Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/16/2000 BAKERSFIELD Jeffrey A. Green, Chair David Couch Mike Maggard Staff: John W. Stinson URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE of the City Council - City of Bakersfield Monday, October 16, 2000 4:00 p.m. City Managers Conference Room Second Floor- City Hall, Suite 201 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. ADOPT SEPTEMBER 21, 2000 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 3. PRESENTATIONS 4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 5. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding tree ordinance - Hardisty ~ B. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding opening Shellabarger Road at Pepita Way C. Discussion and Committee.recommendation regarding Freeway Status Report- Rojas D. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding Transportation Development Fees - Capital Improvement Plan 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding Smart Growth Coalition - presentation of Metropolitan Bakersfield Community Image Survey B. Discussion and Committee. recommendation regarding completing arterials in developing areas and getting reimbursement from developers at the time of development 7. COMMITTEE COMMENTS 8. ADJOURNMENT S:~John\UrbanDev\0OOCT 16agen.wpd FILl COPY DRAFT , BAKERSFIELD. - ~ Jeffrey A. Green, Chair Alan Tandy, City Manager David Couch Staff: John W. Stinson Mike Maggard AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SPECIAL MEETING URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Meeting of Thursday, September 21, 2000 4:00 p.m. City Manager's Office - City Hall 1. 'ROLL CALL Call to Order at 4:06 p.m. Present: Councilmembers: Jeffrey Green, Chair; Mike Maggard; and David Couch 2. ADOPT AUGUST 9, 2000 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Adopted as submitted. 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 4. DEFERRED'BUSINESS A.Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding Development Streamlining Task Force Draft Report Last year at the direction of the Urban Development Committee, staff formed a task force composed of a broad range of people who have an interest or are involved and impacted' by development processes to review ways to streamline and make the City's development policies and standards more efficient and responsive. Assistant City Manager John Stinson gave an overview of the draft report that was prepared from the work of the task force. Recommendations in the report include ordinance changes, Public Works design changes, policy changes, and improvements in providing information to the development community. Out of the 35 different issues that were reviewed and work through, only four issues were not fully resolved and require further study by staff and the development industry. The four issues are: 1) allowing parcel map waivers where site will be developed through additional review process baSically to allow for phased tract maps; 2) the extension of vested rights; 3) graded. roads with gravel base regarding off-site sewer facilities; and 4) encroachment permit streamlining. Staff recommended that the Committee accept the report and forward to the Council for approval, implementation of the design recommendations and referral of the ordinances to the Planning Commission for public hearing and recommendation to Council. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE DRAFT Thursday, September 21, 2000 Page -2- Fred Porter, task force member representing CELSOC, spoke regarding the issues that were reviewed and accomplished by the task force, the remaining issues needing further work, and expressed appreciation to City staff and the many groups from the community for their efforts. The Committee unanimously approved forwarding the Development Streamlining Task Force report to the Council for approval, implementation of design recommendations and referral of the proposed ordinances to the Planning Commission for public hearing and-recommendation to the Council. The Committee directed staff to continue to work with the developmenb'building community on the'four remaining issues and return to the Urban Development Committee for further review. B. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding tree maintenance and removal - tree ordinance Development Services Director Jack Hardisty stated that staff has reviewed the Tree Foundation's 50-Year Plan and 'compared it with the City's current ordinance. The City's ordinance is more specific as to the location, spacings and arrangements of trees relative to the area that they are on. ,· It allows for the trees to be spread over the parking lot in an arrangement that gives dual use of area and minimizes the loss of land for parking. The Tree Foundation's plan is more oriented towards the numbers of trees relative to the 'size of the buildings based on shading criteria. Areas of agreement were that the City's ordinance should have stronger maintenance requirements and provisions to prevent taking out large mature trees and replacing with tiny trees. Staff suggested that a draft ordinance be prepared and brought back to the Committee for review. The COmmittee directed staff to get input from the developer community and the Tree Foundation and prepare, a draft ordinance for the Committee's review. C. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding tree enhancement strategy and formation of Tree Advisory Commission Based on direction from the Committee at the last meeting, Assistant City Manager John Stinson presented a draft format for putting in place a Tree Advisory Ad Hoc Committee. Staff has met with Rick Hewett of the Tree Foundation for their input. Recreation and Parks Director Stan Ford has been contacting the different entities to ascertain their level of interest in terms of structure and participation. Dana Adams, Tree Foundation, said she would like to see the inclusion of a certified arborist in the composition of the committee and/or City and County planners. The Committee directed staff to include a placement on the committee for at least one certified arborist, if one can be found who will agree to serve. The Committee unanimously approved sending an administrative report with a Committee recommendation to form a Tree Advisory Ad Hoc Committee to the Council for approval. D. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding Freeway status report - Rojas Public Works Director Raul Rojas reported that the consultant is just getting started. By the December Committee meeting there should be preliminary information to report. DRAFT AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Thursday, September 21, 2000 Page -3- E. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding opening Shellabarger Road at Pepita Way Staff has been meeting with County staff on this and related road issues. Staff generally feels the road should be opened and the map shows that, but there is a sequence of events that would need to take place.to make sure it is safe and wide enough. Qther issues include cost and condemnation of property. Joan-Terese Bird, Leonard Koch, Norma Dixon, Tim Howell and Stuart Baugher spoke in opposition to opening Shellabarger Road at Pepita Way. Karen Cox and Michael Fanucchi spoke in support of opening Shellabarger Road at Pepita Way. Committee member Couch stated if the road is opened, that he would like assurance from the County that the flagman would remain during ~construction on Calloway. Supervisor Patrick asked if a four-way stop would be okay and Committee member Couch was in agreement with that solution. There was a discussion about the need to do something with the 18-wheelers located in the area, cattle trucks, etc., that would cause a problem if the street is opened and they go through that way. The Committee agreed that the Way the gate is now is unacceptable and a solution needs to be arrived at to open the road or provide other access and put in a cul-de-sac. It was expressed that they would like to work further with the County on access roads. A solution needs to be found to alleviate the traffic concerns of the residents before the road is opened. Supervisor Patrick stated she and the County Roads Department will work with the City and residents in the area for a solution. 'Fhe Committee directed staff to do further research on the property required to open the gate and bdng that information back to the next Urban Development Committee meeting and also work out and implement a temporary solution to allow the sanitation trucks access in and out on Shellabarger Road. The Committee unanimously agreed to refer the issue of property condemnation, which would be necessary to widen the road and open the gate, to the October 11th closed session of the City Council. 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding possible new median island alternate minimum standard This item was tabled to the next meeting. DRAFT URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Thursday, ,September 2'1, 2000 Page -4- 6. ADJOURNMENT Adjourned at 7:30 p.m. cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council Attendance: Staff: City Manager Alan Tandy, Assistant City Manager John Stinson, City Attorney Bart Thiltgen, Public Works Director Raul Rojas, Development Services Director Jack Hardisty, Deputy City Attorney Cad Hemandez, Public Works Civil Engineer Madan Shaw; Recreation and Parks Director Stan Ford, Public Works Engineer Ted Wright and Parks Supervisor Ed Lazaroti. ..Others: Dana Adams, Tree Foundation; Conway Lopez, Tree Foundation; Pam Pecarich; Roger Mclntosh; Bdan Todd, BIA of Kem County; Fred Porter;, CELSOC; Kem County Supervisor Barbara Patrick; Rhonda Knight, County Administrative Office; Patricia Ebel, County Roads Department; Leonard Koch; Stuart Baugher; Norma Dixon, Karen Cox; Michael Fanucchi; Tim Howell; Joan- Terese Bird; and James Burger, The Bakersfield Californian. S:John\UrbanDev\U DOOsep21 Summary.wpd MEMORANDUM October 12, 2000 TO: URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE .,,,...~ / FROM: JACK HARDISTY, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIREC RE: ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO TREES You have requested that staff respond to the Tree Foundation's "Fifty Year Strategic Plan" 1 ) by highlighting sections of our landscaping ordinance which could be quickly and directly linked to the plan's proposals for hearings as soon as they might be scheduled and 2) by continuing to work with the Tree Committee (to be established), Planning Commission and others on issues which are more complex and which might present issues of fundamental change. The attached annotated ordinance is our response to your first request. It was prepared in collaboration with a committee of the Planning Commission which is involved in a broader review of our landscape ordinance. You will see that in some instances recommended changes are proposed while in other commentary a range of alternatives is discussed. This draft is to facilitate your discussion and bring focus on what you would consider an acceptable scope of amendments you would recommend for public hearings. Once that is determined, we will draft a committee report to the City Council recommending a referral to the Planning Commission for public notice and hearings. JH:pah cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council Alan Tandy, City Manager John Stinson, Assistant City Manager Bakersfield Municipal Code - Title 17, Zoning Ordinance Landscape Standards - DRAFT Chapter 17.61 LANDSCAPE STANDARDS Sections: Chapter page 17.61.010 Generally. 17.61.020 Landscaping required. 17.61.030 Minimum landscape standards. 17. 61.040 Landscape maintenance. 17. 61.050 Tree preservation and protection. 17. 61.060 Landscape plan requirements. NOTE: Proposed Changes or notes are shown in italics. All else is language that currently exists in the zoning ordinance. In addition, the Landscape Standards Committee of the Planning Commission reviewed these changes on October 11, 2000, and staff has incorporated their comments into this ordinance. October, 2000 Chapter 17. 61, Page 1 Bakersfield Municipai Code - Title 17, Zoning Ordinance Landscape Standards - DRAFT 17.61.010 GENERALLY. The purpose of this chapter is to establish the necessary criteria, standards and limits for landscaping. The provisions of this section are intended to provide a transition between, and mitigate conflicts which may arise between, adjacent land uses, to promote an attractive visual harmony between the landscape and development and to reduce air, noise and visual pollution. 17.61.020 LANDSCAPING REQUIRED. A. All projects for which site plan approval is required shall install landscaping in accordance with the following requirements; provided however, these landscape requirements shall not apply to projects where a current use is expanded but the valuation of the building permit is less than 50% of the replacement value of the existing improvements. If the existing uses are to be expanded greater than 50% of their replacement value, the Planning Director shall determine the amount and placement of landscaping needed to comply with this section. B. Occupancy of a use subject to these standards shall not be permitted until the approved landscaping and irrigation has been installed, or if permitted by the Planning Director, an agreement and/or surety bond or cash deposit sufficient to cover the cost of installation which amount has been determined to complete the work plus administration costs by the city, and such has been provided to the city specifying completion of installation within a time specified by the Planning Director. · Clarify that these standards apply to allprojects with the exception of single family residential lots. 17.61.030 MINIMUM LANDSCAPE STANDARDS. A. Installation of landscape materials shall be in accordance with commonly accepted methods of installation. · The city has a standard that can be used as a tree planting guideline (Public Works standard L-1 O) if such needs to be incorporated into this ordinance. October. 2000 Chapter 17. 61, Page 2 BakersfieM Municipal Code - Title 17, Zoning Ordinance Landscape Standards - DRAFT B. Trees shall be equivalent to minimum 15 gallon container size or larger and shall be vigorous and healthy when planted. The 15 gallon minimum size is what most surveyed communities use. Some go as far in their ordinance to state that a 15 gallon tree is the minimum, but suggest use of a 24" box tree. Some communities also specify the minimum size of tree based on its trunk size and height (eg. 2" trunk diameter, 15' high) The PC Committee examined having a percentage of larger trees required to mix the tree size (eg. 50% - 15 gal, 25% - 24" box, 25% - 36" box). They have recommended that the minimum tree size remain 15 gallons but add that the minimum caliper tree trunk diameter (as measured from grade 4' up the trunk) be 1" minimum for a 15 gallon tree, 2" diameter for a 24" box tree, and 3" diameter for a 36" box tree. C. Shrubs shall be a minimum 5 gallon container size or larger and shall be vigorous and healthy When planted. Recommend adding that mass shrub planting be allowed at 1 gallon and flats for ground covers. Maximum spacing of these would be 18" on center for 1 gallon plants and 8" on center for ground covers. D. · Live vegetative matter shall cover, no less than 75% of the required landscaped area at its maturity. · Clarify that this applies to shrubs and ground covers, and instead of stating maturity, that the coverage be achieved in 4 years. E. Where setbacks and public improvements allow, a landscaped area 10 feet in width on arterial streets and 8 feet in width on collector and local streets shall be installed behind the back of the curb or sidewalk along said street. The width of the landscape strip may be reduced when, in the opinion of the Planning Director, the following conditions are met: 1. The total square footage of required landscaped area remains constant; 2. The reduction in the required width is consistent with the purposes of the landscape regulations of this chapter. October, 2000 Chapter 17. 61, Page 3 Bakersfield Municipal Code - Title 17, Zoning Ordinance Landscape Standards - DRAFT 3. In the central district (C-B and C-C zone districts) this reduction may include the planting of street trees only to allow adequate pedestrian access consistent with adjacent development. Those zones that do not have setbacks (downtown and Mzones) are allowed lesser width landscape strips. If the first six words of the paragraph are removed, the landscape strip minimum would prevail as the minimum requirement along street frontages. The PC Committee has no recommendation at this time and would consider this as a long-term issue to be reviewed by them at the direction of the Council. F. Along street frontages, a tree shall be planted at a ratio of 1 tree per 35 lineal feet, or portion thereof. Alternatively, trees may be planted in groupings which include a number of trees equal to those required by the 1 tree per 35 foot ratio. A minimum of ½ of the trees required along each street frontage shall be evergreen species. The Planning Commission has required a 30' spacing for some recent PCD projects with 100% evergreen species. However, if more shade is required to achieve 50% as recommended by the Tree Foundation, then more deciduous trees would be necessary as they have on average greater canopy areas than most evergreens. The PC Committee recommends that the ratio be reduced to 1 tree per 30' and that the species mix be 30% evergreen and 70% deciduous. G. In parking lots provide at least 1 tree for each 6 parking spaces placed at a maximum of 65 foot intervals. · Surveys of other cities have ranged from 1 treeper 2 spaces to 1 treeper I0 spaces though most tree oriented ordinances require 1 tree per 4 spaces. No wording exists in the city's ordinance that these trees be within the parking area though it is implied and practiced that way during the review process. Also, if carports or other shade structures are used, would this count towards meeting shade? The PC Committee recommends that the number (! tree per 6 spaces) remain but agree that wording be added that these trees be in the parking area. They also recommend that the interval distance be removed and replaced with language that spacing be such that achieves the shading required in item H. The Committee feels that credit shouM not be given for buildings used for shading so that the project still has trees. October. 2000 Chapter 17. 61, Page 4 Bakersfield Municipal Code - Title 17, Zoning Ordinance Landscape Standards - DRAFT 5." H. Parking lot trees shall be installed and thereafter maintained throughout the parking area to ensure that 30% of the parking lot will be shaded based on calculating 90% of the tree species mature shade area. · The Tree Foundation recommends a 50% coverage after 15 years (we assume from time offinal occupancy of the site or building). Fifteen years appears to be a common time standard used by the cities that have aggressive tree ordinances. The City of Davis has in their ordinance a good definition of how shade is calculated, and what is considered parla'ng lot area (excludes loading areas, truck maneuvering areas, auto dealership displays, and other outdoor retail display areas). They also use a chart showing trees with canopy area shade calculations and they have a recommended tree list of what species can be used in the parking lot for shade. By building this into the ordinance, staff and developers clearly know what trees are allowed, and the area chart is easily used to determine if the 50% can be achieved. Their landscape plans show tree diameters based on the chart so that a person can visually determine if lO0%, 75%, 50%, or 25% of the canopy is counted as parla'ng lot shade. Overlapping tree canopies would not count twice. This appears to be a good user-friendly approach. The PC Committee suggests that 30% shade coverage occur in lO years and 50% within 15 or 20 years (whichever can be realistically achieved based on our climate though 15 years is preferred). They also agreed with staff with using the ideas in the Davis ordinance for calculating shade and a creating a list of parking lot trees if this can be easily put into our ordinance. · I. Buildings with main entrances facing parking lots shall be landscaped with a minimum of 1 tree for each 50 feet of linear building frontage or portion thereof. Said trees shall be adjacent to the building and may also be credited for parking lot trees if they comply with the requirements set forth in paragraph L. · Staffcommented on thepastproblems they have experienced with this section. These trees are usually the first removed by a shopping center due to them not surviving (reflected heat from walls), or being placed to close buildings where root problems, overhang or sign blockage result in them being removed. In addition, trees next to the building conflict with the need by the Fire Department to have adequate fire lane access and we have seen trees either removed or not put in due to keeping a clear fire lane. The PC Committee recommends leaving this requirement but allow clustering of trees and use of large shrubs and vines to break up long building walls if necessary. The ordinance would permit limited Planning Director discretion so that trees would not conflict with fire lanes, main entrances, etc. Staff would look at the building's architecture and work with the developer as to location and species selection to ensure their survival. October, 2000 Chapter 17.61, Page 5 BakersfieM Municipal Code - Title 17, Zoning Ordinance Landscape Standards - DRAFT J. Of the total number of trees required in the parking area and for the entire project, 30% shall be evergreen species. · Because of the desire to have more shade canopy as mentioned earlier for streets, the PC Committee recommends no changes to this section. K. In addition to the trees referenced in paragraphs L., M., and N., evergreen trees shall be installed along the property line perimeter, in the required landscape area required by Section 17.58.050 N., of drive aisles, parking lots, loading areas and storage areas as a buffer between office, commercial and industrial uses and property zoned for residential uses. Said trees shall be spaced no further apart than 30 feet on center. · Recently approved PCDprojects have required lesser spacing at 25', 20', and 15', though 20' seems to be preferred. Also, these projects have required 100% of the trees to be evergreen, and sizes ranging from 24" - 36" box. The PC Committee recommends spacing be reduced to 20' to improve screening. Tree species would also be 100% evergreen to create a year-round screen and reduce litter onto neighboring residential lots. Minimum tree size wouM be 15 gallon if the adjacent residential area is not developed, and 24" box minimum if the adjacent residential area is developed. Another issue concerns requiring a larger landscape'buffer to allow staggering of trees if adjacent to hazardous type land uses. The Committee has no recommendation at this time and would consider this as a long-term issue to be reviewed by them at the direction of the Council. L. Landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in compliance with any approved site plan or other project approval prior to final inspection or occupancy. Additional issues for this section: · Addprovisionsfor minimum treeplanter and tree well sizes. Landscape architects suggest that the minimum tree well size be 5' x 5'. However, since the city allows a vehicle to overhang into a landscaped area up to 2 % ', a tree well or planter that has parking on both sides may need to be at least 7' wide. This wouM allow a 2%' overhang on both sides and leave a 2' area for the tree to grow with room to not be hit by vehicles. For just a planter without parking overhang, a 5' wide planter wouM be sufficient. The PC Committee recommends a minimum 5' x 5' tree well with such to be designed to allow vehicle overhang without damaging the tree. October, 2000 Chapter 17. 61, Page 6 Bakersfield Municipal Code - Title 17, Zoning Ordinance Land~cape Standards - DRAFT 17.'61. 040 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE. A. All plant material shall be maintained in a healthy condition at all times. Maintenance shall include, but is not limited to, programmed watering, consistent fertilizing, weed control, cleaning, pruning, trimming, pest control and cultivating. B. Landscape structural features shall be maintained in sound structural and attractive condition. C. All plant material shall be serviced by a permanently installed, electrically automated sprinkler system. · Add that city encourages the use of water conservation systems. Additional issues for this section: · The PC Committee recommends that treepruning.follow the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) pruning guidelines which recommends that tree-topping be prohibite& all cuts be made at the branch collar; and no more than 25% of the tree canopy be pruned. The ordinance would not apply to utility companies trimming trees in developments for the purpose of providing necessary clearance for power lines, etc. · · Recognize those businesses that have kept their landscaping and tree canopies consistent with the city's goals and reward them with certificate, plaque, etc., and publicize. This would probably not be in this ordinance but through some program with the Urban Forester or arborist. It would be a way to publically recognize the efforts of businesses to provide shade and beautification of their projects for the benefit of the community. 17. 61.050 TREE PRESER VA TION AND PROTECTION. A. Replacement planting must conform to the original intent of the landscape design.' Additional issues: · The PC Com~nittee reco~nmends that trees be replaced at the average size of what is existing not to exceed a 48" box. The ordinance would identiy~y that replacement occur within a specified time period (30-60 days). Replacement would also be the same species as shown on the approved landscape plan or if change, the revised landscape plan showing that all provisions of the ordinance (including shading) are satisfied. October, 2000 Chapter 17. 61, Page 7 Bakersfield Municipal Code - Title 17, Zoning Ordinance Landscape Standards - DRAFT · The PC Committee also examined how to protect existing trees (generally those with a trunk diameter of 6" or more). Thoughts ranged from this being a discretionary action by the Planning Director working with the developer, to requiring the developer to replace the number removed with, for example; a 36" or 48" box tree (l for 1 replacement if the existing couM not be saved due to building location, grading, etc.). The PC Committee has no recommendation at this time and would consider this as a long-term issue to be reviewed by them at the direction of the Council. 17.61.060 LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS. A. A workable scale (preferred -- 1 inch equals 10 feet or larger) and north arrow; B. Property lines, overhead and underground power easements; C. Dimensions; D. Location of all trees and shrubs. Mature tree head diameter shall be depicted to scale; E. Existing and proposed structures; F. Existing natural features (note on plan to be removed or retained); G. Landscape drainage plan (showing method of water removal from the landscape areas); H. A plant specification list must be submitted: 1. Keyed to the plan, 2. Estimated sizes at planting and at maturity, 3. Head diameter of trees at maturity and whether the tree is evergreen or deciduous, 4. Container sizes, 5. Quantity of each, 6. Percent of parking lot shading which will result from tree landscaping calculated in accordance with this section, 7. Percent of evergreen trees located in parking lot and percent located along project perimeter (excluding trees required as buffer in Section 17.61.030P.). 8. Botanical and common plant names. October, 2000 Chapter 17. 61, Page 8 B A K E R S F I E L D , ' '122000 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT i M E M ORA N D U M !~.~ ~y !~..~:.,~,'r - ~-.~--,~. ~,-.: ....... ~V;~.~ .!~ ~'~...~'~ ... ~ : ~"~ ..C TO: Urban Development Committee FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director ~ ~ / DATE: October 11, 2000 SUBJECT: Metropolitan Bakersfield Regional Transportation Impact Fee Facilities List The City is required by State law to annually adopt a Capital Improvement Plan for the Transportation Impact Fee. This Capital Improvement Plan reflects the City of Bakersfield Capital Improvement Plan adopted by the city Council for FY 2000-2001. Please find attached a list of projects proposed to be added to the existing Transportation Impact Fee Facilities List. These projects are all of regional importance and are required, in whole or in part, to accommodate new development. The new projects total approximately $32.8 million. The projects on the existing list which have been completed comes to approximately $35 million. Since this list is a "rolling" twenty year facilities list, and since the total cost of the projects on the list does not increase, the current fee does not need to be adjusted from a project standpoint. However, staff is still investigating the fee with respect to inflation and may propose an adjustment if necessary. This item needs to be heard and approved by the Council by the end of 2000, so staff plans to send the resolution adopting this list to the November 29 Council Agenda. S:\MEMOSX2000\TIF to UrbDev.wpd RMR:mps xc: Reading File Project File Jacques R. La Rochelle Marian P. Shaw New Projects Proposed for the Transportation Facilities List: 24th from Oak to D Street Construction $7,000,000 Alfred Harrell @ Lake Ming Road New Signal $120,000 Berkshire @ Kern Island Canal Bridge Widening $80,000 Buena Vista @ River Run New Signal $120,000 College at Fairfax Street Improvement $290,000 Comanche @ Alfred Harrell Street Construction $350,000 Harris Road @ SJRR At Grade RR Crossing $135,000 Hosking @ Kern Island Bridge Widening $100,000 Hosking @ SR 99 New InterChange $10,200,000 Hosking from Akers to Wible Street Widening $478,600 Hosking from Wible to So. H Street Widening $754,000 Kroll Way @ AE Canal Bridge Construction $300,000 McKee @ SR 9 Bridge Construction $3,000,000 Oak from California to 24th Street Widening $200,000 I Oak/24th/Sillect Bridge Construction $4,500,000 SR 178 Freeway R/W Right-of-way preservation $3,000,000 SR 178 from Morning to Miramonte Street Widening $2,150,000 TOTAL $32,777,600 Total Cost of Projects completed: $34,984,469 C:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Shared\Help\Notebkl .qpw 10/12/00 Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: Street Construction - 24th Street from Oak to D Street /24th Street IOak Street ID Street Project Description: Add one eastbound and one westbound lane from Oak Street to D Street. Improvement Length (Miles): 0.6 mile Number of Lanes (Striped): 4 Number of Lanes Proposed: 6 Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: 2 Estimate Project Cost: Right-of-way Construction $7,000,000.00 Signal Additional Total $7,000,000.00 Reason for Adding to List: This project is on the Phase 1 list. It was 'inadvertently left off the Phase II list. TIF Project Number: G:~ub~SHARED~PRO J ECTS~OutSewer~TIF~Working\Streetconstruct~24th-Oak-D-wb31 Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: New Signal at Alfred Harrell and Lake Ming Road Alfred Harrell Lake Min nal Project Description: Construct new signal at Alfred Harrell and Lake Ming Road. Improvement Length (Miles): N/A Number of Lanes (Striped): N/A Number of Lanes Proposed: N/A Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: N/A Estimate Project Cost: Right-of-way Construction Signal Additional Total $120,000.00 Reason for Adding to List: TIF Project Number: G:~sub~S HARED~PRO JECTS~TIF~Working~lewSignal~AlfredHarrelI-LakeMingRd'wb31 Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: Bridge Widening - Berkshire Road at Kern Island Canal Berkshire ISo. H Street IKern Island Canal IWiden Culvert Project Description: widen existing culvert at Kern ISland Canal and Berkshire (just east of So. H Street) to accommodate a full width collector. Improvement Length (Miles): Number of Lanes (Striped): 2 Number of Lanes Proposed: 4 ,,.--. Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: 2 Estimate.Project Cost: Right-of-way Construction Signal Additional 80,000.00 Total $80,000.00 Reason for.Adding to List: Berkshire is a collector serving an area that is primarily residential. Because of the Arvin-Edison Canal paralleling So. H, outlets to So. H are limited to the collector (Berkshire) & arterials (Hosking, Panama). The bridge widening is a necessary regional improvement due to the constricted access. TIF Project Number: G:~sub~SHARED~PROJECTS~TIl~VVorkingW~denBridge_Berkshire~KernlstandCanal.wb31 Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: New Signal at Buena Vista and River Run Buena Vista I River Run I nal Project Description: Install new si~]nal at Buena Vista and River Run. Improvement Length (Miles): N/A Number of Lanes (Striped): N/A Number of Lanes Proposed: N/A Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: N/A Estimate Proiect Cost: Right-of-way Construction Si~]nal Additional $120,000.00 Total $120,000.00 Reason for Adding to List: TIF Project Number: G:~sub[SHARED~PRO JECTS~TIFWVorking~BuenaVista_RiverRun.wb$1 Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: Street Improvement - College @ Faidax College 160o" w/c Fairfax I Fairfax I Widen street Project Description: Add north side of College for full width collector and expanded intersection at approximately 600'. Improvement Length (Miles): 0.12' Number of Lanes (Striped): 2 Number of Lanes Proposed: 4 Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: 2 Reason for Adding to List: College is a collector serving a primarily residential area..Although somewhat built-out, the area is still able to grow. This segment of College will never be improved through the subdivision process, due to the East Niles water tank site. Typically, widening these types of roads fall to the City-i.e, Panama Lane @ canal, etc. Because of the growth potential, this must be considered a regional improvement. TIF Project Number: C:~Program Files\CoreP, WordPerfect Office 2000\Sharecl~-Ielp~Notebkl.qpwl Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: Street Construction - Comanche / Alfred Harrell Project Description: Re-align Comanche Road to Alfred Harrell at SR 178. Construct signal, install lighting. Joint City/County/State project. Improvement Length (Miles): Number of Lanes (Striped): Number of Lanes Proposed: Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: :~i! i:~Co nstructioh:: =, !:;=. :~ii:'. :: :i?i'i;i i:!:,:?~ ~: :',i~i:i!i:~ Reason for Adding to List: The re-alignment of Comanche.@ SR 178 is necessary for safety considerations, and will help traffic flow in the northeast. SR 178 is the major traffic arterial serving the northeast. TIF Project Number: C:\Program Files~Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Shared~lelp\Notebkl.qpwl Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: Street Improvement - Harris (~ San Joaquin Railroad Crossing (SJRR) Harris Is~.. I IAt-Grade Crossing Project Description: Construct at-grade crossing of San Joaquin Railroad @ Harris Improvement Length (Miles): N/A Number of Lanes (Striped): N/A Number of Lanes Proposed: N/A Number of-Lanes Funded by Fee: N/A Estimate Project Cost: Right-of-way Construction $135,000.00 Signal Additional Total $135,000.00 Reason for Adding to List: TIF Project Number: G:~sub~SHARED~PROJ ECTS~TIl~VVorking~Harris{~SJRR.wb31 Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: Bridge Widening - Hosking Road (~ Kern Island Canal Hosking I So. H Street I Kern Island Canal I Widen Culvert Project Description: Widen existing culvert at Kern Island Canal and Hosking (just east of So. H Street) to accommodate a full width arterial. Improvement Length (Miles): N/A Number of Lanes (Striped): 2 Number of Lanes Proposed: 6 Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: 4 Estimate Project Cost: Right-of-way Construction Signal Additional 100,000.00 Total $100,000.00 Reason for Adding to List: Berkshire is a collector serving an area that is primarily residential. Because of the AE Canal paralleling So. H, outlets to So. H are 'limited to the collector (Berkshire) & arterials (Hosking, Panama). The bridge widening is a necessary regional improvement due to the constricted access. TIF Project Number: G:~sub~SHARE D~PROJECTS~OutSewet~TIFW~rking~W3den Bridge_Hosking~KernlslandCanal.wb31 Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: New Interchange - Hosking @ SR 99 Project Description: Widen existing bridge, construct interchange at Hosking and SR 99. Includes Project Study Report (PSR). .Improvement Length (Miles): N/A Number of Lanes (Striped): N/A Number of Lanes Proposed: N/A Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: N/A Estimate Project Cost: Right-of-way Construction . $10,000,000.00 Signal Additional (PSR) 200,000.00 Total $10,200,000.00 Reason for Adding to List: Both Panama Lane and Taft Highway show large volumes ~ 99 in 2020 due to the lack of an intermediate interchange to serve this area. An interchange at 99 and Hosking would relieve congestion at the other two interchanges and would serve the heart of this rapidly developing area. TIF Project Number: G:~sub~SHARED~PROJECTS~Out Sewer~TIF~Working~Newlnterchange_Hosking~SR99.wb31 Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: Street widening - Hosking from Akers to Wible Project Description: Add two westbound and two eastbound lanes on Hosking from Akers to Wible. Improvement Length (Miles): 1/2 mile Number of Lanes (Striped): 2 Number of Lanes Proposed: 6 Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: 4 .Estimate Project Cost: Right-of-way $48,600.00 Construction $430~000.00 Signal Additional Total $478,600.00 Reason for Adding to List: This area of town is experiencing rapid growth. The area has been underserved by the road network-- the only continuous east-west arterials, Panama Lane and Taft Highway, are two .miles apart. The general plan requires arterials at one mile intervals. With the construction of an interchange at Hosking and 99, this roadway will help to serve the regional transportation needs of the area. TIF Project Numberi G:~sub~SHARED~PRO. JECTS'~Out Sewer~TIl~Working~widenHosking_Akers_~ble.wb31 Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: Street widening - Hosking from Wible to So. H Street Hosking Iwible I So. H Street Project Description: Add two westbound and two eastbound lanes on Hosking from Wible to So. H Street, excepting interchange.work (approximately 1000'). Improvement Length (Miles): 0.8 mile Number of Lanes (Striped): 2 Number of Lanes Proposed: 6 Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: 4 Estimate Project Cost: Right-of-way $56,240.00 Construction $697,120.00 Signal Additional' Total . $753,360.00 Reason for Adding to List: This area of town is experiencing rapid growth. The area has been under-served by the road network-- the only continuous east-west arterials, Panama Lane and Taft Highway, are two miles apart. The general plan requires arterials at one mile intervals. With the construction of an interchange at Hosking and 99, this roadway will help to serve the regional transportation needs of the area. R/W 25' on north from Wible to 2650' east and from So. H to 900' west and 25' on south from 300' west of Wible to 1050' east, excepting approximately 110' (~ Parcel Map 6142 and 400' west of South H Street. 25'x (2650+900+1050-110+400) x $0.46 = $56,235 TIF Project Number: Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: Bridge Construction - Kroll Way at Arvin Edison Canal Kroil Way IArvin Edison I IBridge Construction Project Description: Construct box culvert.on Kroll Way to cross the Arvin Edison Canal. Improvement Length (Miles): Number of'Lanes (Striped): 4 Number of Lanes Proposed: 4 Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: 4 ?:~i:~c~tracti.on ;000: ! :Total :~;!i!!?:::! i!! ~i!'.iii?.: i i?:::;]!?,! ii'~':;~::il ;; :i:,::i $ 30 O; 000 Reason for Adding to List: TIF Project Number: C:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Shared\Heip\Notebkl .qpw Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: Brid~le Construction - McKee (~ 99 I UcKee Road I SR"" I I construct brid,e over SR 99 I Project Description: Construct McKee Road overcrossing at SR 99. Improvement Length (Miles): N/A Number of Lanes (Striped): N/A Number of Lanes Proposed: NIA Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: N/A I Estimate Project Cost: Right-of-way Construction $3,000~000.00 Signal Additional Total $3,000,000.00 Reason-for Adding to List: This bridge will add continuity to the transportation network in this rapidly developin9 area. TIF Project Number: G:~SuB~SHARED~ROJECTS~Out ~ewe~TIF~Woildng~ridgeConstructio~ Mc~ee_99-wb3 $ Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: Street widening - Oak from California Avenue to 24th Street Project Description: Add one northbound and one southb'ound lane. Improvement Length (Miles): 1 mile Number of Lanes (Striped): Number of Lanes Proposed: Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: Reason for Adding to List: In 2020, the roadway segments leading to the intersection of 24th and Oak will be at LOS F. These segments operated at about LOC C in 1994. To handle the increase in traffic due to development, a multi-phase project is required to widen the roadway segments. TIF Project Number: C:~°rogram Files~Comi~Wo~dPe~ect Office 200~Shared~elp~Notebkl,qpwl Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: Bridge Construction - Oak St./24th St./Sillect Ave. Project Description: Construct bridges and roadway to connect Oak St. @ 24th St. to Silect Ave. Construct bridges over the Kern River and the Cross Valley Canal. Construct-single point urban interchange at Oak and 24th. Improvement Length (Miles): 0.2 Number of Lanes (Striped): 0 Number of Lanes Proposed: 4 Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: 4 Reason for Adding to List: In 2020, the roadway segments leading to the intersection of 24th and Oak will be at LOS F. These segments operated at about LOC C in 1994. To handle the increase in traffic due to development, a multi-phase project is required to widen the r.oadway segments and, because the intersection is the "choke point", improve the intersection to handle large amounts of traffic through construction of an urben interchange. This project wll also add an alternate route from/to the downtown area and SR 99 by connecting Oak Street to sillect and the ramps at SR 99. TIF Project Number: C:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Shared\Help\N°tebkl .qpw Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: Freeway Right-of-Way: SR 178 as freeway from Vineland to Alfred Harrell I SR178 IVineland IA,fredHarre, I on,y I' Project Description: Purchase of PJW along the SR 178 Freeway alignment. Property will be purchased as development occurs. Improvement Length (Miles): Approx. 2 1/2 miles Number of Lanes (Striped): Number of Lanes Proposed: Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: Reason for Adding to List: The future freeway will serve both regional and interregional traffic. Purchase of the right-of-way can be considered as the City's local share of this freeway project. Both the .Kern River Freeway and the South Beltway were treated similarly. TIF Project Number: C:~Program Files~Core~WorflPedect Office 2~elp~lotebkl.qpwl Projects to be Added to the Regional Transportation Facilities List: Project Title: Street Widening - SR 178 from Morning to Miramonte SR 178 I Morning I Mirimonte Project Description: Add one eastbound and one westbound lane to SR 178 from Morning to Mirimonte Improvement Length (Miles): 5 Number of Lanes (Striped): 2 Number of Lanes Proposed: 4 Number of Lanes Funded by Fee: 2 Reason for Adding to List: SR 178 is the major arterial serving the northeast. Substantial development is expected to occur in this area over the next 20 years. Although the current traffic volume can be handled with 2 lanes, the 2020 volumes will require the addition of 2 more lanes. TIF Project Number: Metropolitan Bakersfield Community Image Survey "A vibrant metropolitan center and county seat Is a benefit to afl citizens" Smart Growth Coatition of Kern County (A private non-profit organization) March 2000 Metropolitan Bakersfield Community Images Survey Metropo[itan Bakersfield is 8rowins, perhaps faster and bi88er than anyone really anticipated. People are besinnin8 to want an active voice in how our communities 8row. Too often public participation is reactive, in response to a sins[e issue, and lines can be drawn between "sides" too quickly to build a consensus solution. The Smart Growth Coalition has tried to facilitate early notification of devetopment actions in hopes that our community's po[icymakers wi[[ hear more community voices from ail sides of development issues. This Community Imase Survey is one means of articu[atin8 our community's fee[inss and desires about our 8rowth. We hope it can provide useful 8uidance when the Board of Supervisors, our various City Councils, Commissions and P[annin8 Departments address these issues. We would like to thank the many organizations and their members w~to participated in this Survey. These many people and organizations have exhibited a high community spirit and shown that human capital and energy are available in this community to maximize the livability of our area. Summary of Results: Community images evoking strong responses provide significant information to engineers, planners and developers about how we want our community to grow and how we want it designed. Participants overwhelmingly stressed the importance of "tree-based" landscaping in making virtually every aspect of the community more attractive. We are intensely attracted to recreational facilities that support Kern's active lifestyle, such as the Kern River Bike path and Parkway. Consistently the survey demonstrated the importan~'e of the soothing qualities of water and greenery. The survey demonstrates our preference to dramatically increase our tree canopy and water vistas. A vibrant and hospitable city center was important to participants, where shade and sidewalk amenities welcome pedestrians. Consistent and strong 'comments were received suggesting tax and other developmental incentives to avoid inner city blight or decline as we plan to add commercial development away from established areas. Participants' reaction to urban/agricultural interface suggests supporting farmland preservation by controlling urban sprawl. We, as a community, value the visual landscape of growing fields over the blight of vacant, fallow [and. Many participants noted that "leap frog" housing interferes with effective farming operations. Our participants rated several images of high-density housing. There were many positive reactions to high density housing, like apartments and condominiums. Negative reactions came out clearly only when the appearance and maintenance of the units were be[ow standard. These findings come. from a wide cross-section of the community and were consistent. Features that received low ratings throughout the city show that we can accomplish a lot to significantly improve our community's livability. These efforts can extend beyond planning and regulation. They can include current landowners' improved efforts to upgrade maintenance and landscaping. Comments suggested that joint City and County incentives should be established to enable such improvements. METHODOLOGY: This Community Image Survey consists of 44 images of physical features in the metropolitan Bakersfield area taken in 1999. The images are intended to represent varyin~ kinds of standards for public works construction and planning. Typically more than one slide representin~ each standard or feature is . presented, with slides representin~ both positive and negative aspects of the same feature. We show the slides in random order so that the order does not emphasize the pairing. We have presented the survey to more than 25 community ~roups, (see pa~e 16). More than 500 peopte have participated. We asked the participants to rate each image on a scale from minus five (the most negative) to ptus five (the most positive), with zero bein§ neutral. We asked participants to add their own comments. Some issues disp[ayed in the visual imases are: The urban-rural interface; Industrial activities and residential interfaces; Standards for appearance both residential and commercial deveiopment; Recreational facilities; Parkin8 and traffic control; and Downtown and commercial development. Fo[iowin8 are 22 imases in 11 pairs, which most clearly represent the opinions of our participants: ·. ., ~i ,. · ~'. ,.,,.'i~. · · ' ,~':"1 ~' .~ . ', ... . . . '(':?" '~'~:~. ?.'~',72 .:..~L :..}L .. ' ':' Slide A Slide B Grade: Negative .8 6rade: Positive 2.7 Location' 19th Street, East of L Street Location' 19th Street, West of Chester Avenue A few short brocks make a great dear of difference in the appeal of these two retail areas. Many noted tt~at the area in Slide A is dean and in good repair, but distinct[y [ess appealing than the sidewalk cafes on slide B. The area of Downtown west of Chester has been the object of much activity in the last five years. The appearance of sidewalk seating, plants, the awning to shade this south facing sidewatk, at[ invite shoppers and those who work in the area to enjoy the street. White the area of slide B is ctean and we[[ maintained, the [ack of greenery and the [ack of shade in our hot summers as welt as the vacant tots, makes this area much less inviting. SLide A SLide B Grade' Negative 2.1 Grade: Positive 2.5 Location: Ming ~ Sou~h H Street Location: F S~reet ~ 20~h S~reet SLides A and B are of two very different treatments of professional offices. SLide A shows a strip maLL office. SLide B shows a dental office in an adapted residential structure mixed use commercial residential area. The sLide B area has had mixed uses for many years. Yet the adjacent residential area continues to be one of BakersfieLd's most desirable. Even very modest homes there have commanded a premium compared with similar homes in other parts of the City. Adaptive reuse and sensitivity to surrounding homes and other structures are cLearLy weLL received. Homogenized strip maLL development that turns its back on neighbors seems much Less appealing. Our participants strongly supported zoning and planning approaches that provide incentives and are sensitive to a neighborhood's existing character. Stide A Stide B Grade: Negative 3.2 Grade: Positive 2.0 Locati()n: Columbus Street near Eric Street Location: 24th &Encina Stides A and B show two very different kinds of mu[tip[edwet[ingdevelopment. SlicleB, ano[derbunga[ow court on a busy downtown artery, is weir maintained. Responses to this image indicate that higher density housing is not autornaticat[y perceived as unattractive or undesirabte. S[ide A shows a rnuttipie dwe[ting development on a busy thoroughfare near an attractive neighborhood. It shows much tess attractive tandscaping, maintenance and a tower quality of construction. Property structured incentives to devetopers of multiple family housing could encourage ~T~ore attractive architecture and more appealing use of landscaping. Stide A Stide B Grade: Negative 2.1 Grade: Positive 3.2 Location: Brundage [~ Mt. Vernon Location' Bakersfield Californian, Pe3asus Slides A and B show toca[ industriat plants. Slide B with its attractive tandscaping is located in a dedicatecl industria[area, whites[ideAis[ocatedina mixed-useindustria[/residentia[area. Even the most rudimentary landscaping, trash clean-up and simple concealment from the street of' the industrial yards in slide A wouLd enhance it §reat[y. The differing reactions to the twos[idessupportastron8 commitment to ensuring that industrial and residential uses do not encroach upon each other. Slide A Slide B Grade: Ne§ative 1.3 Grade' Positive 3.0 LOcation: Baker Street Near Kentucky Location' Chester Avenue at lC)th Street Slides A anct B show two very different aspects of' centra[ commercial districts. S[ide A is the Baker Street district, once the'retail and commercial hub of eastern Bakersfield. Much of the commercial activity that enlivened this area has moved to strip mails farther to the east.. This area has shown a [ar§e decline in tile economic vitality that can allow a landlord to maintain his property. S[ide B is an image of Chester Avenue at l C)thstreet. This area has benefited froma resurgence of retail and entertainment and specialty uses as Downtown §overnment, professional anti financial activiLy has stabilized. The strong response to Chester Avenue is a vote of conficlence in the notion ora vibrant downtown center. The ne§ative response to Baker Street is a warning of what can happen to commercial areas where planning policies chase low-density sprawl. Slide A Slide B Grade: Negative 'I .5 Grade: Positive 3.9 Location: NiLes atHi[[crest Location: TheMarketp[ace Ever-expanding growth [eaves tile inner rings of the city witi~out the economic activity tllat formerly enlivened them is especiatly evident in the responses to Slides A and B. Tile way these two centers allow people to enjoy the space around them is the key difference between these two centers. In tt~e l-li[~crest Center, the unshaded sidewa[k is the on[y pub[ic[y open space. At ttleMarketp[ace, spacious pubtic areas shaded with awnings and trees areamp[yavai[ab[e. Outdoor restaurants provide places to enjoy the pleasant evening weather that Bakersfie[d is b[essed with through so much of the year. Open and attractive developments draw economic vitality from older commercial areas, creating blight. Our deve[opment fees and other regulatory impositions should be relaxed in these areas to encourage their renewal. Stide A Slide B Grade: Negative 0.5 Grade: Positive 3.2 Location: Southwest Bakersfield Location' Gosford south of/~ing Local transportation depends heavity on private automobiles. Slides A and B address our streets' appearance. WhiLe clean and we[L maintained, it is in stark and treeless contrast to SLide B with its landscaped median and shady trees. While landscape assessment districts add carryin§ cost to a retail area, they support this kind of enjoyment and can yield additional business. 11 Slide A Slide B Grade: Negative 0.6 Grade: Positive 3.1 Location: Southwest Bakersfield Location: Triangle Buitding on Catifornia Avenue Stides A and B contrast two ways oil wells are treated tocally. Slide B has welt landscaped surroundings. Slide A shows a welt in a barren lot next to a wetl maintained dwelling. Bakersfield continues to take pride in its 'oil industry and accepts oil extraction in mixed-use settings. The survey suggests that industry needs to continue efforts to harmonize its activities with surrounding uses. 12 Stide A Slide B Grade' Negative 1.6 Grade: Positive 3.7 Location' Rosedale Hwy near Allen Road Location: Southwest Bakersfield S[ides A and B stark[y i[[ustrate the cha[[enge of the urban/rura[ interface. Our treatment of this interface can enhance either Bakersfie[d's historic and continuing agricultural strength or can nibb[e away at our open spaces and agricu[tura[ vita[ity. Agriculture consistent[y produces positive economic activity consumin§ far [ess pub[lc services than the taxes it p;]ys. S[ideBshowsthebeautyofaproductivea§ricu[tura[fie[d. S[ide A shows urban encroachment upon a§ricu[ture. We attribute the difference to the c[ash of uses. Tile houses in Slide A are clear[y attractive and wel{ kept. The difference reflects our participators' preference for a vibrant, thrivin§ a§ricu{ture that provides open space and views. Slide A Slide B Grade: Negative 1.2 Grade' Positive 4.1 Location' Gosford 8: North Laurel Gten Location' Bicycle Path, Truxtun at Mohawk Slides A and B show two very different treatments (~f one of our city's most distinctive features, the Kern River and the canals that flow from it. Slide B, showing the Bicycle Path of the t<ern River Parkway, had the sing[e highest rating of anys[idein the survey. S[ideA, shows bare ground surrounding irrigationcana[ weirs a few miles from Slide B. This pair of slides is one illustration of a common theme in our participants' responses] they want trees and greenery where possible. The bicycle path's recreational aspects should be well known to every policy maker and planner in the county. The bike path is on top of the [evee that helps protect this part of the City from possible flooding from the River, turning a relatively unattractive aspect of Slide A into a highly appealin§ feature that virtually every resident of the metropolitan area can enjoy. Stide A Slide B Gracle: Negative 1.6 Grade' Positive 3.7 Location: Sump in Southwest Bakersfield Location' Sump at Pin Oak Park Slides A and B are two differing treatments of one of Bakersfietd's scarcest and most cherist~ed aspects, open water. Slide A, shows the treatment of a sump with a comptete [ack of [andscaping. The landscaped take in slide B received one of our participants' highest ratings. This is consistent throughout for at[ water features. We are aware that we rive in a desert and that water is not only precious for what it produces, but for the beaUty it brings to where we live. We would like to thank the many orBanizations and their members who participated in this survey. Active 20/30 Club A[pha Kappa Alpha Alpha Phi Alpha, American Planning Fraternity Association, Southern Division Arts Council of Kern Arvin Lions Club Bakersfield Bakersfield East Association of Rotary Petro[eum Landsmen Bakersfield South Bakersfield West Board of Realtors® Democratic Women of Rotary Rotary Local Government Kern Relations Committee Downtown Business East Bakersfield Friends in Faith Government Review Association, Vision Kiwanis Club Council, Greater Committee Bakersfield Chamber of Commerce Homebuilders' Kern County Hispanic League of Women National Council of Marketing Council Chamber of Voters Negro Women Commerce Oildale Kiwanis Club Palla School, Debbie 60 Plus Club South Bakersfield Boozer's 5th Grade Kiwanis Club C~ass Tree Foundation of Kern 16 Smart Growth Coalition of 'Kern County Mission Statement "The mission of the Smart Growth Coalition is to inform the public about the future impacts of growth and land-use decisions, and to advocate policies that build a quality community and a healthy economy." Special Acknowledgements The Smart Growth Coalition of Kern County wishes to thank the Great Valley Center for partial funding of this survey, and we also wish to thank the American FarmJand Trust for their technica[ support. I'1