Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/17/1998 B A K E R~ S F I E L D Kevin McDermott, Chair Randy Rowles Patricia M. Smith Staff: Dolores Teubner AGENDA URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Wednesday, June 17,1998 12:15 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room Second Floor - City Hall, Suite 201 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 1. ROLL CALL 2. APPROVAL OF APRIL 23, 1998 SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES 3. PRESENTATIONS 4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 5. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. FREEWAY UPDATE - Rojas B. ENCROACHMENT PERMITS - Rojas C. VESTING RIGHTS - Hardisty D. CLEANUP LEGISLATION - Skousen E. MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - Hardisty 6. NEW BUSINESS None 7. ADJOURNMENT DRAFT ~__~ ~~---~ K E R S F I E L D KevinMcDermo~,Chair /~n Tandy,~lty I~nager Randy Rowles Patricia M. Smith Staff: Dolores B.Teubner AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Wednesday, April 23, 1998 12:15 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room 1. ROLL CALL Call to Order at 12:30 p.m. Present: Councilmembers Kevin McDermott, Chair; Randy Rowles Absent: Councilmember Patricia M. Smith 2. APPROVAL OF MARCH 4, 1998 MINUTES Approved as submitted. 3. PRESENTATIONS 4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS None 5. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. FREEWAY UPDATE Staff gave a brief update on the status of the Kern River Freeway Funding. The project is up for review before the California Transportation Commission for inclusion in the State Transportation Improvement Program. Staff also provided a status on the reauthorization of the Intermodal'Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). B. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE AMENDMENT Staff gave a presentation on the proposal to increase the City's sphere of influence (SOl). A sphere of influence is a buffer between urban and rural land and defines the planning URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE DRAFT AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Thursday, April 23,1998 Page -2- boundary in which urban growth is anticipated to occur. The proposal to expand the SOl is needed since the City limits are either right up to the current SOl boundary or are quickly approaching the boundary. The Planning Commission, at its December meeting, reviewed the proposal and based on the objections of property owners, agreed to exclude the McAIlister Ranch and the Pacificana specific plan areas. Since that time the owners of Sunland Nurseries have also objected to being included in the expanded SOl, so staff is also recommending removing them. Staff's current proposal is to maintain a SOl boundary that creates a minimum one-mile buffer between urban and rural and to include all of the new and anticipated development area in the Northwest. Bill Turpin, Executive Director of LAFCO, made a presentation explaining LAFCO's involvement in the SOl expansion process and the policies, procedures and objectives that LAFCO uses to evaluate proposals. He stressed the need for ag land protection policies and methods in the General Plan in order to bring ag land into the City's SOl. The Committee thought it would be better to plan ahead for the transition of ag land which is in the direct path of urban growth, and develop ag policies for those areas that are not. Mr. Turpin offered his assistance in developing the policies. Staff was directed to work on this issue. The Committee supported staff's recommended SOl expansion and forwarded it to the City Council for hearing on May 6. 6. NEW BUSINESS A. ANNEXATION PROCESS The City Manager gave a report on measures which staff is proposing for improving and expanding the current annexation information program. He indicated that the City's effort is the most extensive one ever undertaken to inform residents about annexation and get them involved. He proposed that all protest hearings would be individually noticed, there would be no bundling of non-contiguous areas, and that an informal forum would be held prior to filing the annexation to get further input. In addition, staff would be developing an issue of Borderline which detailed the annexation process. Public comments were taken from residents of a recently annexed area and proposed annexation areas regarding their concerns about the process. The Committee recommended several additional changes including expanding the hotline to include options for several recorded messages to get information about upcoming meetings, · dates and events. Also recommended was holding City services faires in potential annexation areas to give residents the opportunity to talk one-on-one with City staff about various services and issues. Staff was also directed to change the tracking system used for surveys and to hold more small meetings in each area so that each resident has an opportunity to attend one. The Committee will be making a report to Council on the recommended changes and enhancements. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Thursday, April 23,1998 Page -3- B. ENCROACHMENT PERMITS The Public Works Director did a demonstration of various sidewalk widths and the impact of sidewalk encroachments with different widths. Staff presented a list of other cities and comparisons of their encroachment policies and sidewalk requirements. Currently there are areas of Bakersfield's downtown where the sidewalk is as narrow as 4.5 feet. The ideal standard according to CalTrans is 10 feet, however, that may not always be practical. Staff would recommend a compromise of 6 feet. In addition, they would recommend that encroachment onto the public sidewalk be temporary so that it can be moved in case of emergency or when repairs are needed. Representatives of the Downtown Business Association indicated that they would like to encourage more outside activities in downtown and would like to see only 5 feet as a required sidewalk width. The Committee discussed the various options for sidewalk requirements and types of encroachments. Police also expressed concerns that encroachment permit requests were often for bars and taverns and that allowing drinking outside, encouraged problems with alcohol on public streets. The Committee agreed to an annual permit process with a $10 annual renewal fee. The structures should be temporary and the City should maintain its right to require their removal if needed. Also agreed on was a minimum 6 feet (from curb to property) sidewalk width. The Committee directed staff to begin working on revising the current process to include these changes. The C-1 zoning issue and the drinking in public right- of-way issue was referred back to staff for additional review. C. VESTING RIGHTS After discussion, it was agreed that the vesting rights issue should be tabled to the May meeting D. CLEANUP LEGISLATION Staff made a brief presentation on the nature of the cleanup items which simply bring the Municipal Code into compliance with what the actual practice of the City and/or with State or Federal requirements. After discussion, all items were recommended to Council for approval with the exception of the C-1 zoning issue which was tabled to the May meeting. 7. ADJOURNMENT Adjourned at 3:30 p.m. cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council DBT:jp S:\Dolores\udmin42398 BAKERSFIELD POLICE MF MO UM June 10, 1998 To: Urban Development Committee~M~/bers From: S.E. Brummer, Chief of Police .~/~" Subject: Encroachment Permits The Police Department's Special Operations Bureau conducted a review of downtown businesses related to encroachment issues. The attached memorandum describes issues concerning law enforcement and local businesses. SEB/vrf Attachment: Enforcement Issues Associated with A.B.C. Permitted Bus/ness Encroachrnent,~,, Memorandum by Lt. Brad Wahl, Dated 6/10/98 BAKERSFIELD POLICE June 10, 1998 To: S.E. Brummer, Chief of Police From: Brad Wahl, Lieutenant, Special Operations Bureau Subject: Enforcement Issues Associated With A.B.C. Permitted Business Encroachments The recent encroachment permit sought by Goose Loonies Restaurant at 1623 19th Street, brought to light several enforcement concerns for our department. These issues pertain primarily to the accessability of alcohol, particularly to minors and juveniles and the flow of pedestrian traffic on the sidewalks. Our first consideration in the issue of granting encroachment permits to liquor selling businesses are the prohibitions in the municipal code against consuming or possessing alcoholic beverages on city streets and sidewalks. BMC 9.16.010: No person shall drink any beer, wine or any other alcoholic beverage on any street, sidewalk, pedestrian mall, alley or highway in the city. BMC 9.16.020: No person shall have in his possession an open container containing an alcoholic beverage. Since Goose Loonies, or any other business seeking a permit to encroach on city sidewalks, intends to serve alcoholic beverages their employees and customers will be serving, possessing and consuming these beverages illegally. Obviously this type of permit is in direct conflict with the spirit and the letter of the municipal code as it is currently written. In addition to the illegality of the possession and consumption of alcoholic beverages on city sidewalks is the issue of access and control. Goose Loonies current patio is enclosed by a stucco Enforcement Issues Associated With A.B.C. Permitted Business Encroachments Lieutenant Brad Wahl June 9, 1998 and iron wall which stands approximately four feet tall. The location of the patio is such that the normal pedestrian traffic flow is along this wall as people approach the business from the east. There is also a gate in the wall which permits entry to the patio without entering the restaurant itself. The height of the patio wall is too low to prevent patrons from handing their drinks to anyone outside of the patio. This may be especially appealing to minors who may have friends able to legally purchase liquor. These friends could enter the patio, purchase a drink or pitcher, and hand it directly over the wall to a minor. This issue is particularly important in light of the high number of minors and juveniles who loiter in the area on Friday and Saturday nights. Given the traffic flow on the sidewalk this would be difficult for uniformed officers to control. The gate in the wall could well allow minors to enter the patio area, thus bypassing any security screening of patrons entering the main door. While drink servers are required to assess the ages of patrons and/or ask for identification, the patio environment is not as controlled or conducive to screening as entry through the main door. The Goose Loonies encroachment also reduces the sidewalk width by approximately 50 percent. This reduction could result in a severe impediment to pedestrian traffic which must pass between vehicle bumpers overhanging the curb on one side and the patio wall on the other. This reduced sidewalk is less of an issue during daylight hours but on weekend nights may become more problematic. The crowds are increased substantially and many pedestrians have consumed or are under the influence of alcohol. Naturally the jostling that will occur as the pedestrian flow narrows to accommodate the encroachment could cause conflict. This will only be exacerbated by more encroachments at different locations which would break up the natural walkway. I recognize that it is the intent of downtown business owners to improve the general ambiance of the area to increase patronage. While that is commendable, it is the duty to recommend conditions upon which the granting of encroachment permits to ABC licensed establishments must be contingent. These conditions may be included in the municipal code, the licensee's ABC permit or both. I have listed some conditions below: At all times a patio or other encroachment is open to customers one employee must be stationed in and responsible for, only the area in question. Employees with responsibilities throughout the business, i.e., waiters or busboys, would not qualify. It would be this employee's responsibility to screen customers for underage purchasers, check identification and insure that no alcoholic beverage(s) leave the area improperly. 2 Enforcement Issues Associated With A.B.C. Permitted Business Encroachments Lieutenant Brad Wahl June 9, 1998 Only Plastic drink containers and pitchers are to be allowed on an encroachment area or patio. This would preclude glass bottles, etc. from being tossed out into the street or crowd, as well as accidental breakage on the sidewalk. All entry and exit must be through the main restaurant. This would help to prevent minors and juveniles from entering the patio or encroachment and obtaining drinks from friends old enough to purchase liquor. No encroachment should reduce the total sidewalk available to pedestrians to less than eight feet. By providing this restriction an even walkway is provided. I am not aware of any regulations pertaining to permanent or temporary encroachments that dictate how much room must be afforded pedestrians.. A restriction pertaining to the depth of the encroachment would provide a consistent walkway for pedestrian travel. Officer J. Gomez of the Special Operations Bureau recently conducted a survey of the area bounded by "H" Street, "Q" Street, 17~' Street and 24th Street, to determine the number of businesses currently encroaching on city sidewalks. He found twelve businesses which currently are encroaching. He also identified six more which are likely to seek such encroachments. (See attached list.) With the current number of businesses encroaching and those likely to, I believe the above conditions would be conducive to increasing business revenue as well as maintaining order in the downtown area. Brad Wahl, Lieutenant Special Operations Bureau BW/ik Enforcement Issues Associated With A.B.C. Permitted Business Encroachments Lieutenant Brad Wahl June 9, 1998 Downtown Businesses That Are Now Encroaching 1. Goose Loonies 1623 19~h Street Railing/tables 2. Jerry's Pizza 1817 Chester Lane Tables 3. Sharky's 1517 18th Street Tables 4. Tapas Restaurant 1800 Chester Avenue Railing/Tables 5. Wing Wah's Restaurant 1525 19th Street Tables 6. Cinnamon Cyclones 1418 18th Street Tables 7. Rockin Taco 1631 17~h Street Tables 8. *Uricchio's Trattoria 1400 17th Street Railing/Tables 9. Renee'sGourmet Amoure 1514 18th Street Tables 10. Paul's Deli 1521 19th Street Railing 11. Sub Station 1605 20* Street Tables 12. Dagny's Coffee Co. 1600 20t" Street Tables *Private Property Businesses Who Might Require Encroachment Alcohol Permits 13. Spike's Eatery & Tap Room 1534 19~h Street 14. Jelly's Cafe Sport 1918 Eye Street, No. B 15. Jerry's Pizza & Pub 1817 Chester Avenue 16. Sharky's 1517 18th Street 17. Tapas Restaurant 1800 Chester Avenue 18. Rockin Taco 1631 17th Street H St to Q St 17th St to 24th St 4 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SUBSECTION F.1 OF SECTION 17.22.020 OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO USES PERMITTED IN THE C-1 ZONE. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Bakersfield as follows: SECTION 1. Subsection F. 1 of Section 17.22.020 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 17.22.020 Uses permitted. F. The specified store, shops, restaurants or businesses set forth .in subsection B above shall be retail establishments selling new merchandise exclusively, except used merchandise clearly incidental to the regular business conducted on the premises, and shall be permitted only under the following conditions: 1. Such stores, shops, restaurants or businesses, except automobile service stations, shall be conducted entirely within an enclosed building. No outside service or storage of materials is permitted. SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall be posted in accordance with provisions of the Bakersfield Municipal Code and shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. .......... 000 .......... Page 1 of 2 Pages I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on ,, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERCARSON, DEMOND, SMITH, MCDERMOTT, ROWLES, SULLIVAN, SALVAGGIO NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER CITY CLERK and EX OFFICIO of the Council of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED: BOB PRICE, MAYOR CITY OF BAKERSFIELD APPROVED AS TO FORM: JUDY K. SKOUSEN CITY ATTORNEY By: CARL HERNANDEZ III ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY CH\cj $:\COU NCIL\ORD~c- lzone.ord.wpd Page 2 of 2 Pages DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUILDING PLANNING FAX # 805-327-0646 1715 Chester Avenue Phone # 805-326-3733 Bakersfield, Ca. 93301 Date: June 10, 1998 TO: Urban Development Committee FROM: Stanley Grady, Planning Director SUBJECT: Council Referral Part II to Planning Commission: Fourplex Apartments Amenities and Open Space The Subdivision and Public Services Committee of the Planning Commission completed its work in December or 1997. Presentation of their results was delayed due to canceled meetings and agenda scheduling conflicts. They met one time during the scheduling conflicts in April and reviewed their recommendations. The committee recommendations are contained in the table in this memorandum. Their recommendations address mechanisms for encouraging amenities, promoting clustering, limiting numbers of projects at one location, architectural and site design and lot size proposals that support more open space.. The basic element involves raising the minimum lot size using a floor area ratio (FAR)and allowing reductions from the new minimum in favor of amenities. An FAR is simple the ratio of the amount of building square footage to land. The lower the FAR the more land required per total building square footage. Page: 1 of 2 URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS WITH CORRESPONDING RESPONSE FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION (Bold italic is Staff Recommendation) MECHANISM FOR AMENITY LIMIT ON NUMBER AT ONE PROMOTE CLUSTERING MINIMUM SIZE IN THE PROJECT LOCATION Increase Floor Area Ratio Regulate the number 1. No more than two adjacent Floor Area Ratio of.25 for (FAR) if recreational amenity through zoning. Set units shall be perpendicular to two to four units. Rather provided with 4 plex. (See maximum acreage for 4- the street. The unit on either than a set square feet of example no. 2). plexes within a given area. side of the two must be land per unit, the land Control the designation of parallel to the street, requirement is based on the R-2 to control the number size of the building. This and location of potential 2. Alternate between one will provide more open fourplexes, story and two story structures, space for each complex. (See example no. 1) ADDITIONAL RESPONSE FROM PLANNING COMMISSION ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN SITE DESIGN 1. Utility meters & AC units not 1, Average setback 20' or to be visible from street every third lot 2. Elevations for adjacent units 2. Street end unit entry and shall not be the same windows must face street except on arterials. 3. Wall & landscaping is required along arterial streets 4. No more than two adjacent units shall be perpendicular to the street. The unit on either side of the two must be parallel to the street. 5. Alternate between one story and two story structures. EXAMPLE NUMBER 2" - AMENITY CONSIDERATIONS 4 PLEX STRUCTURE EXCLUSIVE MINIMUM LOT SIZE AT 2,500 ADDITIONAL LAND NOT AMENITY CONSIDERATIONS OF GARAGES SQUARE FEET PER REQUIRED IF AMENITY PROVIDED Land for an open space amenity could be set at a percentage of the 3,432 10,000 3,728 additional land that would have been required at the FAR of .25 4,320 10,000 7,280 Criteria: Active recreational amenities such as court sports, Tot 3,890 10,000 5,560 Lots, Playground apparatus per , city code. Public amenities such as outdoor public court yards, covered group picnic areas with BBQ facilities. EXAMPLE NUMBER 1" - MINIMUM LOT SIZE TO ACCOMMODATE FOUR UNITS 4 PLEX STRUCTURE EXCLUSIVE MINIUM LOT SIZE REQUIRED CURRENT MINIMUM LOT SIZE ADDITIONAL LAND REQUIRED OF GARAGES USING AN FAR OF .25 AT 2,500 SQUARE FEET PER USING FAR UNIT 3,432 13,728 10,000 3,728 4,320 17,280 10,000 7,280 3,890 15,560 10,000 5,560 Page: 2 of 2