The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03/12/2001 BAKERSFIELD David Couch, Chair Sue Benham Mike Maggar~l Staff: John W. Stinson SPECIAL MEETING URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE of the City Council - City of Bakersfield Monday, March 12, 2001 1:00 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room, Suite 201 Second Floor- City Ha11,1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. ADOPT FEBRUARY 12, 2001 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 3. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 4. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. Committee discussion and adoption of 2001 Urban Development meeting schedule 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Discussion and possible' recommendation regarding Downtown Business and Property Owners - Vision Committee · Completing downtown element of 2010 Plan · Identifying and improving collector street grids · Formation of a parking authority · Downtown site for high speed rail · Downtown Charrette 6. ADJOURNMENT S:~John\UrbanDev2OOl~Jd01 marl2agen.wpd B A K E R S FIE L D DRAFT _/~ '.~) ~.~-,~---- David Couch, Chair Alan Tandy, ~i~ ~anager Sue ~nham Staff: John W. Stinson Mike Maggard AGENDA SUMM~Y-REPORT URBAN DEVELOPMENT .COMMI~EE Meeting of Monday, Februa~ 12, 2001 4:00 ~p.m. Ci~ Managers Office - Ci~ Hall 1. ROLL C~L Called to order: 4:07 p.m. Present: Councilmembers David Couch, Chair; Sue Benham; and Mike-Maggard 2. ~OPT NOVEMBER 13, 2000 AGENDA SUMM~Y REPORT Adopted as submi~ed. 3. PUBLIC STA~MENTS DEFERRED BUSINESS A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding tree maintenance and*removal - tree ordinance - Grady Planning Director Stan Grady reported that as directed by the Committee at the November 13"' meeting, staff has met with the interested tree groups three times and came to a consensus on all items except for the percent of shade coverage. The City's ordinance requires 30% shade for new commercial development and there is a request by the Tree Foundation to increase it to 50%. The issue of enforcement was not addressed by staff during the group meetings or by the Planning Commission. Currently, it is a misdemeanor to violate any section of the Municipal Code. The Committee reviewed a sample site plan showing the 30% shade coverage. Staff reviewed each change in the proposed tree ordinance with the Committee. A copy of tree pruning guidelines has been-attached to the ordinance. Fred Porter, CELSOC, spoke in opposition to the increase from 30% to 50% tree canopy and felt that to impose this on just commercial development would be a huge financial burden and the'benefits small because commercial development represents under five percent of development in the City. He also spoke in opposition to the 48-inch box trees which require a crane to move, a backhoe to plant, and damage to any existing curb and sidewalk. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Monday, February 12, 2001 Page -2- Brian Todd, BIA of Kern County, spoke in opposition to the increase from 30% to 50% and in support of the comments by Fred Porter. He also felt that if this is determined to be reasonable for commercial development, it should apply to City properties as well. Dana Adams, Tree Foundation of .Kern, spoke ~in support of the goal for 50% tree canopy. Pauline Larwood, representing the Smart'Growth Coalition, clarified that regarding commercial parking lots, they are not suggesting that it is the commercial developer that ought to get us to the overall goal of where we ought to be in future years in terms of tree canopy. She felt that this should be an effort to try to make the summertime more bearable for our community and not just try to reach a certain .percentage of tree canopy. Lorraine Unger stated .that public property and the parks department should be included in the ordinance and have the same rules as commercial developers. She also spoke regarding the need for enforcement of the tree ordinance. Pam Pecarich, Southwest Community Action Committee, spoke in support of the tree ordinance. She also would like to see the ordinance apply to new residential development. Cassie Daniel, Bakersfield Association of Realtors, spoke regarding a letter they had sent to the Landscaping Committee of the Planning Commission in January with concerns about infringing on landowners property rights and the cost benefit ratio of increasing tree canopy from 30% to 50% in new commercial development. Assistant City Manager John Stinson spoke regarding entities such as schools, federal, state, county and hospitals not being under the control of the City, so those cannot be included. Committee member Sue Benham stated that she feels the City should subject itself to the same requirements as we are proposing for the development community. She expressed concern that the tree situation at the Ralph's grocery store is not being addressed in the amendments to the tree ordinance. She spoke in support of the 50% tree canopy requirements for new commercial development. Committee member Maggard agreed that the City should come under the same rules that We are proposing for new commercial developments. He .expressed concern with mandating new commercial development to go from 30% to 50% tree canopy because the benefit is not commensurate with the cost and it places an onerous additional cost on commercial development, although he definitely would like to see 50% shade. He stated that an ordinance without any enforcement.provision does not have much teeth, but does not want to create tree police. Regarding the 48" box tree, he would like to see some type of language added that allows for unique situations. Also, he does not favor imposing these rules on residential developments. It was also discussed that there is no credible way to tell existing development to change their trees and landscaping. There Was a discussion regarding incentives and enforcement and the Committee directed staff to meet and bring back information to the Committee. D AFT AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Monday, February 12, 2001 Page -3- B. DiscussiOn and Committee recommendation regarding Freeway Status Report C. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding Transportation Development Fees Marian Shaw gave an update on the proposed increase in costs on various projects on the Impact Fee List. Staff is recommending that we use the Construction Cost Index to adjust the fees as required by the ordinance. The fees would be increased by the .Construction Cost Index from February 1997 when the current fees were adopted. This is 9.12% over four years. The Committee directed staff to meet with the industry and get their input and bring this back to the Committee. D. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding High Spccd Rail locations 5. NEW BUSINESS A. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding Kern Bluff open space corridor (This item was heard second immediately after New Business 4.A) Planning Director Stan Grady gave an overview regarding the area that is being considered for the Kern Bluff Open Space Corridor. A coalition of community groups, City staff and Councilmembers have been meeting to discuss options for developing a plan to preserve an area in the northeast commonly referred to as the Kern Bluffs. The'Committee discussed Kyle Carter's project and trading land for credits against the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). The Committee voted unanimously for Councilmember Maggard to speak on behalf of the Urban Development Committee in support of changes to HCP rules regarding the exchange of lands'for credits during the hearing at the February 14~' Council meeting and directed staff to follow through with Mr. Carter. Michelle Beck, Kern River Parkway Committee, spoke in support of Kern Bluffs open space recreation area and their proposed plan to acquire 1,500 acres of land in the Bluff area that is zonedopen space inthe 2010 Metro Plan. They are proposing a multi-use recreation area with funding to come from a variety of sources. The land is currently privately owned. This land is on a steep grade, not suitable for building. Rich O'Neil, Kern River Parkway Committee, stated that he.has spoken with others who may give land in exchange for their open space requirements. He asked the Committee to recommend that the City support the concept. Arthur Unger, Sierra Club, spoke in support of the plan. Sidney Kelly, Bakersfield Cactus and Succulent Society, spoke in support and discussed an area that could be reserved for cactus. Renee Nelson spoke regarding the need for financial support from the City. DRAFT AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Monday, February 12, 2001 Page -4- Committee member Maggard stated that there is a mid-year budget adjustment that is being recommended .but has not yet been reviewed by the Council. It includes $200,000 toward the Kern Bluffs open space, but it ~may or may .not be approved. Representatives from the group informed the Committee that grants may be available to assist with the development of the plan. The group further stated ~that most grants would want City support and/or matching funding in order to improve their potential for success. In order for the .groups to apply for grants-in a timely manner, the Committee unanimously approved that a resolution based on existing adopted general plan policies that could be i". submitted with grant applications as an indication of City support be drafted by staff and forwarded to the Council for adoption. B. Discussion and Committee recommendation-regarding request from Vision 2020 for Charrette funding Planning Director Stan Grady gave an update on funding. There needs to be a total pledge of $40,000 to $45,000. We have a total of $18,000 ($10,000 of this may need to be re-applied for because the funds were not used last year and they are now in a new funding cycle). Committee member Benham made a motion that the Committee recommend to the Council that we appropriate $30,000 for the Downtown Charrette. The Committee unanimously approved the motion and recommended forwarding to the Council. C. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding new zone for commercial development D. Discussion and Committee recommendation regarding City/County drilling requirements E. Committee discussion and adoption of 2001 Urban Development meeting schedule 6. ADJOURNMENT Due to the late hour, the Committee deferred the balance of the items. The meeting was adjourned at 6:37 p.m. DRAFT AGENDA SUMMARY FIEPORT Monday, February lA, 2001 Page -5- Attendance: Staff: Mayor Harvey L. Hall; Assistant City Manager John W. Stinson; Assistant City Attorney Bob Sherfy; Interim Public Works Director Jack LaRochelle; Planning Director Stanley Grady; and Deputy City Attorney Carl Hernandez Others: Ron Brummett, Kern COG; Roger Mclntosh, Mclntosh & Associates; Mark Smith, ASU; Cassie Daniel, Bakersfield Board of Realtors; Dana Adams, Tree Foundation; Fred Porter, CELSOC; Brian Todd, BIAof Kern County; Pauline Larwood, Smart Growth Coalition; Renee Nelson; Carl Moreland, CELSOC; John and Sidney Kelley, Bakersfield Cactus and Succulent Society; Cheryl Miller, BIA of Kern County; Rich O'Neil, Kern River Parkway Committee; Lois Watson, Kern Audubon Society; Michelle Beck, Kern Bluffs Recreation and Open Space Association, Jan Gillespie, Kern Bluffs Recreation and Open Space Association, Lorraine Unger, Sierra Club; Mary Griffin, Kern Audubon Society; Art Unger, Sierra Club; " Clyde Barbeau, developer; Mark Smith, Grubb & Ellis/ASU; Pam Pecarich, Southwest Community Action Committee; Herman Ruddell, Downtown Business Association; Deborah G. Neumann, B.T.C. & Kern Bluff Open Space; Craig O. Smith, Bakersfield Track Club & Kern Bluffs Open Space; Marci Cunningham, Kern Equestrians for Preservation of Trails & Kern Bluffs Open Space; Bob Holloway, Kern . Equestrians for Preservation of Trails & Kern Bluffs Open Space; and Reporter James Burger, The Bakersfield Californian cc: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers S:~John\UrbanDev~UD01feb12summary.wpd URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE PROPOSED 2001 MEETING SCHEDULE OUrban Deve opment Committee ~ City Council Meeting Holiday 1:00 p.m. (3:00 p.m, on March 26th) Joint meeting ~Budget Hearing or City Council and Department Presentations Board of Supervisors at City Council Meeting JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S 2 3 4 5 6 I 2 3 1 2 3 7 8 910 11 12 13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4 5 8 7 8 9 10 16~ 18 19 20 13~ 15 16 17 11 13~ 15 16 17 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 20 21 22 23 24 18 20 21 22 23 24 28 29 30~ 25 26 27~ 25 27~ 29 30 31 APRIL MAY JUNE S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S 1O 3 4 5 8 7 1 2 3 4 5 t 2 8 9 10~ 12 13 14 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3~ 5~ 7 8 9 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 13 15~ 17 18 19 10 12 14 15 22 23 24~ 26 27 28 20~ 22 23 24 25 28 17 ~._~ 19 20 21 22 23 29 30 27~ii 29 31 24 25 28~ 28 29 30 JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S 1 2 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 1 80 10 11 12 13 14 5 6 7® 910 11 4® 6 7 8 15 16 17~ 19 20 21 12 13 14 15 15 17 18 11 12 13 14 15 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 19~ 21~ 23 24 25 1 18~ 20 21 22 29 30 31 28 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 28 27 28 29 3O OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S S M T W TH F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 1 9~ 11 12 13 6 7 8 9 10 4 5 6 7 8 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 13~ 1~ 16 17 _ _ 11~ 13 14 15 21 22 23 25 26 27 18 19 zu ~l iittiili~Iiililli~i! 24 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 28 29 30 31 25 26 27~ 29 30 26 27 28 29 February 12, 2001 The following documents pertain to the: URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE meeting of Monday, March 12, 2001 at 1:00 PM. DAVE CROSS AIA ARCHITECT LICENSE NO. C 4338 March 12, 2001 City of Bakersfield Urban Development Committee VIA FACSIMILE__ U. S. POST._._ FEDEX.___ PERSONAL DELIVERY_g(_ OTHER.___ SUBJECT: CALIFORNIA HIGH SPEED RAIL / KERN COUNTY STATION LOCATION Honorable Committee Persons: I am taking this opportunity to bring to your attention that the California High Speed Rail Authority has a plan showing seven (7) potential station locations in Kern County, some of which are within the Bakersfield City limits. (See Map from California High Speed Rail Authority) The California High Speed Rail Authority has also determined that station locations will be evaluated for screening at the June 2001, authority meeting. The importance of this issue merits a serious comprehensive economic evaluation. The benefits of the important matter of whether the station location should be within the Bakersfield City limits or elsewhere in Kern County, needs to be addressed. This study should be completed, with a recommendation in time to influence the June California High Speed Rail Authority meeting. (See attached memorandum to High Speed Rail Authority) Dave Cross DC/jec Attachments: 1. Map from California High Speed Rail Authority 2. Memorandum from California High Speed Rail Authority Cc List: Mr. Ahn Tandy, Bakersfield City Manager 1400 Q STREET · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA ° 933'01-5517 PHONE: 661 323-3181 · FAX: 661 323-3184 B;~,kersfield Station and Alignment Evaluation -~ -~__ Si~-e "' ;~'"' ' 't0 Miles · Oea~dFebm~2QQ1.DMJM+Ha~s- 925 L Street, Suite 1425 c..~,,~os.N,.~ ,.,,,~,,-s,.~o n.,~, ~,.rnvontr~; (916) 324-1541 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 322-0827 fax MEMORANDUM To: Chair and Authority Members Dat. e: Fg~bruary 22, 2001 From~ .... ~_ _e.h_~i_. _M_ _oy_s h~e d__,_ _E_x_ ~e_~U t_!.y. ~e_ _D i_r_e.c~t 9_r- ............................................. Subject: Agenda Item 5: High-Speed Rail Alignment Options Discussion: Staff and each regional team will present the attached maps of the regional high-speed rail alignment options to be evaluated for screening at the June Authority Meeting. This will not preclude other. alignment options that may be added as a result of further public and agency input from the town halls, scoping meetings and additional outreach. ~ OSP O0 39255 Visioning Downtown Downtown Vision Mission Statement To develop a consensus among property owners on a philosophy and standards associated with a "livable community" in regards to traffic circulation, parking and land use in the downtown area. · Maximize use of existing downtown assets · Create best value for property owners and potential developers through improved access, parking and circulation · Identify opportunities to create synergy, efficiency and the ability. to include amenities which could not be achieved individually · Enhance the desirability and utilization of downtown by visitors to and residents of the greater Bakersfield area Proposed Lead and Subsequent issues Economic Development · Complete the Downtown element of the 2010.General Plan Building relationships with our neighbors * Form relationships Circulation · Crete a collector street grid Parking · Create a Parking Authority Transportation · Complete the Freeway 178 corridor · Plan a Downtown High Speed Ground Transportation Terminal Downtown Vision Goals 2001 Parking · Create a Parking Authority that provides long term parking solutions in consolidated structures at lower overall costs. Transportation Roadways · Complete the Freeway 178 corridor through downtown to Freeway 99 · Upgrade State Route 204 frOm Freeway 58 to Freeway 178 to an expressway without curb cuts · Upgrade State Route 204 from Freeway 178 to Freeway 99 to a grade separated roadway Transit · Plan a Downtown High Speed Ground Transportation Terminal with a direct airport connection, and reserve right of way · Plan a regional system of Interurban Transit and reserve fight of way, connecting directly with .a downtown HSGT terminal · Plan a metropolitan system of Light Rail Transit and reserve right of way, connecting directly with a downtown HSGT terminal · Strengthen and create incentives for existing surface transit and connect with future HSGT terminal Circulation Crete a collector street grid as recommended in Colonel Baker" Field, the nest 100 years · F, H, Chester, L, N, Q Street and Union Ave., are primary north/south collectors or arterials · California Ave., Tmxtun Ave., 18tu, 2 l~t, 23ra/24tu couplet 28th, Golden State Ave., and 34tu are primary east/west collectors or arterials Pedestrian Elements Create a pedestrian friendly downtown · Connect downtown bike and walk paths to the Kern River Parkway · Connect downtown parking structures with pedestrian walkways that are separated from vehicular traffic and offer direct access parking and buildings · On streets interior to the collector / arterial grid; create pedestrian malls, Courtyards, plazas promenades and fountains. · Encourage sidewalk dining and oppommities for entertainment · Eliminate vehicular / pedestrian conflicts Residential mixed use · Encourage mixed use residential in downtown Quality of Life issues · Strengthen our downtown school, and form partnerships with downtown businesses. Economic Development · Complete the Downtown element of the 2010 General Plan · Recommend that the.City of Bakersfield Community and Economic Development Department serve a single focus on re-development in the three RDA's and work collaboratively with peer agencies on Economy Development outside RDA's with a Metropolitan and Regional focus · Identify, Encourage and Support a lead agency, such as the Greater Bakersfield Chamber of Commerce or the Kern Transportation Foundation, for the establishment of Kern County as a Self Help County · Assist in the formation of Parmerships and development Corporations to assemble block sized or greater oppommities for development Building relationships with our neighborx · Form relationships with surrounding residential communities and strengthen them, thereby adding value and character to our downtown. · Form a relationship with the Historic Old Town Kern Disffict and work collaboratively and cooperatively in developing both Downtown and Old Town · Incorporate findings of Bakersfield Vision 2020 Project and the Smart Growth Image Project