the road is proposed. This
State Route 178 relinquishment will allow the widening to occur with less impacts and
disruption to the Westchester neighborhood than if the project were constructed to Caltrans
standards.
BEFORE Tim BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
AND THE
BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL
In the matter of: SUPPORT FOR AB 1858: Resolution No.
AUTHORIZING RELINQUISHMENT Reference No.
OF RoSEDALE HIGHWAY PORTION
OF STATE ROUTE 58
I, DENISE PENNELL, Clerk of the Board of supervisors of the County of Kern, State of
California, hereby certify that the following resolution, on motion of Supervisor .,
seconded by Supervisor , was duly and regularly adopted by the Board of
Supervisors of the County of Kern at an official meeting thereof on the day of .,
2006, by the following vote and that a copy of the resolution has been delivered to the Chairman of the
Board of Supervisors.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DENISE PENNELL
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
County of Kern, State of California
Deputy Clerk
RESOLUTION
Section 1. WHEREAS:
(a) H.R.3, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005,
authorizes federal funding for projects that will improve traffic flow in the metropolitan
Bakersfield area; and
/
1
(b) The Rosedale Highway portion of State Route 58, the 23rd and 24th Street portion of Stat~
Route 178 and State Route 204 are is critically overburdened with traffic congestion that
carries high environmental and economic costs and poses a serious threat to public safety;
and
(c) The Act earmarks funding for the City of Bakersfield and the County of Kern to widen
Rosedale Highway, widen State Route 178 between State Route 99 and D Street, and to
construct the Hageman Flyover to accommodate greater traffic volume and relieve
congestion on thig these heavily traveled corridors; and
(d) The California Department of Transportation currently maintains State Route 58, State
Route 178 and State Route 204; and
(e) Assembly Member Kevin McCarthy has introduced AB 1858, legislation to authorize the
California Transportation Commission to relinquish the Rosedale Highway portion of
State Route 58 between Enos Lane and State Route 99 to the City and County, to
relinquish the 23rd and 24th Street portion of State Route 178 between State Route 99 and
M Street to the City, and to relinquish State Route 204 between State Route 99 and State
Route 58 to the City; and
(f) Relinquishment of Rosedale Highway to City and County control and 24th Street to City
control will enable faster study, design, and construction of a-~ additional traffic lanes in
each direction of these this heavily congested corridors with less disruption to existing
businesses located along Rosedale Highway and to existing residences located along 24th
Street than if the projects were constructed to Caltrans standards; and
(g) RelinquiShment of State Route 204 to City control will enable the Hageman Flyover
project to move forward, which would not be possible if the project were to be designed
and constructed to Caltrans standards;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the Kern Coun[y Board of Supervisors
and the Bakersfield City Council that:
1. The City Council and the Board of Supervisors strongly support AB 1858 and urge its
swift enactment by the Legislature and the Governor; and
2. The City Council and the Board of Supervisors direct that a copy of this resolution shall
be forwarded to the appropriate members of the Legislature and the Governor
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
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBER CARSON, BENHAM, MAGGARD, COUCH, HANSON, SULLIVAN, SCRIVNER
NOES: COUNCILMI:MBER
ABSTAIN: OOUNCILMEMBER
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER
PAMELA A. McCARTHY, CMC
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
'APPROVED:
HARVEY L. HALL
Mayor of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED astoform
VIRGINIA GENNARO
City Attorney
BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
AND TI-W~
BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL
In the matter of: SUPPORT FOR AB 1858: Resolution No.
AUTHORIZING RELINQUISHMENT Reference No.
OF ROSEDALE HIGHWAY PORTION
OF STATE ROUTE 58
I, DENISE PENNELL, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Kern, State of
California, hereby certify that the following resolution, on motion of Supervisor ,
seconded by Supervisor , was duly and regularly adopted by the Board of
Supervisors of the County of Kern at an official meeting thereof on the day of ,
2006, by the following vote and that a copy of the resolution has been delivered to the Chairman of the
Board of Supervisors.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
DENISE PENNELL
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
County of Kern, State of California
Deputy Clerk
RESOLUTION
Section 1. WHEREAS:
(a) H.R. 3, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005, authorizes
federal funding for projects that will improve traffic flow in the metropolitan Bakersfield area;
and
(b) The Rosedale Highway portion of State Route 58 is critically overburdened with traffic
congestion that carries high environmental and economic costs and poses a serious threat to
public safety; and
(c) The Act earmarks funding for the City of Bakersfield and the County of Kern to widen Rosedale
Highway to accommodate greater traffic volume and relieve congestion on this heavily traveled
corridor; and
(d) The California Department of Transportation currently maintains State Route 58; and
(e) Assembly Member Kevin McCarthy has introduced AB 1858, legislation to authorize the
California Transportation Commission to relinquish the Rosedale Highway portion of State Route
58 between Enos Lane and State Route 99 to the City and County; and
'(f) Relinquishment of Rosedale Highway to City and County control will enable faster study, design,
and construction of an additional traffic lane in each direction of this heavily congested corridor
with less disruption to existing businesses located along Rosedale Highway than if the project
were constructed to Caltrans standards;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the Kem County Board of Supervisors and the
Bakersfield City Council that:
1. The City Council and the Board of Supervisors strongly support AB 1858 and urge its swift
enactment by the Legislature and the Governor; and
2. The City Council and the Board of Supervisors direct that a copy of this resolution shall be
forwarded to the appropriate members of the Legislature and the Governor.
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 ,,
by the following vote:
AYES: COUNClLMEMBER COUCH, CARSON, BENHAM, MAGGARD. HANSON, SULLIVAN, SCRIVNER
NOES: COUNCILMEMBER
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER
ABSENT: COUNClLMEMBER
PAMELA A. McCARTHY, CMC
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED
HARVEY L. HALL
MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
VIRGINIA GENNARO
City Attorney
By:
The 7th Standard Road Projects
7th Standard Road,
Currently
?th Standard Road from
Santa Fe Way to Wings Way
· Two Lane Road
· Two At-Grade Railroad Crossings
· Length 8.2 ~iles
7th Standard Road
Project Plan
Railroad Overcrossing Railroad Overcrossing and
at Santa Fe Way Interchange at Hwy 99
[William M. Thomas
Air Terminal
Widening Widening
Santa Fe Way to Wings Way
7th Standard Road
Funding Sources
· Joint Agency Agreement- Bakersfield, Shafter,
Kern County, Separation of Grade District
· State Section 190 Grade Separation
· Railroads Contribution (UP' BN&SF)
· State Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP)
· State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)
· Caltrans State Highway Operation & Protection Plan
(SHOPP)
[] Thomas Money
Phase I
Widening from Hwy 99 to Wings Way
· Estimated Cost $4.5 Million
· Length 1.6 Miles
· Construction Scheduled to Begin July 2006
Phase I
Hwy 99 to Wings Way
Funded Pending
STIP For Engineering $165,000
SHOPP Hwy65 modification $413,000
STIP For Construction-
to CTC 3/06 $2,500,000
Impact Fees $1,500,000
Total$578,000 $4,000,000
Estimated Project Cost $4.5 Mill.ion
Phase II
Railroad Overcrossing and Interchange at Hwy 99
:= From Coffee Road to Hwy 99
= Estimated Cost $24 ~illion
· Length 0.6 Miles
· Construction Scheduled~to~Begin Fall 2006
Phase II
Railroad Overcrossing and Interchange at Hwy 99 '~
Funded to Date
(Million $)
State SOG Section 190 - Exp. 6/07 5.0
TCRP (State) Has been invoiced 1.9
Railroad 0.5
Total $7.4
Phase II
Railroad Overcrossing and Interchange at Hwy 99
Funds Pending
(Million $)
Kern County Seed Money 3.0 max
City of Bakersfield Seed Money 3.0 max
City of Shafter Seed Money 3.0 max
TCRP (State) Need CTC approval 6.1
STIP for Right of Way FY 05/06-Need CTC apvl 2.5
STIP for Construction FY 06/07-Need CTC apvl 6.374
Thomas Money If needed TBD
Total $23.9
Phase II
Railroad Overcrossing and Interchange at Hwy 99
(Million $)
Funded 7.4
Pending Funds 23.9
Total $31.3
Estimated Project Cost $24 Million
Potential Refund of Seed Money $7.3 Million
Phase III
Widening & Railroad Overcrossing
at Santa Fe Way
· To date, City of Shafter has been the lead
· From Santa Fe Way to Coffee Road
· Estimated Cost $27 ~illion
· Length 6.0 Miles '-
· Construction Scheduled to Begin Fall 2007
7th Standard Road
Conceptual Typical Section
Phase III
Santa Fe Way to Coffee Road and Railroad Overcrossing
Funds Pending
(Million $)
STI P Engineering FY 05/06 1.0
STI P Right of Way FY 06/07-Need CTC apvl 3.5
STIP Construction FY 07/08-Need CTC apvl 11.2
State SOG Section 190 5.0
Railroad Estimate 1.0
Thomas Money If needed 5.3
Total $27.0
Estimated Project Cost $27 Million
Interim Project
Traffic Signal at Coffee Road
Project .Funds
Halliburton $150,000
Impact Fees $200,000
Total $350,000
Estimated Project Cost $350,000
Estimated Completion March 2006
Environmental
All Phases- Received Biological Opinion
January 23, 2006
Phases I and II- CEQA and NEPA
documents to Board of Supervisors for
adoption Spring 2006
Phase III - NEPA document to Board of
Supervisors and City of Shafter for
adoption late ~arch 2006
Schedule
=April 2006 All Phases- Environmental
clearance ~
=July 2006 Phase I- start construction -
estimated 4 months to complete
=November 2006 Phase II- start construction-
estimated 18 months to complete
=Fall 2007 Phase III- start construction -
estimated 18 months to complete
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
IJOINT ClIY/COUNTY I AGENDA SECTION: Business
MEETING DATE: February 27, 2006 ITEM: "'7'. E~.
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED
FROM: Raul M. Rojas, Public Works Director DEPARTMENT HEAD ,~(~
,. -
DATE: February 15, 2006 CITY ATTORNEY
CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: Update on Local Safe Roads Ballot Measure (Joint Agenda Item). Hear City Staff
Presentation by Public Works Director Raul Rojas and County Staff Presentation by
Resource Management Agency Director David Price, III.
RECOMMENDATION: Hear staff report.
BACKGROUND: The City's Public Works Director and the County's Resource Management Agency
Director will provide a report regarding the proposed Local Transportation Measure. Roger Mclntosh who
is the president of the Kern County Citizens for Quality TranSportation, the grassroots committee formed to
promote this measure, will be also be providing a brief update.
PW_Jacques
Wednesday, February 15, 2006 - 2:42:15 PM
G:\GROUPDAT~ADMINRPT~2006\02-27 Joint City_County\haft cent update.doc
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY DAVID PRICE III, DIRECTOR
Community and Economic Development Department. Engineering & Survey Services Department. Environmental Health Services Department. Planning Department. Roads Department
(661) 862-8800 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 350
(800) 552-5376, Menu Option 5 ~ BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2370
Fax: (661) 862-8801 ~ E-maih rma@co.kern.ca.us
TTY Relay: (800) 735-2929 Web Page: http://vvww, co.kern.ca.us/rma/
JOINT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS/BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
February 27, 2006
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION SAFE ROADS BALLOT. MEASURE By: David Price III, RMA Director ~
Since the last joint city-county meeting, considerable work on the Local Transportation
Safe Roads Ballot Measure (measure) has taken place. A draft measure was created in
November, with subsequent revision. The revised draft measure is currently under
review pending finalization. Once the measure is determined to be complete, the.
current plan is for it to be presented before the City Councils of the eleven cities of Kern
County, most likely during the months of April- May. Subsequently in June, the Kern
County Board of Supervisors will be asked to approve placing the measure on the
November, 2006 countywide general election ballot for action by the county's electors.
At tonight's meeting, there will be presentations by both City of Bakersfield and County
of Kern staff. Roger Mclntosh, representing Kern County Citizens for Quality
Transportation and Taxpayers for Traffic Relief will also be making a presentation.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that both the Bakersfield City Council and
the Kern County Board of Supervisors receive and file this report.
Printed on Recycled Pauer
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: February 27, 2006 I AGENDA SECTION: Business [
ITEM: ~. Co
TO: Bakersfield City Joint Council/Kern County Board of Supervisors APPROVED
FROM: City of Bakersfield Development Services Department/
Kern County Planning Department
DATE: February 8, 2006
DEPARTMENT HEAD ~
CITY ATTORNEY ~)/Z~
CITY MANAGER /~.'
SUBJECT: Report Regarding Updating the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan
RECOMMENDATION:
Direct City and County staff to pursue a joint update to the Metropolitan Bakersfield General
Plan.
BACKGROUND:
At the Council and Boards last joint meeting of September 19, 2005, the Board and Council
directed staff to investigate the potential of preparing a joint City/County update to the
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan.
City and County staff are recommending that the City and County pursue such an update. A
general description of such a program is provided below.
GOALS: The Goals of the General Plan Update would be to:
Clearly communicate the extent of urbanization projected within the City/County Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan Boundary.
Add~ess issues of special interest including agriculture land conversion, air quality, patterns of
development, traffic and circulation. This would likely result in new mitigation programs and
development policies and ordinances.
Update plan data assumptions based on projected buildout of the designated urban areas within
the General Plan.
Provide EIR to evaluate cumulative impacts of projected growth.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Page 2
Collaborate with Bakersfield Vision 2020 to capture community priorities and vision for the future
of Bakersfield. Involve the development and the public in the decision making process.
BENEFITS: Major benefits of a General Plan Update at this time include:
Cumulative Impact Analysis of Urbanization. The EIR prepared for the General Plan could be
tiered off of for Annexations, General Plan Amendments, Zone Changes, Subdivisions and
Public Work projects. Comprehensive mitigation packages would be considered for potentially
significant environmental impacts such as impacts upon air quality conversion of agricultural land
and circulation.
Show areas to be urbanized using an "Urban Reserve" or similar designation.
Communicate long range goals/vision through updated/new policies. (How Bakersfield will grow,
what will it look like)?
COST:
Estimate of Consulting Costs: $700,000 - $900,000 +/(50/50 split with Kern County)
TIME LINE: ..
2 YEARS FROM HIRING OF CONSULTANT.
6 months Visioning process and project description.
18 months project refinement/EIR preparation/hearings.
STEPS in the update process are:
Hire adequate staff (City/County)
Hire consultant (RFP process)
Develop Community Outreach program
Data collection/background reports/mapping
Draft General Plan/EIR
Finalize General Plan/EIR
Hearings
OVERVIEW:
Working with a consultant, the City and County would use a joint City/County Planning
Commission for the visioning process and utilize 20/20 visioning as a means to facilitate the
visioning process. The visioning process would assist in describing the "Project" to be evaluated
in the EIR for the General Plan Update.
The project would include policies and mapping to guide future growth. To make the EIR and
General Plan document most effective in communication and analyzing future growth patterns,
The City and County have discussed using an "Urban Reserve" designation for futUre growth
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Page 3
areas. With areas designated as "Urban Reserve", we would use historic growth patterns and
proposed policies to estimate the intensity and impact of future growth.
Input gained from the visioning process would result in policies which may affect the base
assumptions and the "look" of future development. This general "Urban Reserve" designation
would clearly communicate areas to be urbanized without having to assign land use
classifications and intensities to specific parcels. Assignment of specific land uses to specific
parcels is the most controversial aspect of General Plan Updates and can add years to the
process. We need to act quickly!
It is expected however, that not assigning land uses will result in more emphasis on policy
formation and performance criteria/standards for future growth.
We would also investigate the possibility of creating policies that allow Zone Changes to occur
within the Urban Reserve designation without General Plan Amendments if certain performance
criteria are met. This could assist in reducing the number of General Plan cases, at least for
some land uses.
jm\admim~-27generalplanupdate
tv Fire Chief & Director of
Kern Coun_. Fire Emergency Services
Department &
Office of Emergency Serviceschief Deputy
ROBERT W. KLINOFF
5642 Victor Street · Bakersfield, CA 93308-4056 Deputy Chiefs
Telephone 661-391-7000 · Fax 661~399~2915 PHIL CASTLE
NICK DUNN
TTY Relay Service 1~800~735~2929 MICHAEL CODY
KEVIN H. SCOTT
February 27, 2006
Board of Supervisors
Kern County Administrative Center
1115 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
PRESENTATION ON ANALYSIS OF CURRENT AND FUTURE FIRE PROTECTION
REQUIREMENTS IN METROPOLITAN BAKERSFIELD AREA IN ACCORDANCE .WITH
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF BAKERSFIELD AND COUNTY OF
KERN
Fiscal Impact: None
At the previous joint meeting of the Bakersfield City Council and Kern County Board of
Supervisors, held Monday September 19, 2005, both the City Council and Board of Supervisors
adopted the most recent update of the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) for Fire Protection
Services in the metropolitan Bakersfield Area. On January 25, 2006 the Bakersfield City
Council approved the purchase of property for the relocation of County Station 65 (Rosedale)
that is necessary to make way for the Rosedale Highway widening project. In addition to the
relocation of City Station 5 to near the intersection of White Lane and Union Avenue, future fire
station locations and properties have been identified and/or secured for three (3) additional fire
stations:
County Station 68 - NW Bakersfield; near the intersection of Allen Road and Reina
Road
City Station 12 - NE Bakersfield; near the intersection of Paladino and Morning Drive
City Station 14 - SW Bakersfield; near the intersection of Harris Road and Buena Vista
Road
A number of other additional fire station locations are in the early planning stages, in conjunction
with planned developments including McAIlister Ranch and West Rosedale.
The next step in the process of identifying the specifics of agency responsibilities for
construction of fire stations, the provision of fire protection services, and the timing for each will
be done in accordance with Section I - A - 11 (pages 5 - 6) of the JPA. This will involve the
following steps:
1. Determination of incorporated and unincorporated demographics (land area,
population, and Fire Fund/Fire Fund Equivalent property tax revenues) within
existing fire station response boundaries;
Service · Pride · Commitment
Joint Meeting of the Board of Supervisors and Bakersfield City Council
February 27, 2006
Page 2 of 2
2. Identification of future fire station locations and response boundaries for Stations 65,
68, 12 and 14; and corresponding adjustments to surrounding fire stations' response
boundades;
3. Determination of existing and projected incorporated and unincorporated
demographics (land area, population, and Fire Fund/Fire Fund Equivalent property
tax revenues) generated within future fire station response boundaries and the
surrounding fire stations' response boundaries;
4. Determination of priorities and necessary timing and/or coordination for future fire
station construction, staffing, and any transfers of fire protection responsibilities;
5. Formulation of recommendations by City and County Staff regarding the specific
timing and responsibilities for construction, staffing of future fire stations, and any
necessary transition of fire protection responsibility within the metropolitan
Bakersfield area; and
6. Approval of written plans for future fire stations, relocations of fire stations, and any
transfers of fire protection responsibilities by the City Council and Board of
Supervisors. These plans would become Attachments to the Joint Powers
Agreement.
It is anticipated that this process will require the participation and cooperation of City and
County Staff involving both fire departments, the offices of the City Manager and County
Administrative Officer; and the assistance of additional staff as necessary to develop and
analyze the data that will be required to formulate recommendations for approval.
Therefore, IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Board of Supervisors and Bakersfield City Council
approve the following: hear presentation and receive and file report.
Fire Chief & Director of Emergency Services
Cc: Ron Errea, County Administrative Officer
Mayor Harvey Hall
Members of the Bakersfield City Council
Alan Tandy, Bakersfield City Manager
Ron Fraze, Bakersfield Fire Chief
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: February 27, 2006 I AGENDA SECTION:
I
ITEM: "~. ~'.
TO: City Council and Board of Supervisors
FROM: Ron Fraze, Fire Chief DEPARTMENT HEAD
DATE: February 14, 2006 CITY ATTORNEY
/
CITY MANAGER .,/*/-~
SUBJECT: Information on Fireworks Task Force (Presentation by Ron Fraze, City Fire Chief)
RECOMMENDATION: Receive report.
BACKGROUND: Fire Chief Ron Fraze will present a Power Point Presentation on
the recommendations made by the City/County FireWorks Task Force.
The City Ordinance, with applicable fees, is in the process-Of being amended to reflect the Task Force's
recommendations; the first reading is February 22 and the second reading is March 8, 2006. The
Ordinance will be effective on April 7, 2006.
At the last Joint City/County meeting on September 19, 2005, a recommendation was made to form a
Fireworks Task Force which comprised the following members: Council member Zack Scrivner,
Supervisor Ray Watson, Fire Chiefs Ron Fraze and Dennis Thompson, and fireworks' vendors, supplierS,
and representatives from non-profit organizations.
The goal of the Task Force is to have a cohesive fireworks policy for the metropolitan area agreed upon by
the City Council and the Board of Supervisors. This is a metropolitan area problem and both agencies
must act in unison to curb the problem of illegal fireworks.
February 15, 2006, 9:16AM
S:\SUSAN~Admin Report Word\Fireworks Task Force Feb 2006.doc
O ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
I MEETING DATE: February 27, 2006 AGENDA SECTION: Business
ITEM: '-I, F,
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED
FROM: Stanley C. Grady, Development Services DEPARTMENT HEAD ,,~,-"~. /
DATE: February 14, 2006 CITY ATTORNEY
CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: Report Regarding the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan Mitigation
Fee and Land Acquisition Program
RECOMMENDATION:
City Council and Board of Supervisors receive and file this report
BACKGROUND: ._.
The MBHCP is a comprehensive endangered species conservation planning program that utilizes a
development fee ($1,240 per gross acre) charged at the grading/building permit stage of the
development process to acquire habitat to mitigate for federally and State protected plant and animal
species within the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan area. The MBHCP is being implemented to
assist the development community in complying with State and federal endangered species laws.
In recent years, land costs have increased significantly as well as the transaction cost of finding and
obtaining suitable habitat lands. Program projections of revenue generated in relation to land
acquisition, transaction and endowment costs necessitate revising the 12-year-old mitigation fee rate
to ensure the program has adequate revenue to meet its obligations. Because of this situation, the
MBHCP Implementation Trust Group will be recommending an increase in the mitigation fee amount
in the coming months in order to ensure that the program collects sufficient funds to meet its
obligations for acquiring compensating habitat lands. Public hearings will be scheduled before the
City Council and Board of Supervisors to consider the proposed mitigation fee increase for the
MBHCP program.
In recent years, due to the large amount of development activity, the Implementation Trust Group has
had to acquire more than 2,000 acres each year to meet its contractual obligations with the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game for acquiring compensating
habitat lands. The MBHCP program's property acquisition costS have gone up significantly in recent
years as land values have increased. Whereas in the program's earlier years it was easy to find
available land and willing sellers of property, there presently exists an environment where suitable
qualifying habitat lands are becoming increasingly more difficult to find and require greater effOrt to
negotiate land acquisitions due to the presence of competing interests in the County's real estate
market. Development speculators and the acquisitions undertaken by private interests and public
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Page 2
agencies to create their own habitat banks for endangered species mitigation have added to the
program's difficulties in finding available habitat land.
Because of the aforementioned difficulties in obtaining suitable habitat to keep pace with the high
urban growth rates, the MBHCP Implementation Trust Group intends to seek acquisition lands
outside of Kern County in neighboring San Luis Obispo, Kings and Tulare Counties. Although the
Implementation Trust Group has been resistant to seeking lands outside of Kern County in the past,
the high rate of urban growth and the corresponding obligation to acquire specified habitat for
targeted species (San Joaquin Kit Fox, Tipton Kangaroo Rat, etc), make it necessary to pursue this
option in addition to continuing program efforts to acquire lands within Kern County.
To date, the program has acquired more than 14,000 acres at a cost of $10.5 million, which includes
an enhancement cost and an endowment cost for perpetual maintenance that are forwarded to the
State of California for habitat preserve land management. In eight years, the MBHCP program will
expire unless the City and County intend to extend the conservation program into the future. Given
the significant lead time that is needed to undertake negotiations with the wildlife agencies, the City
and County decision-makers will need to decide whether there is a benefit to continue the program
well in advance of the MBHCP's expiration date.
-PLANNING DEPARTMENT RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY
TED JAMES, AICP, Director DAVtD PRICE III, RMA DIRECTOR
2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 100 Community & Economic Development Department
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2323 Engineering & Survey Services Department
=hone: (661) 862-8600 Environmental Health Services Department
Planning Department
(661) 862-8601 Tn' Relay 1-800-735-2929 Roads Department
E-Mail: planningOce.kern.ca.us
Web Address: www.co.kem.ca.u$1plannlng
JOINT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS/BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
..... _ February 27, 2006
Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan Mitigation Fee
and Acquisition Program
By: Ted James, Kern County Planning Department Director
Stanley Grady, City of Bakersfield Development Services Director
In 1993, the City of Bakersfield and Kern County jointly adopted the Metropolitan Bakersfield
Habitat Conservation Plan (MBHCP) program. The MBHCP is a comprehensive endangered
species conservation planning program that utilizes a development fee ($1,240 per gross acre)
charged at the grading/building permit stage of the development process to acquire habitat to
mitigate for federally and State protected plant and animals species within the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan area. The MBHCP is being implemented to assist the development
community in complying with State and federal endangered species laws.
The MBHCP Implementation Trust Group consisting of the City Development Services Director,
the County Planning Director, a public member and State and federal wildlife agencies utilizes
_program funds to acquire compensating habitat lands for each acre that is converted to
urbanization. Acquired habitat lands are transferred to the State of California for management as
preserve lands. In recent years; land costs have increased significantly as well as the transaction
cost of finding and obtaining suitable habitat lands. Program projections of revenue generated in
relation to land acquisition, transaction and endOwment costs necessitate revising the 12-year-old
mitigation fee rate to ensure the program has adequate revenue to meet its obligations. Because '
of this situation, the MBHCP Implementation Trust Group will be recommending an increase in
the mitigation fee amount in the coming months in order to ensure that the program collects
sufficient funds to meet its obligations for acquiring compensating habitat lands. Public heatings
will be scheduled before the City Council and Board of Supervisors to consider the proposed
mitigation fee increase for the MBHCP program.
In recent years, due to the large amount of development activity, the Implementation Trust
Group has had to acquire more than 2,000 acres each year to meet its contractual obligations ·
with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department ofFish and Game for
acquiring compensating habitat lands. The MBHCP prOgram's property acquisition costs have
gone up significantly in recent years as land values have increased.. Whereas in the program's
earlier years it was easy to find available land and willing sellers of property, there presently
exists an environment where suitable qualifying habitat lands are becoming increasingly more
difficult to find and require greater effort to negotiate land acquisitions due to the presence of
competing interests in the County's real estate market. Development speculators and the
February 27, 2006
Page 2
· acquisitions undertaken by private interests and public agencies to create their own habitat banks
for endangered species mitigation have added to the program's difficUlties in finding available
habitat land.
Because of the aforementioned difficulties in obtaining suitable habitat to keep pace with the
high urban growth rates, the MBHCP Implementation Trust Group may on occasion seek
acquisition lands outside of Kern County in neighboring San Luis Obispo, Kings and Tulare
Counties. There are a number of suitable areas that meet the conservation program's
requirements in these neighboring counties where willing sellers are available. Although the
Implementation Trust Group has been resistant to seeking lands outside of Kern County in the
past, the high rate of urban growth and the corresponding obligation to acquire specified habitat
for targeted species (San Joaquin Kit' Fox, Tipton Kangaroo Rat, etc), make it necessary to
pursue this option in addition to continuing program efforts to acquire lands within Kern County.
The Implementation Trust Group will continue to keep the City Council and Board of.
Supervisors apprised of the MBHCP program as habitat acquisition efforts continue. To date,
the program has acquired more than 14,000 acres at a cost of $10.5 million, which includes an
enhancement and an endowment cost for perpetual maintenance that are forwarded to the State
of California for habitat preserve land management. In eight years, the MBHCP program will
expire unless the City and County intend to extend the conservation program into the future.
Given the significant lead time that is needed to undertake negotiations with the wildlife
agencies, the City and County decision-makers will need to decide whether there is a benefit to
continue the program well in advance of the MBHCP's expiration date.
IT IS RECOMMENDED that the City Council and Board of Supervisors receive and file this
report.
Sincerely,
TE~~, Director
Kern County Planning Department
TJ:jb
i:\adm\j vbhnetrohcp\acquisition prog.rpt
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
JOINT CITY/COUNTY AGENDA SECTION: Business
MEETING DATE: February 27, 2006 ITEM: ~. ~.
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED
FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director DEPARTMENT HEAD ,////('"
DATE: February 15, 2006 CITY ATTORNEY /,/'~--
,,"1
c,.,.
SUBJECT: Report on South Beltway alignment (Joint Agenda Item) - Hear City Staff Presentation by
Public Works Director Raul Rojas and County Staff Presentation by Planning Director Ted
James and Roads Director Craig Pope.
RECOMMENDATION: Hear staff report.
BACKGROUND: City and County staff will give a brief update on the status of the South Beltway
alignment. The purpose is to apprise the Bakersfield City Council and the Board of Supervisors of the
status of the South Beltway, an east-west freeway alignment that is part of the Circulation Element of the
joint City/County Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan. The South Beltway is one component of a series
of freeway alignments designed to move traffic efficiently through the Metropolitan Bakersfield area. This
circulation route is intended to link State Route (SR) 58 in east Bakersfield with Interstate 5 and provide a
bypass around Central Bakersfield to facilitate regional and interstate trips.
The South Beltway is intended to be a 300-foot wide freeway with full access control. Construction of the
ultimate facility would consist of eight travel lanes, shoulders, and a wide median that can be used for
alternative transportation modes such as rail, bus ways and high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes. In order
to preserve right-of-way for this route, a specific plan line has been designated and adopted by the
County. A specific plan line defines the centerline location and width of a facility.
After City and County staffs studied multiple routes, the City of Bakersfield recommended an alignment in
May, 2000 which extended southwest from SR 58 at Comanche Drive, crossing SR 99 at Houghton Road
and then west to Interstate 5. Following the City of Bakersfield's action, County staff considered an
additional alternative for the portion of the South Beltway east of SR 99 that would bring the South Beltway
closer to Lamont and Arvin, and allow these communities to benefit from improved circulation access.
The Kern County Board of Supervisors indicated they are studying different alternatives for this eastern
portion of the South Beltway alignment. City staff encourages a prompt discussion and decision on a final
alignment so that the project may move forward without delay.
The County Roads Department in coordination with the City Public Works Department intends to locate
local interchanges and freeway to freeway interchanges to allow connection with major routes on the
Metropolitan area's circulation system. The County Roads Department is planning to prepare legal
descriptions for the South Beltway interchanges for ultimate adoption by the City of Bakersfield and Kern
County as part of the South Beltway Specific Plan line.
The South Beltway will provide an important east-west regional connection for traffic traveling between
Interstate 5 and SR 58 while also providing necessary circulation to relieve traffic congestion and address
future land use needs in the southern portion of the Metropolitan Bakersfield area.
G:\GROUPDA'IAADMINRPT~2006\02-27 Joint Ci!y_County\South Beltway.doc
PLANNING DEPARTMENT RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENC
TED-JAMES, AICP, Director D,4VtD PRICE II1o RMA DIRECTOR
2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 100 Comrnunlb/& Economic Development Department
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2323 Engineering & Survey Sen4ces Department
Phone: (661) 862-8600 Environmental Health Services Department
.~.X: (661) 862-8601 ~ Relay t-800-735-2929 Planning Department
~11: plannlng~co.kem.ca.u$ Roads Department
~t'Addrese: www.co.kem.ca.us/plannlng
JOINT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS/BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
February 27, 2006
.~pUth Beltway Specific Plan Line Update
By: Ted James, Kern County Planning Department, Director
Craig Pope, Kem County Roads Department, Director
On August 23, 2005, the Board of Supervisors approved a 300-foot wide Specific Plan Line for a
future freeway alignment to facilitate future traffic movement within the southern portion of the
Metropolitan Bakersfield area. The alignment extends east of Interstate 5 to State Route 99 near
Houghton Road and further extends northeast to intersect with State Route 58 at Comanche
Road. Following the adoption of the Specific Plan Line, staff identified various freeway
interchange locations for inclusion as part of the 300-foot wide freeway alignment. Caltrans
spacing criteria were utilized for interchange location and design.
On January 26, 2006, the Kern County Planning Commission recommended approval of
interchange locations along the 25-mile alignment. Interchanges are recommended fo/' approval
at the following locations:
Interstate 5
Old River Road
Gosford Road
Ashe Road
State Route 99
DiGiorgio Road
Panama Road
Panama Lane
Weedpatch Highway
Edison Road
State Route 58 and Comanche Road
A proposed interchange located two miles east of Interstate 5 was originally proposed by staff to
the Planning Commission as a future freeway-t~-freeway connection with the West Beltway
which presently has a southerly terminus at Taft Highway. Mr. George Borba the operator of a
dairy located south of Taft Highway expressed concern that the southerly extension of the West
Beltway not be proposed through his dairy facility especially since a southerly extension of the
West Beltway was previously deleted through a Circulation Element Amendment when the
Pacificana Specific Plan proposal was rescinded to accommodate two dairy projects.
February 27, 2006
Page 2
As a result of considering the testimony by Mr. Borba, the Planning Commission recommended
the deletion of the freeway-to-freeway interchange two miles east of Interstate 5 on the South
Beltway alignment.
The City of Bakersfield Public Works Department has expressed concern that an interchange
needs to be identified two miles east of Interstate 5 on the South Beltway in order to allow for
the future southerly extension of the West Beltway. Caltrans spacing standards restrict the
location of interchange locations. The City notes that existing and proposed development
projects in the southwest metropolitan planning area require the inclusion of an interchange two
miles west of Interstate 5 including a future amendment to the Circulation Element of the
General Plan to extend a freeway designation south of Taft Highway to connect with the South
Beltway. The Board of Supervisors will consider the adoption of the interchange proposal on
March 14, 2006.
It should be noted that a portion of the Congressman Thomas funding received for Metropolitan
Bakersfield circulation planning is intended to be used to design the South Beltway. This
freeway segment is expected to be needed within 15 years to provide for local and area-wide
circulation needs within Metropolitan Bakersfield.
RECOMMENDATION: City Council and Board of Supervisors receive and file this report.
Sincerely,
TED~~-~, AICP~Director
Kern County Planning Department
TJ:jb
i:\adm\pln\So Beltway SP.joint mtg
0~
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY DAVID PRICE III, DIRECTOR
Community and Economic Development Department. Engineering & Survey Services Department. Environmental Health Services Department. Planning Department. Roads Department
(661) 862-8800 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 350
552-5376, Menu Option 5 ~ BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2370
Fax: (661) 862-8801 ~ E-maih rma@co.kern.ca.us
TTY Relay: (800) 735-2929 Web Page: http://www, co,kern.ca.us/rma/
JOINT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS/BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
February 27, 2006
FORMATION OF JOINT TASK FORCE FOR RESPONSIBLE GROWTH PLANNING
By: David Price III, RMA Directo~.
Discussion occurred at the September 19, 2005 joint meeting about the rate of growth
experienced by the Bakersfield metropolitan planning area and such discussion has
also occurred in recent months at Board of Supervisors (Board) meetings. One
mechanism that was suggested to better facilitate communication among the affected
parties would be to establish a forum that consisted of City. of Bakersfield (City) and
County of Kern (County) staff, along with representatives from various school districts,
utility companies, special districts and related serviCe providers. Such a forum would
offer a means through which information concerning future growth trends and their
implications could be communicated to thOse that were in a position to address those
impacts. Because of limited staff resources, however, any new grouP that is formed
must have a defined function and prove itself to be useful and productive, as staff is
already fully occupied by the many tasks and projects currently underway.
County staff has discussed this concept with City staff and both staffs have expressed a
willingness to work together on the concept. In recent months, County staff has worked
closer with affected parties to better anticipate the impacts of urbanization within the
unincorporated area and to identify impacts and related actions required to mitigate
those impacts in the unincorporated area when caused by development in City areas.
Because of the concerns noted above, staff believes that such a forum should be
regarded and utilized as a valuable.source of technical assistance to our joint
metropolitan area planning effort. By doing so, it won't be an isolated group operating in
the abstract. It should serve a valuable role in providing professional information about
current plans and capacity while helping affected agencies prepare for the continued
growth and development of our area as articulated through the general plan update.
Printed on Rec),cled Paper
JOINT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS/BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
FORMATION OF JOINT TASK FORCE FOR RESPONSIBLE GROVVTH PLANNING
February 27, 2006
Page 2
This will help assure that adequate public facilities are provided in a timely manner to
meet the needs of our growing population and are planned within the context of our
local "blueprint for growth".
If both governing bodies agree, it would be appropriate for both City and County staff to
create a roster of likely affected entities and develop a preliminary list of objectives for
distribution to those entities. Staff could then extend an invitation to these groups to join
in this process and form the Task Force. An important step will be to integrate the
functioning of this group into the process related to the update of the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan. Staff would then coordinate the future activities of the Task
Force to be assistive to overall metropolitan area planning efforts.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Bakersfield City Council and the
Kern County Board of Supervisors authorize staff to proceed with the project to create
the Metropolitan Bakersfield Growth Planning Task Force and receive and file this
report.
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY DAVID PRICE III, DIRECTOR
Community and Economic Development Department. Engineering & Survey Services Department. Environmental Health Services Department. Planning Department. Roads 0epartment
(661) 862-8800 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 350
(800) 552-5376, Menu Option 5 ~ BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2370
Fax: (661) 862-8801 ~ E-maih rma@co.kern.ca.us
TTY Relay: (800) 735-2929 Web Page: http://www, co.kern.ca.us/rma/
JOINT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS/BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
February 27, 2006
ANIMAL CONTROL
By: David Price III, RMA Director~
Since the last joint meeting, an important milestone in the cooperative city-county
animal control relationship has occurred. On January, the joint adoption center ribbon
cutting was held to commemorate the true consolidation and integration of sheltering
activities. With the opening of this new, city constructed facility, animal sheltering
capacity at the Mt. Vernon Animal Control complex was increased by approximately
25%.
In addition, just this past week the County of Kern (County) consultant veterinarian
began designing the shelter's veterinary medical program, including preliminary reviews
that will lead to the creation of the Animal Control veterinary clinic. Service
enhancements provided by the County to City of Bakersfield (City) and County animals
include vaccination for common infectious diseases for all animals as part of the intake
process. Upon implementation of the veterinary medical program, increased medical
screening and treatment for diseased and injured animals will be provided.
The Board of Supervisors authorized and enabled the formation of a new community
based non-profit group, Friends of the Kern County Animal Shelters Foundation. This
group's active Bbard of Directors is now functioning and has already undertaken or
assisted with three activities in support of the shelter and our programs. County
Counsel staff is providing assistance to the group as it seeks tax exempt status.
In monthly and quarterly reports to the Board, the Resource Management Agency is
reporting on the progress being made in implementing the recommendations of last
year's review of the animal control function. There has been a considerable record
accomplishment thanks to the committed and dedicated staff of the Division.
The Board of Supervisors has also enacted an Ordinance and related operational rules
for the establishment of the Kern County Animal Control Commission (Commission).
JOINT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS/BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ANIMAL CONTROL
February 27, 2006
Page 2
This Commission will work cooperatively with staff and advise the Board concerning
matters related to the enforcement and sheltering aspects of the Animal Control
program.
There are other, new opportunities for collaboration. One issue of recent interest has
been the "give-away" of animals, the so-called "free to a good home" action by which
the indiscriminate breeding of cats and dogs is perpetuated. As reported locally, this
activity is still continuing and community wide benefit might be realized if the City and
County could act jointly to discourage this situation. The County has already adopted
an ordinance making such activity unlawful and this issue was referred to staff for
discussion at tonight's meeting.
County staff is pleased by the recent improvements in the Animal Control program and
looks forward to working cooperatively with the City to improve the services provided to
the community.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Bakersfield City Council and the
Kern County Board of Supervisors receive and file this report.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
IJOINT CITY/COUNTY AGENDA SECTION: Business
MEETING DATE: February 27, 2006 ITEM: "'l,. ~.
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APP,,ROVED
FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director DEPARTMENT HEAD
DATE: February 10, 2006 CITY ATTORNEY
CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: Metropolitan Area Refuse Transfer Station Report (Joint Agenda Item). Hear City Staff
Presentation by Solid Waste Director Kevin Barnes and County Staff Presentation by
Waste Management Director Daphne Harley.
RECOMMENDATION: Hear staff report.
BACKGROUND: On February 28, 2005, City and County staff made a joint presentation on the status
of the Metro Transfer Station to the Joint Meeting of the Kern County Board of Supervisors and the
Bakersfield City Council. There was a consensus that a Metro Transfer Station Project would be
strengthened if the City and County move forward from this point through a joint agreement, seeking grant
funding where possible. City staff had applied for federal CMAQ grant funds in December 2004 for a
transfer station project on behalf of both jurisdictions, but the available funds were appropriated to more
pressing transportation needs.
At the September 19, 2005 joint meeting of the Board of Supervisors and the City Council, staff jointly
reported that progress had been made in determining that a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) would
be the appropriate instrument for both jurisdictions. A draft MOU was subsequently prepared by County
Counsel, and then revised by City staff. In the meantime, City staff again applied for CMAQ grant funds
on behalf of both jurisdictions in the January 2006 cycle.
February 14, 2006, 2:05PM
G:\GROUPDA'IAADMINRPT~2006\02-27 Joint City_County~Metro Area Refuse Transfer Station 2-27-06.doc
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY
STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S., Director ~ DAVID PRICE III, RMA DIRECTOR'
2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 ~ Community and Economic Development Department
KERSFIELD, CA 93301-2370 Engineering & Survey Services Department
(661) 862-8700 Environmental Health Services Department
(661) 862-8701 Planning Department
TTY Relay: (800) 735-2929 Roads Department
e-mail: eh@co.kern.ca.us
dOINT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS/BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL MEETING
February 27, 2006
~'~ BODY ART UPDATE
STEVE McCALLEY--'--.'.~vir-'~'~me--'~'~ealth Services Director
The purpose of this item is to share the current state of body art oversight/regulation in the
County of Kern and provide an opportunity for input by the Council and Board regarding the
public health protection of citizens seeking this service.
In 1997 legislation was enacted to amend the California Health & Safety Code to require the
registration of any person engaged in the business of tattooing, body piercing or the application
of permanent cosmetics with the local county health officer. The law further directed the
California Department of Health Services to develop regulations for oversight of body art
practitioners throughout California. To date, these regulations have not been completed.
The Kern County Environmental Health Services Department (KCEHSD), designated as the
local enforcement agency for the county health officer, maintains an active registration and
educational outreach program for all body art practitioners and businesses within the county.
Currently, there are more than 100 body art practitioners and 49 body art facilities registered
with KCEHSD. Of the 49 registered facilities in Kern County, the majority are located within
incorporated cities with 25 in the City of Bakersfield.
KCEHSD has initiated an inspection program based upon general accepted sanitary health
practices with an educational and guidance approach to achieve safe operating practices, but
lacks the force of law should we identify "violations." In general, most practitioners have been
receptive to our involvement and guidance. Further, we have worked cooperatively to address
outstanding issues, respond to complaints, and make efforts to assure that facilities and body art
practitioners practice in a safe manner. We have received over 20 complaints involving body art
practitioners and facilities countywide.since 1997, when legislation was passed.
Given the popularity of body art, the failure of the state to develop regulations and the lack of
enforcement capability, we have become more concerned with the local public health impacts of
the body art activity.
At least five local jurisdictions elsewhere in California have chosen to enact local ordinances to
regulate body art activities to address the lack of leadership at the state level. Since more than
half of the local body art facilities are located within the City of Bakersfield, this is an issue of
local regulatory concern.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that both the Bakersfield City Council and the
Kern County Board of Supervisors receive and file this report.
B A K E R S F I E L D
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
MEMORANDUM
February 27, 2006
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: PAMELA A. MCCARTHY, CITY CLERK/")~
SUBJECT: JOINT CITY/COUNTY MEETING OF FEBRUARY 27', 2006
AGENDA ITEM CLOSING COMMENTS 8.
Attached is correspondence received from Michael J. Rubio, Supervisor, Fifth
District, regarding frequency and scheduling of Joint City/County meetings.
pi
Attachment
~'~ ,:.~,-~2/23/2006 THU 1~t34 FAX 8683645 Supervisor Michael Rubio ~002/002
TO:. KERN COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS; RON ERREA, COUNTY ADiV~STR.AT[VE OFFICER;
BERNARD C BARMANN, SR., COUNTY COUNSEL; BAKERSFIELD CITY COD-NC~/.4 HARVEY
,, HALL, MAYOR OF BAKERSFIELD; ALAN TANDY, QTY MANAGER; VIRGINIA GENNARO, CITY
"i ATroI~IWEY
i CO DENISE PENNELL, ~ ~RK OF THE BOARD; PAMELA MCCARTHY, BAKERSHELD C~TY CLERK
FROM: MICHAEL J. RUBIO, SUPERVISOR, FIFTH DISTRICT ~
SUBJECT: JOINT CITY-ODUNTY MEETINGS
DATE: FEBRUARY 23, 2006
· In reviewing the agenda for the upcorn, ng joint meeting of the Bakersfield City Council and Kern County Board
of Supervisors, I am immediatelystruck bythe length and scope of the agenda itself. No .mbly, there are 11
(designated as A- K) business kerns to be discussed this coming Monday.
As I enter mysecond year in office as Supervisor, I am always looking for opportunities to streaml;ne
government services and work more effectivetyto serve my constituents in the Fifth District and taxpayers
throughout Kern County. Though I have been unable to gather much substantive documentation from the
discussiom in the late 1990's when these meetings v~re first instituted, I have been able to ta/k at length with
many of the keyplayers that participated in those discussions. Originally; the goal was to convene at least three
or four joint meetings annually between the City and County. Unfortunately, since the meetings started in 1999,
onlytwo meetings have been held every'year except for 2004 when City Council members and Supervisors met
Only
I therefore propose that we meet the original intent of these meetings by conve,lng three times each year.
Furthermore, the three annual dates should be set ahead of time (i.e. every2.d Monday of every February, etc.)
so that meeting dates can be set in perpetuity. This advanced planning will emure that members of the
Bakersfield City Council and Kern County Board of Supervisors will be able to plan accordingly, thereby
avoiding having to coincide over a dozen public official Calendars to arrive at a single date.
Additionally, with the unprecedented development and growth that we are experiencing in metropolitan
Bakersfield and throughout Kern County, it is incumbem on both of our respective bodies to work
collaborativelyto resolve the manyissues facing Kern County residents. In that vein, I would also like to
· propose that instead of using these joint meedngs as a forum to p ' .nmarilyhear reports and presentations byCky
and County staff, we should be devoting a substamial portion of these meetings t'o 3ggillg on action items.
" I'look forward to discussing these proposals on Monday at the next joint meeting. :