Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/17/1995 BAKERSFIELD Kevin McDermott, Chair Randy Rowles Patricla M. Smith Staff: Gall E. Waiters -- AGENDA URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMrI'rEE Tuesday, October 17, 1995 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 OCTOBER 4, 1995 MINUTES 3. PRESENTATIONS 4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 5. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. SPORTS COMPLEX - Tandy 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. ADJOURNMENT GEW:jp FILE NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITrEE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Urban Development Committee of the City Council will hold a Special Meeting for the purpose of a Committee Meetin~ on Tuesday, ~' October 17, 1995, at 12:15 p.m., at City Manager's Conference Room, City Hall- Second Floor, Suite 201, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, to consider: 1. ROLL CALL 2. APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 4, 1995 MINUTES 3. PRESENTATIONS 4. PUBLIC STATEMENTS 5. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. SPORTS COMPLEX, Tandy 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. ADJOURNMENT _/~ail E. Waiters, Assistant City Manager GEW:jp -~ B A K E R S F I E L D Ala~'~a~ay, C. fi{y I~ja~ag.ef' Randy Rowles Staff~ Gail E.cWaJ't7 Patricia M. Smith / AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMI'I'rEE Wednesday, October 4, 1995 12:15 p.m. City Manager's Conference Room 1. ROLL CALL Call to Order 12:23 p.m. Present: Councilmembers Kevin McDermott, Chair; Patricia Smith and Randy Rowles. 2. APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 11, 1995 MINUTES Approved as submitted. 3. PRESENTATIONS None 4. PUBUC STATEMENTS None 5. DEFERRED BUSINESS A. FREEWAY UPDATE: SOUTH BELTWAY Staff provided the Committee with a projected time line for the adoption of the South Beltway alignment. The steps, which amount to approximately 10 and 1/2 Urban Development Committee Agenda Summary Report October 4, 1995 Page 2 months, consists of preparing maps and legal descriptions, letting an RFP for the EIR; drafting the supplemental EIR; and holding hearings with the Planning Commission, City Council and Board of Supervisors. There has been no change on the status of other freeways since the Committee's September 11 meeting. 6. NEW BUSINESS A. WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT The final waste water master plan conducted by Brown & Caldwell has been completed and after extensive review, staff is recommending Option B, which- requires improvements to and expansion of Plant #2 and Plant #3. Option B includes the following major items: existing city limits and county service areas already served by the City; the 2010 General Plan sphere of influence; the most flexibility for future growth; and the lowest user and connection fees throughout the study period. The total expenditure for the first five years amounts to $44,050,000. The Committee concurred with staff's recommendation and asked that the matter be placed on the Council agenda for the November 8, 1995 meeting. B. SPORTS COMPLEX The Committee reviewed the four sites proposed for the sports complex. Additional information was discussed regarding a downtown site and a site in the northeast. A matrix showing potential traffic improvements that may be required of the northeast site was distributed. There was also discussion regarding a formal donation of the property and additional infrastructure improvements such as parking and water availability. Discussion of the downtown site included identifying additional property acquisition issues; and relocation and installation of utility facilities. Anticipated costs for the downtown site over and above already identified costs for a sports complex are roughly $5 million, including parking needs. Finally, there was discussion regarding the County's role and shared cost in secudng a sports complex. A unanimous decision could not be reached with the Committee on this issue. The Committee, therefore, elected to forward a majodty and minodty report to the Council. Staff was asked to complete a matrix showing comparative data for the four sites; identify funding for the additional $5 million dollars; and draft the advisory measure legislation for the November 8 Council meeting. The majodty report will Urban Development Committee Agenda Summary Report October 4, 1995 Page 3 recommend the preferred site as the downtown site, and will ask the Council to appropriate $7,000 for the City's share to conduct a study of the downtown site. The minority report will ask the Council to support staff conducting additional research on the northeast site; direct staff to draft an advisory ballot measure that asks that the people vote as to whether they want a sPorts complex in the City, and by what means this complex should be funded. A special meeting of the Committee to finalize the recommendations for the sports complex will be called on Tuesday, October 17, 1995. 7. ADJOURNMENT Adjoumed 2:03 p.m. cc: Honorable Mayor and City Council GEW:cv BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM September 29, 1995 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Raul M. Rojas, Public Works Director SUBJECT: South Beltway/Status and Schedule The alignment is currently being transferred to a survey control grid. This work should be completed in one to two weeks. Legal description preparation can then proceed. Upon completion of legal descriptions, a request for proposal will be issued for a consultant to prepare a supplement to the KCOG environmental impact report (EIR). When the EIR supplement is drafted the first hearing can be scheduled before the Planning Commission with Kern County participation. At a second Planning Commission hearing the alignment would be recommended for approval to the City Council. Following hearing(s) and adoption by the City Council the alignment would be scheduled for hearing and adoption by the Board of Supervisors. Schedule - Tentative Months Mapping and descriptions 1.5 RFP for EIR ! Supplemental EIR 4 Planning Commission Hearings City Council Hearings 1.5 Board of Supervisors Hearings 1.5 Total: 10.5 BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM September 15. 1995 TO: Alan Tandv. Citv Manager FROM: Raul Rojas. Public Works Director - -'.,:'.- ~ /- SUBJECT: BROWN & CALDWELL WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN REPORT The Wastewater Master Plan Report and financial plan/revenue program for the City of Bakersfield has been completed. Development of this plan was initiated in August of 1993 to provide a guide for wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal improvements through the year 2040. The plan included an evaluation of a new regionai wastewater treatment plant in the extreme southwest Bakersfield area. three opuons of expanding the e.,cisting Plants 2 and 3 without planning for a new regional plant, and new trunk sewers. .-kfter reviewing the final Wastewater Master Plan rermrts, staff recommends Option B - Ptanm 2 and 3 based on the following major items: I. Option B - Plants 2 and 3: Option B W~il cover the following: eExisting City limits and Counw service areas already served bv the City. eThe 2010 General Plan Sphere of Influence. sProvide the most flexibility for future growth based on the area that would be provided service. · Would require the lowest sewer user fees and connection fees throuehout the study period. Even though Option A has less capitol costs, the fees that users would pay would be less under Option B through the year 2040 due to the projected number of connections that would occur within the service area of this option. This option will require the expansion of Plant 2 from I9 mgd capacity, to 25 mgd. and the expansion of Plant 3 from 12 mgd capacity, to 16 mgd including odor control. In addition. we would construct the remaining pomon of the Buena Vista Trunk Sewer Line and the .Allen Road Trunk Sewer Line. ~lSTam_,~4..,a~.'~t Paee 1 of 5 If Option B is adopted, as recommended, dunng the first five years of the master plan the following improvements are recommended to serve future projected growth. During 1995-1996: Plans and specifications should be started for the expansion of Plant 2 from 19 mgd capacity to 25 mgd $ 180,000 Plant 3 from 12 mgd capacity to 16 mgd (Includes odor control) $ 570,000 Design of Buena Vista Trunk Sewer I ine $ 360,000 Design of Allen Road Trunk Sewer Line $ 160,000 TOTAL 1995 $1,270,000 In 1996, 1997, & 1998: Construct Plant 2 improvements $23,070,000 Construct Plant 3 improvements $11,630,000 Construct Buena Visa Trunk Sewer Line $ 5,600,000 Construct Allen Road Trunk Sewer Line $ 2,480,000 TOTAL 1996-1998 $42,780,000 The total expenditure for the first five years is $44,050,000. The master plan calls for the design and construction of the South Bakersfield Trunk Sewer I.ine in 1998. However, since this area is currently not in the City and development around Taft Highway is in the furore, staff recommends the South Bakersfield Trunk Sewer l.ine be postponed. The postponement will defer approximately $9,910,000 in Capital expense in the first five years. ~nsrm,t~.~ Pag~ 2 of 5 2. Original Option - Regional Plant: Existing City limits and County service areas ~. already served by the Civ,,. the 2010 General Plan Sphere of Influence. and the City. service area within CSAT1 (Western Rosedale). This option recommended the elimination of Plant 3 in the year 2021. This option appeared to place too much emphasis on providing service to areas that mav or may not connect to the expanded sewer system. Originally. this option planned on serving the proposed developments of Pacificana. McAllister Ranch. and Destefani Farms in the southwest Bakersfield area. As the plan was being developed, it became apparent that due to the uncertainties of these developments, they were deleted fi.om the final report. In addition, this option recommended the elimination of existing wastewater facilities that can be used throughout the study period and bevond. It is questionable if the projected connections for the service area of this option were also estimated too high. This would result in estimated user fees and connection fees being lower than what they would actually need to be. 3. Option A - Plants 2 and 3: Existing City limits and County service areas already served by the City. This opti°n appears to be too restrictive based on the area that would be provided sen'ice, which could impact future growth. The sewer user fees for this option would be slightly less. but the connection fees would be greater through the year 2040. 4. Option C - Plants 2 and 3: Existing City limits and County service areas alreadv served bv the City. the 2010 General Plan St~here of Influence. and the City service area within CSA71 (Western Rosedale). This ontion has the most costly sewer user fees and connection fees throughout the study period that uses would have to pay. At one point dunng the study period, the connection fees would be $1.200 higher than Option B. Again. this option appears to piace too much emphasis on providing service to areas that may or may not connect to the sewer svstem and to which the City has no authority for assessments. The following table on Page 4 of this memorandum outlines the overall implementation schedule and capital costs for Option B through the year 2040. MSTRPLN4.MEM Page 3 of 5 Year olrrlON B Capital Cost Ending Estimate, Million Dollars 1995 L)esi~n ReViSions to Plant 2,bid package preparation 0.18 D~s~n Plant .3 ext~ans~on to 16 rngd 0.5," Re-negotiate Garone:Plant 2 reclamation contract 0.00 YEAR SUBTOTAL: 0;?5 1997 Design Castle & Cook trunk sewetx/lift sra. 0.16 _Desi~l south Bakersfield trunk sewers/lift sra. 0.§9 Design Buena Vista trunk sewer extension 0.36 Construct Plant 2 kn~rovemen~s (25 mgd capacity.) Neeotiate new contract for 1.000 acres add'l farm land/Plant 2 recL 0.00 Construct Plant 3 e a s, on to (incl. odo ¢ontro YEAR SUBTOTAL: 35.81 1998 Construct Castle & Cook trunk sewers/?.~ mgd lift sra. ~.4~ Construct souti~ Bakerstield trunk sewer, 18 m~d lift sra. o .... Construct Buena Vista trunii sewer ertens~on 5.60 2000 Construct Plant 2 90 - day s~orage (stage I. to 21.4 m~ci ca=acity. ) 2.00 2002 Renew Gist-brocades lease atonement until Year 2009 0.00 2005 Renew I - 5 reclamation contract throueh Year 2040 0.0~ 2007 Desiun 8 mgci expansion to Plant 3 1.38 2009 Construct 8 m~d expansion to Plant 3 {incl. odor contml~ Construct Plant 3 effluent storage ponds 3.90 Negotiate contract for 2.500 acres of add'l farm land for ci .mPOsal capam~. 0.00 through Year 2040. Plant 3 YEAR SUBTOTAL: 26.82 2024 Design 8 mgci expansion to Plant 3 1.38 202§ ' Construct 8 rn~ct expansion to Plant 3 (inel. odor control~ 22.92 2030 Construct Plant 2 90 - day storage (stave 2. to 2~ rn~ci capacity) 2.00 GRAND TOTAL: 110.46 ,Notes: All Costs F,.xpresse~i in 1995 Dollars MSTR~LNS.MF_'~ Page 4 of 5 The projected capital costs through the year 2040 for the options are summarized in the .. following table: Capital Costs. Million Dollars FaCilities Original Option A Option B Option Option Plant 2 27 27 27 27 Plant 3 -- ,~0 64 97 Plant 4 150 ...... LiR Stauon.v 44 9 19 23 TOTAI~: ! 221 [ 76 110 i 147 As part of the financial plan to ensure funding in the furore, estimated user fees and connection fees, at current dollar levels, were projected over the next 5 years and are summarized below: Original i Option A i Option B Option C 1997 114.7 1.420 114.7 . 1.420 114.7 1.420 114.7 1.420 Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please give me a call. MSTRPL.X-~MF.M Page 5 of 5 BAKERSFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM MEMO TO: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director FROM: Stephen L. Walker, Traffic Engineer ~'~ ~ DATE: October 2, 1995 SUBJECT: "MESA MARIN" BASEBALL STADIUM SITE - TRAFFIC ANALYSIS We have reviewed the subject site together with a recent traffic impact study for a General Plan Amendment and zone change over the same site. The GPA/ZC changed the-zoning on the parcel for the site of the stadium to residential.. Based upon our very rough'review the following items of interest are presented: 1. This new use will require another GPA zone change or some other planning action. 2. Being adjacent to two State highways will mandate a full traffic impact study and a Project Study Report to satisfy. CalTrans requirements. 3. We have identified what in our opinion will be the major project 'mitigation improvements and fees:' Please note this list is very preliminary and subject: to the final traffic impact study and PSR. This assessment is based upon our. experiences in dealing with other projects in the area and past reviews by CalTrans. The cost estimates to a large extent are based on the unit figures used in the-current Transportation Improvement Fee program. Attached are two figures. The first showing the list of offsite improvemcmts with cost estimates along with a list for which mitigation fees are expected be required. The second attachment shows additional improvements along a route which CalTrana has sought evaluation of on previous projects in the Mesa Matin area. The figure shows what the additional costs would be should this be a required mitigation. More than likely, at a minimum, a percent share in this project may be required. Percentage share might be 'in the 10-20% range. cc: Bruce Deeter, CE III, Traffic Engineering PW Memo File Traffic File - Stadium Attachment s:\wp\mm_stadl.mcm IMPROVEMENTS EXPECTED TO BE REQUIRED WITH STADIUM CONSTRUCTION LOCATION LIMITS II IMPROVEMENTS il__ Quantity II Unit II Cost/Unit ][ Total Cost Highway '178 1/2 MI west of Fairfax to Widen from 2 lanes to 4 Hi.qhwav 184 lanes 7.00 Lane Miles $250,000 $1,750,000 Highway 184 Icrest to Highway 178 Widen from 2 lanes to 4 4.00 Lane Miles $220,000 $880,000 lanes Highway 178 at Mornin~ Drive Traffic Signal 1.00 Ea $150,000 $150,000~ Highway 178 at Vineland Traffic Signal & expansion for turn lanes 1.00 Ea $200,000 $200,000; Highway 178 4ighway 184/Edison Traffic Signal & expansion for 1.00 Ea $200,000 $200,000 turn lanes Highway 184 at Vineland Traffic Signal & expansion for 1.00 Ea . $200,000, $200,000 .............................................................. tur~n_._lan e~s ..................... · SUB-TOTAL $3,380,000 t5% CONTINGENCIES $507,000 TOTALS3,887,000 Note: Improvements do not include internal site area circulation or roads such as Vineland between Hwy 178 & Hwy 184 EXISTING CITY PROJECT l ]' IExpand Intersection & Modify'[ Highway 178 t Fain'ax to 1000' west I Signal (City project in design! $400,000 .................... _L .......................................... J I~roces_sl [ FUTURE NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS (STADIUM PROJECT SHARE) 2010 Total Total Project Share LOCATION LIMITS IMPROVEMENTS Project Traffic % Share Traffic . Improv. Cost_ in Fee Highway 178 Fair/ax Fu~re Interchange ' 9,389 2,309" 24.59%" $~,000,000J' $737,77~- Highway 178 Masterson Traffic Signal 2,459 598 24.32% $150,000 $36,478 Highway 178 Comanche I Alfred Harrel Traffic Signal 2,217 409: 18.45% $150,000 $13,836 Highway 184 Shalane Traffic Signal 2,681 1,214 45.28% $150,000 $67,922 Highway 18~ College Traffic Signal 2,344 1,132 48.29% $150,000 $72,440 Shalane Vineland Traffic Signal 2,437 520 21.34% $130,000 $27,739 * Reduced for local share of project in TIF List TOTAL PROJECT SHARE OF MITIGATION FEES $956,194 Note: All traffic is PM Peak HourTotal traffic taken from GPA 1-94, Seg. ill with stadium traffic added. Generation for the stadium traffic based upon GPA with adjustments for less local dispersion. Stadium peak traffic assumed occudng all within PM peak hour for worst case scenario. 10/04/95 07:58 AM STADMESA.WK4 ,I POSSIBLE ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS (REQUIRED BY CALTRANS) LOCATION JL LIMITS Jl IMPROVEMENTS Quantity__ll Unit Cost/Unit ][ _Total Cost Highway 184 Widen from 2 lanes to 4 Lane $220,000 · $660,000 (Mornin.q.Dr) Niles south to Fwy 58 3.00 Miles ___ lanes __ Highway 184 Niles south to Fwy 58 New Signals & Signal Mod 2.50 Ea $150,000 $375,000J SUB-TOTAL $1,035,000 15% CONTINGENCIES $!s~,2so TOTAL $1,190,250 10/04/95 10:23 AM STADMESA.WK4 POSSIBLE BALLOT LANGUAGF Alternative #1 Shall the City participate in building a multi-Use stadium? Alternative #2 A) Shall the City participate in building a multi-use stadium at Panama Lane at Progress Road on a site to be donated to the City. Construction cost is estimated to be $10.4 million. Sources of funding to be limited to donations and contributions, cash on hand in an amount equal to future tax proceeds, and funds to be repaid by user fees? No new taxes or-assessments to be utilized. Yes No B) Shall the City participate in building a multi-use stadium near the Sam Lynn Ballpark on Chester Avenue on County-owned land. Construction cost is estimated to be $12.6 million. Sources of funding to be limited to donations and contributions, cash on hand inan amount equal to future tax proceeds, and funds to be repaid by user fees? No new taxes or assessments to be Utilized. Yes No C) Shall the City participate in building a multi-use stadium in the area of the Convention Center Downtown with a cost roughly estimated to be between $13.5-$14.5 million. Sources of funding to be limited to donations and contributions, cash on hand in an amount equal to future tax proceeds, and funds to be repaid by user fees? No new taxes or assessments to be utilized. Yes No D) Shall the City participate in building a multi-use stadium at Mesa Marin area or Highway 178 with a cost roughly estimated to be $13-$14.3 million. Sources of funding to be limited to donations and contributions, cash on hand in an amount equal to future tax proceeds, and funds to be repaid by user fees? No new taxes or assessments to be utilized. Yes No Only the top project, if one receives majority support, would be built and only if funding sources as specified are available. It would be far more clear and understandable for the voters if three, or at least two, of the alternatives A-D were eliminated. Other Critical Issues Asking the County for their willingness to make a loan conditioned on the results of the election.