HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/12/2005 B A K E R S F.I E L D
Sue Benham, Chair
David Couch
Mik~ Maggard
Staff: John W. Stinson
MEETING NOTICE
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
of the City Council - City of Bakersfield
Monday, December 12, 2005, at 1:00 p.m.
City Manager's Conference Room, Suite 201
Second Floor- City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA
AGENDA
1. ROLL CALL
2. PUBLI~C STATEMENTS (REGARDING CLOSED SESSION)
3. CLOSED SESSION
A. Conference with Legal Counsel--Potential Litigation
Closed session pursuant to subdivision (b)(1)(3)(A) of Government Code
section 54956.9 - two cases
4. CLOSED SESSION ACTION
5. ADOPT OCTOBER 10, 2005 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
6. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
7. DEFERRED BUSINESS
A. Report and Committee recommendation regarding establishing a memorial grove -
Hoover
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding General Plan Updates
B. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding streamlining the General Plan
amendment cycle and process
C. Discussion and Committee recommendation on 2006 Committee meeting schedule
9. COMMITFEE COMMENTS
10. ADJOURNMENT
DI A T
B A K E R S F I E L D
/~ ~) ~ Sue Benham, Chair
StaJ~: John W. Stinson David Couch
For: Alan Tandy, City Manager Mike Maggard
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
Monday, October 10, 2005 - 1:00 p.m.
City Manager's Conference Room - Suite 201
1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield CA
1. ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order at 1:00 p.m.
Present: Councilmembers Sue Benham, Chair; and David Couch
Absent: Councilmember Mike Maggard
2. ADOPT SEPTEMBER 12, 2005 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
Adopted as submitted. (Committee Member Maggard absent.)
Committee Chair Benham announced that New Business, Item 5A, on the agenda
regarding "Vacation of "O" Street between Truxtun Avenue and 17th Street" was not
going to be heard until the Committee's next meeting. Committee Member Maggard
was absent and Committee Member Couch may have a conflict due to an affiliation
with a client.
3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
Lorraine Unger, Sierra Club, spoke regarding attending a workshop at Kern COG
and while touring in the downtown, she noticed the dirt was very uneven with 3-inch
deep depressions next to the curb at the northwest corner of "K" and 18th Streets
and requested it be filled in and leveled out.
4. DEFERRED BUSINESS
A. Report and Committee recommendation regarding subdivision tree
requirements for new single family homes and sidewalk design standards
Planning Director Movius gave an overview of the memorandum in the Committee ·
packet. The Planning Commission had formed an Ad Hoc Committee to review the
issue of walkable neighborhoods for new residential developmentS. The Planning
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Page 2
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
Monday, October 10, 2005
Commission referred the Ad Hoc Committee recommendations to the Council. The
· highlights of the recommendations were:
1. The normal type sidewalk is a "combination-type sidewalk" with the sidewalk next
to the curb, which is used in most new subdivisions in Bakersfield. The "standard
sidewalk" has a landscaping strip between the sidewalk and the curb. The Ad
Hoc Committee recommended the "standard sidewalk" design be the
requirement for new residential developments, unless a deviation is required.
Also, the Ad Hoc Committee recommended an ordinance amendment to require
Planning Commission approval for deviations to the sidewalk Standard, which is
currently approved by the Public Works Director. If the Council votes to change
to the "standard sidewalk" design, while making the revision to the Public Works
Subdivision Design Manual, also recommended that a reference be included
from the Municipal Code regarding clear sight view for trees planted in the
parkway pertaining to sight-line visibility for drivers.
2. Recommended for new residential developments that developers be required to'
plant two 15-gallon trees in the front yard of single-family homes, in addition to
those in the parkway. The homeowner would not be required to keep the trees as
they would be planted on private property.
3. Recommended that the Parks Division make available to the public through
publication and posting on the City's website, a list of appropriate trees for
residential parkways including planting and maintenance .standards.
Dana Karcher, from the Tree Foundation, spoke regarding the proposal to require
two trees to be planted in front yards in new developments, and instead, suggested
the tree requirements be based on square footage and the developer be allowed to
mitigate that requirement by planting the trees in another location if the new
homeowner does not want the trees.
Public Works Director Rojas explained the current standards allow for either
combination or standard sidewalk designs and Public Works staff has no preference
of one over the other. He strongly recommended that the Planning Commission not
be in charge of decisions in the public right-of-way. There are utilities and sewer
lines under the right-of-way, which require the expertise of the Public Works
Department.
City Attorney Gennaro pointed out in the June 2nd memorandum in the Committee
packet dealing with trees planted in the parkway strip it states:" .... maintenance of
those trees will be the responsibility of the homeowner." The City ordinance defines
trees in parkways as street trees. Under the current ordinance, if the standard type
sidewalk becomes the subdivision design standard, the City would be responsible
for the maintenance of the trees planted in the right-of-way, parkway strip.
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Page 3
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
Monday, October 10, 2005
Committee Member Couch asked staff to provide an estimate of the cost to
implement the change to standard type sidewalks in new residential developments,
including how many extra Tree Maintainers would need to be hired in future years,
cost to contract out the tree trimming, and how that could be funded. He asked staff
to provide cost information on using a different material other than concrete when
repairing buckled sidewalk from tree roots.
Committee Chair Benham expressed she liked the idea of the parkway between the
sidewalk and curb, but thought there should be a subsection in the tree list with
specific trees for parkways, which do not buckle the sidewalks and block sightlines.
Committee Chair Benham agreed with the Public Works Director that the Planning ·
Commission not be involved in decisions in public right-of-ways.
Public Works Director Rojas suggested if the City decides to use the standard
sidewalk design, the parkway strip in the right-of-way be at least five feet wide.
Committee Member Couch confirmed with staff that the Building Industry
Association (BIA) was notified about the Planning and Development Committee
meeting as well as the Planning Commission Ad Hoc Committee meetings. He
requested staff to provide him with a transcript of this portion of the meeting.
The Committee requested staff to bring .information to the next meeting on the
parkway tree list, cost of maintaining the trees if the standard type sidewalks were
implemented in new residential developments, and the cost of using materials other
than concrete to repair root-damaged sidewalks.
5. NEW BUSINESS
A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding vacation of "O"
Street between Truxtun Avenue and 17th Street
This item was deferred to the next meeting.
B. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding planning,
development and funding of community and regional parks, bike paths and
trails ,~
Assistant City Manager Stinson explained this is the item· the Committee had
requested the Council to refer back to the Committee. Also, per the Committee's
request, Colon Bywater and Dave McArthur from North of the River Recreation and
Parks District (NOR) were invited to the meeting and were in attendance.
Committee Member Couch explained his idea was to go forward with some grants
and with the large developments being proposed in the southwest and northwest to
D AF?
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Page 4
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
Monday, October 10, 2005
take advantage of the opportunity to develop a specific parks, trails and bike path
master plan in other parts of the City, as was developed for the northeast. Highlights
of his ideas included:
Explore the possibility of the City being able tO get right-of-way for a bike path
adjacent to the South Beltway.
· Develop extensions from the Bike Path into new developments.
· There is one developer (Castle and COoke) in the southwest that has expressed
an interest to have an extension off the Bike Path into their development.
· Develop a more creative parks plan with smaller pocket parks, as well,, as
medium and large parks and incorporate into the ordinance on park standards.
· Referring to the Gardiner properties in the northwest, in a cooperative manner
work jointly with NOR District on being creative with other types of parks as well
as the big active parks in their District, perhaps add some small pocket parks,
and work with NOR on a large regional park in the northwest similar to the new
park in the southwest.
City Manager Tandy explained the City does not make those decisions in the NOR
District. NOR receives the Park Development Fees, owns and operates the parks,
unless they would agree to enter into some type of agreement or' MOU.
Dave McArthur, North of the River Recreation and Parks District (NOR), expressed
a willingness to cooperate on smaller parks if the developer requested it, but
indicated smaller parks are less economical to maintain. NOR has a master park
plan and puts in what their constituents want and that is recreational parks for the
children. The developments in their District are small and it takes several
developments to fund a park because small developments cannot provide suitable
parks sites. For the most part, NOR parks are not in maintenance districts, which
provide funding for park maintenance, so their park plan is different from the City's.
Public Works Director Rojas explained the City adds property to the maintenance
districts at the time of approval of the subdivision map. NOR has the authority to
form maintenance districts, but it is difficult because for the most part they work with
small developments.
Committee Member Couch suggested City staff meet with NOR to work out how
they might time the adding of developments into a maintenance district.
City Manager Tandy suggested Assistant City Manager Christensen, Parks Director
Dianne Hoover, and Public Works staff could meet with NOR. City Attorney
Gennaro offered to work with staff and NOR if needed.
Committee Member Couch stated he had invited Ron Brummett, the Director of
Kern COG, to attend the Committee meeting today because all the planning for the
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Page 5
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
Monday, October 10, 2005
Bike Path was funded through Kern COG. The construction money or matching
funds were from grants through Kern COG. When the City develops a master plan
to secure the property for trails and bike path extensions into developments, the
City will need to be looking for future grants and funding to construct the trails and
bike path extensions.
Ron Brummett, Kern COG Director, indicated he would be glad to help the City
apply for grant funding.
6. COMMITTEE COMMENTS
7. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 2:07 p.m.
Attendance-staff: City Manager Alan Tandy; City Attorney Ginny Gennaro; Assistant
City Manager John Stinson; Assistant City Manager Alan Christensen; Public Works
Director Raul Rojas; Planning Director Jim Movius; Recreation and Parks Director
Dianne Hoover; and Park Technician Tom Jones
Attendance-others: Lorraine Unger, Sierra Club; Ben Wageman, Castle and Cooke; Jeff
Leggio, ASV Associates; Dana Karcher, Tree Foundation; David McArthur and Colon
Bywater, North of the River Recreation and Parks; Jennifer Cadmus; Ron Brummett,
Kern COG; Ward Wollesen, CCAPE; James Burger, The Bakersfield Californian; Jamie
Nickel, Nickel Family
cc: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
S:~lOHN\Council Committees\05Planning&Development~P&D 05 oct 10 summary.doc
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: December 12, 2005 AGENDA SECTION: Closed Session
ITEM:
TO: Planning & Development Committee APPROVED
FROM: Virginia Gennaro, City Attorney DEPARTMENT HEAD ~/"~'~'
DATE: December 6, 2005 CITY ATTORNEY
CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: Conference with Legal Counsel B Potential Litigation
Closed session pursuant to subdivision (b)(1)(3)(A) of Government Code section 54956.9.
(two cases)
VG:do
S:\Planning~P&D admins\12-14-05 Potential.dot
December 6, 2005, 9:09AM
DEC 0 7 2005
B A K E R S F I E L D
Department of Recreation and Parks
Date: December 7, 2005
To: Alan Tandy
From: Dia~o~o~er
Subject: Memorial Tree Grove
Councilmember Mike Maggard initiated discussions for a city-wide
memorial tree grove over a year ago. Since that time, various areas were
considered for an appropriate location. In meetings with Dana Karcher of
the Tree Foundation, she indicated that the idea of using the Manor Street
bike parking area would be a good location. Councilmember Maggard
concurred with the Manor Street site due to having existing parking and
easy accessibility.
At the same time we were looking for an appropriate location, the
Bakersfield Breakfast Rotary was searChing for a significant project that
would benefit the city to commemorate Rotary's Centennial Celebration.
Representatives from the Breakfast Rotary club, Dana Karcher and I met at
the Manor Street parking area to discuss the Memorial Tree Grove. All
agreed that the Manor Street location was excellent, and the Rotary has
committed to purchasing the trees and assisting in planting as well.
Rich O'Neal and Bill Cooper have also agreed that this location would be
acceptable for a Memorial Tree Grove. They indicated that there are a few
native plants that need to remain, and we will work with them on that issue.
Staff will begin preparation of the site in cooperation with other city
departments, the Tree Foundation, and the Bakersfield Breakfast Rotary.
The goal is to have the site ready for volunteers to plant trees for the
annual Arbor Day project in conjunction with the Tree Foundation. Arbor
Day is typically held in early March.
The Memorial Tree Grove will start with 100 trees, and some trees will be
identified with small markers. This first planting phase should be
completed by spring 2006. In the future, those wanting to dedicate a tree in
memory or honor of an individual would be able to so. It will be an ongoing
project, and a living tribute to the citizens of Bakersfield.
December 1, 2005
Dianne Hoover
City of Bakersfield, Recreation & Parks
900 Truxtun Avenue, Suite 100
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Dear Dianne,
I would like to outline Bakersfield Breakfast Rotary Club's (BBRC) intentions for assisting in
the creation of a Commemorative Tree Grove. This is the 100th year of Rotary International and
in celebration our current club president, Cecil Martin, wanted our club to d° a special project
that would celebrate this important anniversary.
Our club has approved funding for the purchase of 100 trees to be planted in a memorial grove as
we have discussed in previous conversations. The club has set aside $5,000 for the tree
purchase. We have also budgeted $2,000 to apply to the irrigation required for these trees.
It is our hopeful intention to be able to place a plaque at the site noting the club's donation and
that it celebrates the 100th year of Rotary International. The city's requirements would be
respected when deciding the type, size and wording of the plaque.
Cecil, would also like to have an onsite observance upon the completion of the project. Since
BBRC is a breakfast club We thought a morning meeting and dedication would be a nice touch.
We would like to invite the appropriate city representatives to participate in this ceremony and
perhaps encourage some media coverage. Cecil's presidential term is up on June 30, 2006 and
we are hoping that the grove will be developed before this date.
Some suggestions for a dedication date would be: California Arbor Days March 7 - 14,, Earth
Day April 22nd, National Arbor Day April 28th or May Day May 1st, Memorial Day May 29th.
I have been speaking with Dana Karcher, of the Tree Foundation of Kern, regarding the tree
purchases. She is aware of the tree requirements for plantings along the Kern River Parkway and
will assist us in obtaining the appropriate trees.
The entire club is very excited to be involved in the development of this new park area. We
thank you for your consideration of this project and look fonvard to working with you.
Sincerely,
Cecil Martin Jackie Maxwell
BBRC President Tree Project Coordinator
B A K E R S F I E L D , C~7 '31E005 ',
M E M O R A N D U M
October 31, 2005
TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager
FROM: James D. Movius, Planning Director ~
SUBJECT: General Plan Update
This memorandum is in response to questions you raised regarding the type of general plan
update we completed in 2002, the need for a new update, and the forms it could take.
2002 Update
· What we did:
- Update~l plan to reflect development environment since 1990, incorporated 2020
visioning, recognized fees/programs put into place and updated chapters
· Why we did it:
Over 10 years since 2010 plan had been adopted
Things changed, many goals had been accomplished
· Who was involved/resources used:
- City and County staffs along with consulting firm
· How long/cost:
3 years - substantial staff cost, much of work done in-house
$130,000 consulting fees
· What we didn't do:
Mapping changes were not part of the process
Significant policy changes did not occur
Implementation measures were not changed
· Advantages of doing it that way:
Used 2020 as public outreach component and basis for relevant policy updates
- No mapping changes made it faster, less controversial
- No fundamental changes to policies equals less controversy
· Disadvantages of doing it that way:
- Mapping/development policies did not go far enough into future for current growth rate
Alan Tandy, City Manager
October 17, 2005
Page 2
Why update our plan four years later?
· Unprecedented growth rate: - We have outgrown our urban land use designations and base assumptions
- Major issues are addressed on project by project level (air quality, agricultural land
conversion, water supply, sewer capacity, transportation impacts, densification, mixed
use),
Change in County policy regarding sewer service
CEQA document out of date
Increased public interest in how we are growing
Approach A (Excludes assigning land use designations)
· Technical:
- Review and "refresh" all elements as necessary
- Identify specific elements (land use, circulation, conservation) for more intensive update of
goals, policies and implementation measures
· Goals:
- Clearly communicate the extent of urbanization projected under the general plan (to GP
boundary)
- Address hot button issues such as agricultural land conversion, air quality and "smart
growth"
- Update base data assumptions
Provide new EIR to address cumulative impacts
Complete a public "visioning" process
· Advantages:
Communicates long range goals/vision to public and development community
- Provide up to date environmental document
- Allows public input into Bakersfield's future
- Ability to, use 2020 visioning again
· Disadvantages:
Time consuming (3-4 years)
Lack of staff (would require one principal planner position full time in Planning, affects
· other departments as well)
Consultant needs (RFP process)
Costly ($500,000 - 700,000)
Would not reduce number of GPA applications
Apr)roach B (Comprehensive includes assigning land use designations)
Same as above except add mapping component. Assign land use designations to all
property
· Advantages:
- Lets community know specific expectations regarding land use.
Would reduce number of GPA applications
· '~, ' "~ Alan Tandy, City Manager '
October 17, 2005
Page 3
· Disadvantages: - Very time consuming (4-6 years)
- Very costly (1 million)
- More controversial
- More staff needed
Note: Costs/timelines do not include development of related programs such as impact fees, ag
preservation, form based zoning.
CC: Stanley C. Grady, Development Services Director
Ted James, Kern County Planning Director
S:~2005 GP Update~AT memo 10-20.doc
DRAFT ~ PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
2006 D~EETIN6 SCHEDULE
~ Planning and Development Committee Meetings @ 1:00 pm~
C~TY COUNCIL - BEGINS @ 5:15 PM ~ CiTY COUNCIL BUDGET
PRESENTATIONS
CONTINUED AT 6:30 P~v~ Monday's @ Noon, Wednesday's @ 5:15pm
Hearing on 6/7, Ad~tk~n on
Holidays ~ City HaH C~osed Joint City/County ~eeting
JANUAR' Fl MARCH
S M T W ] D S S i T
~ 9 ~- 13 14 ~ 1~
23 2%~- 27 28 28
29 30 31
APRIL JUNE
JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER
OCTOBER !EMBER ;CEMBER
Proposed December t2, 2005
The following documents pertain to the:
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMM.
meeting of Monday, December 12, 2005
at 1:00 PM.
PLANNING & DEV C0M
HANDOUT 12/12/05
?LANNI~G & DEV COM
~ ~ MANDOUT 12/12/05
PLANNING & DEV COM
., m~o~ ~2/~/o5
PLANNING & DEV COM
HANDOUT 12/12/05
12/12/05
?LANN[NG fi: DEV COM
i~;~NDOUT 12/12/05
PLANNING & DEV COM
· ~0~ 12/12105
P~G & DF.V CO~
~DOUT 12/12/05