PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
POST-MEETING AGENDA
SPECIAL MEETING
November 4, 2024, 5:30 p.m.
City Hall North Conference Room A
1600 Truxtun Avenue
Committee Members:
Manpreet Kaur
Bob Smith
Bruce Freeman
1. ROLL CALL
2. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
a. Agenda Item Public Statements
b. Non-Agenda Item Public Statements
3. ADOPTION OF MINUTES
a. Adoption of August 27, 2024, Regular Meeting Minutes Staff recommends adoption of minutes.
4. REPORTS
a. Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan Update
Staff recommends receive and file report.
*1. PowerPoint presentation
b. Chronic Nuisance Properties Update
Staff recommends the Committee discuss and receive and file the report *1. PowerPoint Presentation
c. Update on the City Facility Assessment and City Space Downtown Planning Staff recommends receive and file.
*1. PowerPoint presentation
5. DEFERRED BUSINESS
6. NEW BUSINESS
7. COMMITTEE COMMENTS
8. ADJOURNMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 4, 2024: Adoption of minutes
TO: Planning and Development Committee
FROM: Julie Drimakis, City Clerk
DATE: October 25, 2024
SUBJECT: Adoption of August 4, 2024, Regular Meeting Minutes
[Document Description]
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of minutes.
BACKGROUND:
Adoption of meeting minutes
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Action to adopt the minutes will have no impact on the General Fund.
COUNCIL GOAL:
Innovative and Efficient City Government
ATTACHMENTS:
1. August 27, 2024, Regular meeting minutes
1 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
August 27, 2024, 5:30 p.m.
City Hall North Conference Room A
1600 Truxtun Avenue
Members Present: Bob Smith, Bruce Freeman
Members Absent: Manpreet Kaur
Staff Present: Gary Hallen, Assistant City Manager, Viridiana Gallardo-King, Deputy City Attorney, Julie Drimakis, City Clerk
_____________________________________________________________________
1. ROLL CALL
Meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m.
2. PUBLIC STATEMENTS
a. Agenda Item Public Statements
None
b. Non-Agenda Item Public Statements
None
3. ADOPTION OF MINUTES
a. Adoption of April 25, 2024, Regular Meeting Minutes
Moved by: Bruce Freeman
Staff recommends adoption of minutes.
Approved
4. REPORTS
5. DEFERRED BUSINESS
6. NEW BUSINESS
2 a. Review of Sign Ordinance in Commercial Centers and Enforcement of Sign Standards
Development Services Director Burns made staff comments and provided a PowerPoint presentation.
Moved by: Bob Smith
Staff recommends receive and file and provide direction Approved
1. PowerPoint presentation
7. COMMITTEE COMMENTS
8. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 6:05 p.m.
_________________________
MANPREET KAUR, CHAIR
_________________________
JULIE DRIMAKIS, CITY CLERK
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 4, 2024 AGENDA CATEGORY: Reports TO: Planning and Development Committee
FROM: Phillip Burns, Development Services Director
DATE: October 28, 2024
SUBJECT: Update on Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan
[Document Description]
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends receive and file report.
BACKGROUND:
For nearly 30 years, the City of Bakersfield (City) and County of Kern (County) successfully implemented the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan (MBHCP). The MBHCP was a regional habitat conservation plan and state permit that allowed impacts to federal and state listed species resulting from urbanization and related development activities. Although extensive energy was expended over the last ten years in efforts toward preparation of a new habitat conservation plan, the MBHCP and associated Incidental Take Permit (ITP) expired on January 1, 2023, without a subsequent plan in effect.
On February 8, 2023, staff presented a draft Habitat Conservation Plan that was determined to be approvable by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), collectively referred to as the Wildlife Agencies. The draft plan included:
A Grading Hold process. Incidental take of protected species authorized via the release of the “hold” on grading permits.
Habitat Mitigation Fee increasing from $2,145 to $14,070 per gross acre. The 5-day grading permit application review time was unchanged. Avoidance and Minimization Measures remained similar to the MBHCP. An Urban Kit Fox Artificial Den Program was to be established, with a Kit Fox Biologist added to City staff.
A Public Education Campaign with a website and Public Education Specialist position was to be added to City staff.
A Disease Treatment & Monitoring Program.
Funding for one (1) employee with CDFW was included, enhancing CDFW response times and availability.
The City and the County were permittees within the new proposed HCP. The term of the new HCP/ITP was to be thirty years.
At that meeting, Council expressed concern over the per acre mitigation fee and directed staff to identify amendments to the proposed draft HCP that would reduce per acre mitigation costs. Staff has continued discussions with council members along with various developers to understand the range of fee that would minimize public concern. Staff has been evaluating ways to get this extremely important program across the finish line which requires a contract amendment that our City Council will not approve without some certainty that CDFW and USFWL are tentatively in agreement.
Number of Permittees
The February 2023 report identified that the County of Kern was not supportive of the HCP as proposed, which included a per acre mitigation fee of $14,070 with two permittees (the City and County) and a fee of $15,681 if the City w as the sole permittee to the plan. Moving forward, The County of Kern has communicated that they will not participate in the City’s habitat mitigation planning efforts. Therefore, the current proposal is for a single-permittee plan.
Costs
While the draft HCP presented to the City Council in February 2023 initially suggested a single-permittee fee of $15,681 per acre, preliminary assessments and cost revisions suggest the possibility of reducing this figure to approximately $11,000 per acre. Preliminary eva luation and revisions of costs indicate the potential to reduce costs down to approximately $11,000 per acre . This cost estimate is based on the assumption of 7,325 acres of development and 5,500 acres of habitat designated for conservation.
The changed assumptions include:
1. It takes people to administer any HCP. The reductions outlined below provide a net sum of 3 FTEs, down from five. 2.5 FTEs would function as the HCP staff at the City, and ½ FTE would be dedicated to the Bakersfield HCP at CDFW. The revised administrative costs are:
a. Principal planner (50% time down from 100%)
b. Associate planner (50% time down from 100%)
c. Accountant clerk (50% time down from 100%)
d. GIS support (50% time)
e. Real estate specialist (50% time) Real estate support would be subcontracted. f. CDFW biologist (50% time down from 100%)
2. The proposed kit fox program is designed to address the urban kit fox program. USFWS and CDFW expressed that this is the heart of the new program and desire that it be retained as much as possible. The kit fox program costs are:
a. Retain full-time on-call biologist (no change)
b. Public education staff (25% time down from 100%)
c. Public education budget ($12,500 per year, down from $50,000 per year) d. Retain research and disease treatment (no change)
e. Retain den program (no change)
The public outreach component of the program has been significantly reduced. It could be anticipated that outreach be provided in the form of web -based educational content as part of the HCP’s web content.
3. The land acquisition ratio would change as would the land acquisition strategy. a. Reduced the number of transactions as a result of larger land acquisitions and fewer acquisitions as a result. The assumption would b e that each transaction is 100 acres in size (not 50 acres), and that a few larger purchases are better. b. Reduced mitigation ratio (0.75:1), or ¾ acre of habitat conservation for each acre of development, because proposed development lands are currently u nder intensive agricultural practices. A total of 5,494 acres of high -value land will be permanently protected.
4. The fee collected to support the program is proposed to be split into two payments. A portion of approximately $4 -5000 to be paid at grading pe rmit issuance and remainder $6 -7000 at final
inspection or close of escrow of the actual building permit. As part of the process the city may need to bridge the gap of funding between the timing at year end or as determined. This would be part of the analysis.
CDFW Discussion
City staff met with CDFW and Wildlife Agency staff on October 7 th to discuss options as outlined above.
CDFW is not able to utilize a part FTE thus that potential cost is an all or nothing item. The latter is tied to timing of reviews. It was agreed that when a submittal is made to CDFW, it could be earlier in the process to minimize the impact to the overall project. The second issue is the ratio of replacement habitat land.
The proposed ratio of 0.75:1 is not acceptable as proposed. However, both CDFW and the Wildlife Agency strongly voiced the opinion of a focused urban kit fox program. Under this new focus the ratio will most likely go down further, perhaps even zero or 0.25:1. During the meeting CDFW also brought up that the Burrowing owl will most likely be added the endangered list and thus need to be added t o our proposed plan. It was clear from the conversation that the City needs to pivot and thoroughly explore this option to understand the cost and development implication.
FOLLOW-UP ACTION
City Staff needs to have a few more meetings with CDFW staff to fully understand the elements of a focused urban kit fox program. The intent is to provide dens and travel corridors within the developments to support the species. For example, an artificial den could be constructed in the corner of a fenced sump area along with an opening large enough for a kit fox to get through but not a dog or larger predator.
There would need to be a pathway to get to and from the sump for the kit fox to travel. There are a lot of built-out sumps and parks that could have habitat added. Staff need to understand space needs and operational constraints. Staff have said that ideas like conservation easements over golf courses are not likely to happen. Clearly this is a different direction than the current plan. There are many unknowns as this will be the first of its kind plan. Staff needs to determine and fully understand the scope of the plan changes to be able work with the consultant to evaluate the cost of the plan changes to the current document.
CONCLUSIONS
City staff will continue to work with CDFW and the Wildlife agency to develop a habitat conservation plan that is acceptable to the City, Developers and Agencies. This change in concept will take some time t o arrive at solutions acceptable to all. I see this as an opportunity for Bakersfield to be a leader in innovation toward a complex environmental issue. CSUB and its consultants are working on a similar program for their campus. Staff can reach out and w ork together to develop strategies that work for both. I see an urban Kit fox program as one that will take time to develop long term proven strategies. Partnering may provide the research necessary to track success and overall health of the kit fox spec ies under this approach. Staff realize the strong desire to have the coverage of an HCP and associated ITP. Staff will work diligently toward getting a plan prepared for approval and adoption. Once the scope and understanding of added urban kit fox elements, staff will bring a follow-up report back to this committee.
FISCAL IMPACT:
COUNCIL GOAL:
Choose an item.
ATTACHMENTS:
MEMORANDUM
August 8, 2024
TO: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Manpreet Kaur, Chair
Bruce Freeman
Bob Smith
FROM: Phillip Burns, Development Services Director
SUBJECT: Update on Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan
BACKGROUND
History
For nearly 30 years, the City of Bakersfield (City) and County of Kern (County) successfully implemented the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan (MBHCP). The MBHCP was a regional habitat conservation plan and state permit that allowed impacts to federal and state listed species resulting from urbanization and related development activities. Although extensive energy was expended over the last ten years in efforts toward preparation of a new habitat conservation plan, the MB HCP and associated Incidental Take Permit (ITP) expired on January 1, 2023, without a subsequent plan in effect.
On February 8, 2023, staff presented a draft Habitat Conservation Plan that was determined to be approvable by the California Department of F ish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), collectively referred to as the Wildlife Agencies. The draft plan included:
Grading Hold process was retained. Incidental take of protected species was authorized via the release of the “hold” on grading permits.
Habitat Mitigation Fee rose from $2,145 to $14,070 per gross acre. The 5-day grading permit application review time was unchanged. Avoidance and Minimization Measures remained similar to the MBHCP. An Urban Kit Fox Artificial Den Program was to be established, with a Kit Fox Biologist added to City staff.
A Public Education Campaign with website and Public Education Specialist position was to be added to City staff.
A Disease Treatment & Monitoring Program would have been established. Funding for one (1) employee with CDFW was included, enhancing CDFW response times and availability.
The City and the County were permittees within the new proposed HCP. The term of the new HCP/ITP was to be thirty years.
At that meeting, Council expressed concern over the per acre mitigation fee and directed staff to identify amendments to the proposed draft HCP that would reduce per acre mitigation costs. Staff have continued
discussions with council members along with va rious developers to understand the range of fee that would minimize public concern. Staff have been evaluating ways to get this extremely important program across the finish line which requires a contract amendment that our City Council will not approve without some certainty that CDFW and USFWL are tentatively in agreement.
Number of Permittees
The February 2023 report identified that the County of Kern was not supportive of the HCP as proposed, which included a per acre mitigation fee of $14,070 with two permittees (the City and County) and a fee of $15,681 if the City was the sole permittee to the plan. Moving forward, The County of Kern has communicated that they will not participate in the City’s habitat mitigation planning efforts. Therefore, the current proposal is for a single-permittee plan.
Costs
While the draft HCP presented to the City Council in February 2023 initially suggested a single-permittee fee of $15,681 per acre, preliminary assessments and cost revisions suggest the possibility of reducing this figure to approximately $11,000 per acre. Preliminary evaluation and revisions of costs indicate the potential to reduce costs down to approximately $11,000 per acre . This cost estimate is based on the assumption of 7,325 acres of development and 5,500 acres of habitat designated for conservation.
The changed assumptions include:
1. It takes people to administer any HCP. The reductions outlined below provide a net sum of 3 FTEs, down from five. 2.5 FTEs would function as the HCP staff at the City, and ½ FTE would be dedicated to the Bakersfield HCP at CDFW. The revised administrative costs are:
a. Principal planner (50% time down from 100%)
b. Associate planner (50% time down from 100%)
c. Accountant clerk (50% time down from 100%)
d. GIS support (50% time)
e. Real estate specialist (50% time) Real estate support would be subcontracted. f. CDFW biologist (50% time down from 100%)
2. The proposed kit fox program is designed to address the urban kit fox program. USFWS and CDFW expressed that this is the heart of the new program and desire that it be retained as much as possible. The kit fox program costs are:
a. Retain full-time on-call biologist (no change)
b. Public education staff (25% time down from 100%)
c. Public education budget ($12,500 per year, down from $50,000 per year) d. Retain research and disease treatment (no change)
e. Retain den program (no change)
The public outreach component of the program has been significantly reduced. It could be anticipated that outreach be provided in the form of web -based educational content as part of the HCP’s web content.
3. The land acquisition ratio would change as would the land acquisition strategy. a. Reduced the number of transactions as a result of larger land acquisitions and fewer acquisitions as a result. The assumption would be that each transaction is 100 acres in size (not 50 acres), and that a few larger purchases are better. b. Reduced mitigation ratio (0.75:1), or ¾ acre of habitat conservation for each acre of development, because proposed development lands are currently under intensive agricultural practices. A total of 5,494 acres of high -value land will be permanently protected.
4. The fee collected to support the program is proposed to be split into two payments. A portion of approximately $4 -5000 to be paid at grading permit issuance and remainder $6 -7000 at final inspection or close of escrow of the actual building permit. As part of the process the city may need to bridge the gap of funding between the timing at year end or as determined. This would be part of the analysis.
CDFW Discussion
City staff met with CDFW and Wildlife Agency staff on October 7 th to discuss options as outlined above.
CDFW is not able to utilize a part FTE thus that potential cost is an all or nothing item. The latter is tied to timing of reviews. It was agreed that when a submittal is made to CDFW, it could be earlier in the process to minimize the impact to the overall project. The second issue is the ratio of replacement habitat land.
The proposed ratio of 0.75:1 is not acceptable as proposed. However, both CDFW and the Wildlife Agency strongly voiced the opinion of a focused urban kit fox program. Under this new focus the ratio will most likely go down further, perhaps even zero or 0.25:1. During the meeting CDFW also brought up that the Burrowing owl will most likely be added the endangered list and thus need to be added to our proposed plan. It was clear from the conversation that the City needs to pivot and thoroughly explore this option to understand the cost and development implication.
FOLLOW-UP ACTION
City Staff needs to have a few more meetings with CDFW staff to fully understand the elements of a focused urban kit fox program. The intent is to provide dens and travel corridors within the developments to support the species. For example, an artificial den could be constructed in the corner of a fenced sump area along with an opening large enough for a kit fox to get through but not a dog or larger predator.
There would need to be a pathway to get to and from the sump for the kit fox to travel. There are a lot of built-out sumps and parks that could have habitat added. Staff need to understand space needs and operational constraints. Staff have said that ideas like conservation easements over golf courses are not likely to happen. Clearly this is a different direction than the current plan. There are many unknowns as this will be the first of its kind plan. Staff needs to determine and fully understand the scope of the plan changes to be able work with the consultant to evaluate the cost of the plan changes to the current document.
CONCLUSIONS
City staff continue to work with CDFW and the Wildlife agency to develop a habitat conservation plan that is acceptable to the City, Developers and Agencies. This change in concept will take some time to ar rive at solutions acceptable to all. I see this as an opportunity for Bakersfield to be a leader in innovation toward a complex environmental issue. CSUB and its consultants are working on a similar program for their campus. Staff can reach out and work together to develop strategies that work for both. I see an urban Kit fox program as one that will take time to develop long term proven strategies. Partnering may provide the research necessary to track success and overall health of the kit fox species under this approach. Staff realize the strong desire to have the coverage of an HCP and associated ITP. Staff will work diligently toward getting a plan prepared for approval and adoption. Once the scope and understanding of added urban kit fox elements, staff will bring a follow-up report back to this committee.
BHCP Discussion – November 4, 2024
Discussion of Potential Modifications to
Proposed Habitat Conservation Plan
City Council Referral
(All Wards)
City Council Committee Meeting
Planning & Development
Background
Background
On February 8, 2023, staff presented a draft Habitat Conservation Plan that was determined to be approvable by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), collectively referred to as the Wildlife Agencies. The draft plan included:
• Grading hold process was retained. Incidental take of protected species was authorized via the release of the “hold” on grading permits. • Habitat Mitigation Fee rose from $2,145 to $14,070 per gross acre. • The 5-day grading permit application review time was unchanged. • Avoidance and Minimization Measures remained similar to the MBHCP. • An Urban Kit Fox Artificial Den Program was to be established, with a Kit Fox Biologist added to City staff.
Background
Background – Cont.
• A Public Education Campaign with website and Public Education Specialist position was to be added to City staff.
• A Disease Treatment & Monitoring Program would have been established. • Funding for one (1) employee with CDFW was included, enhancing CDFW response times and availability.
• The City and the County were permittees within the new proposed HCP. • The term of the new HCP/ITP was to be thirty years.
Council Feedback
City Council Feedback
The February 2023 report identified that the County of Kern was not supportive of the HCP as proposed, which included a per acre mitigation fee of $14,070 with two permittees (the City and County) and a fee of $15,681 if the City was the sole permittee to the plan. Moving forward, The County of Kern has communicated that they will not participate at the $14,070 rate. However, they are interested evaluating all paths forward toward a joint plan.
While the draft HCP presented to the City Council in February 2023 initially suggested a single- permittee fee of $15,681 per acre. Staff have continued with discussion with council members along with various developers for understand the range of fee that would minimize public concern.
The current “acceptable “ threshold is around $11,000 per acre.
The challenge is a developing a program that meets that threshold and also addresses the agencies programmatic requirements. Preliminary evaluation and revisions to costs indicate the potential to reduce costs down to approximately $11,000 per acre This cost estimate is based on the assumption of 7,325 acres of development and 5,500 acres of habitat designated for conservation.
Plan Discussion
Proposed to CDFW Revised Elements
1. Administrative Support
a. Principal planner (50% time down from 100%)
b. Associate planner (50% time down from 100%)
c. Accountant clerk (50% time down from 100%)
d. GIS support (50% time)
e. Real estate specialist (50% time) Real estate support would be subcontracted. f. CDFW biologist (50% time down from 100%)
2. Kit Fox Program
a. Retain full time on-call biologist (no change)
b. Public education staff (25% time down from 100%)
c. Public education budget ($12,500 per year, down from $50,000 per year) d. Retain research and disease treatment (no change)
e. Retain den program (no change)
Plan Discussion
Proposed to CDFW Revised Elements
3. Land Acquisition
a. Reduced number of transactions as a result of larger land acquisitions and few acquisitions as a result. The assumption would be that each transaction is 100 acres in size (not 50 acres), and that a few larger purchases are better.
b. Reduced mitigation ratio (0.75:1), or ¾ acre of habitat conservation for each acre of development, because proposed development lands are currently under intensive agricultural practices. A total of 5,494 acres of high-value lands will be permanently protected.
4. Funding
a. The fee collected to support the program is proposed to be split into two payments. A portion of approximately $4,000-5,000 to be paid at grading permit issuance and remainder $6,000- 7,000 at final inspection or close of escrow of the actual building permit. b. As part of the process the city may need to bridge the gap of funding between the timing at year end or as determined to support assured funding.
Plan Discussion
Proposed Revised Elements
Feedback Discussion
Feedback to Revised Elements
1. Ratio
The proposed ratio change to less that 1:1 is not acceptable in the plan as submitted. Would require more robust urban fit fox plan, thus more appropriate to switch focus.
2. Urban Kit Fox Mitigation Plan
a. Change approach from buying habitat land to providing and promoting the species. b. Create dens, corridors and acceptable habitat as part of new developments and explore opportunities add habitat in built out development.
1. Conservation easements
2. Modified conservation easements
b. Endowment fund
1. Funds for disease prevention and potential partnership with Cal State
2. Funds to obtain and maintain conservation easements
3. Funds for all necessary monitoring, tracking reporting etc.
Feedback Discussion
Feedback to Revised Elements
3. Funding
a. The new fee per acre at this time is unknown based on the new proposed approach. b. It is expected for the fee to go down but also have new modifications to development standards.
a. Artificial Dens
b. Opening in block walls
c. Reviewing landscape standards near opening or corridors.
4. Timing
a. Initial follow-up meeting with CDFW and Bakersfield team Friday November 1, 2024. b. Much research and internal discussion to be completed to determine if this approach will work for C DFW, USFWS, City of Bakersfield, Development Community and potentially County of Kern.
c. Expect follow-up meeting to include small group of developers, C D F W, USFWS, County and Bakersfield Team to further discuss development related options. d. First of its kind approach.
Next Steps
Next Steps
• Advise team to move forward to explore this option and bring back a contract for scope of work to full council.
• Provide Alternate suggestions for Bakersfield team to evaluate and bring back for further discussion.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 4, 2024 AGENDA CATEGORY: Reports TO: Planning and Development Committee
FROM: Phillip Burns, Development Services Director
DATE: October 28, 2024
SUBJECT: Update of Chronic Nuisance Property and Vacant Building Registry Progress
[Document Description]
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Committee discuss and receive and file the report
BACKGROUND:
Code Enforcement staff rank Chronic Vacant Nuisance Buildings for properties that have a Posted Substandard Building and have multiple Code Enforcement cases, Bakersfield Fire Department calls for service and BPD calls for service. This list is used to set a priority level for each Chronic Vacant Nuisance Building identified for evaluation and the properties are integrated into a GIS system for mapping.
The Chronic Nuisance Vacant Building Program Evaluation Group which consists of staff from the City Attorney, Code Enforcement and Economic & Community Development meet regularly to review the properties for potential remedies which include Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, Receivership or Purchase program.
In February 2024 the Bakersfield City Council approved an ordinance to create a vacant building registry to proactively address chronic nuisance and vacant properties in the City. Code Enforcement staff implemented the Commercial Vacant Building Registry Program within the downtown and old town kern areas effective March 2024. All commercial vacant buildings t hat are expected to be vacant for thirty (30) days shall be registered. This registry is maintained through the Rocksolid (Bakerfield Mobile APP). The registration shall include the identity of all record owners, the street address of the vacant building, a local contact. The vacant , commercial, building is required to have posted signage: no trespassing signs, and emergency contact signs, on the building. Staff developed a Commercial Vacant Building Registry page on the Code Enforcement website to assist property owners with the requirements and registration process.
Chronic Nuisance Property/Commercial Vacant Building Registry Progress Attached please find exhibit “A” the Chronic Nuisance Vacant Building Program Annual Report 2024 outlining the progress over the last year toward addressing chronic nuisance properties. Our intent is to continue to provide this same data on an annual basis to measure progress and review any need to explore other options.
CONCLUSIONS
City staff continues to take steps forward in systematically addressing our chronic nuisance properties.
The Chronic Nuisance Vacant Building Program Evaluation Group will continue to meet to assess appropriate action for these properties.
NEXT STEPS
Staff will take the direction of the Committee. Potential options include:
1. Receive and File the report
2. Provide Alternate direction to Staff.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The adoption of the update will not result in any further financial impact on the City General Fund.
COUNCIL GOAL:
Community Character & Quality of Life
Safety and Resilience
ATTACHMENTS:
MEMORANDUM
November 4, 2024
TO: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Manpreet Kaur, Chair
Bruce Freeman
Bob Smith
FROM: Phillip Burns, Development Services Director
David Paquette, Code Enforcement Manager
SUBJECT: Update of Chronic Nuisance Property and Vacant Building Registry Progress
BACKGROUND
Code Enforcement staff rank Chronic Vacant Nuisance Buildings for properties that have a Posted Substandard Building and have multiple Code Enforcement cases, Bakersfield Fire Department calls for service and BPD calls for service. This list is used to set a priority level for each Chronic Vacant Nuisance Building identified for evaluation and the properties are integrated into a GIS system for mapping.
The Chronic Nuisance Vacant Building Program Evaluation Group which consists of staff from the City Attorney, Code Enforcement and Economic & Community Development meet regularly to review the properties for potential remedies which include Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, Receivership or Purchase program.
In February 2024 the Bakersfield City Council approved an ordinance to create a vacant building registry to proactively address chronic nuisance and vacant properties in the City. Code Enforcement staff implemented the Commercial Vacant Building Registry Program within the downtown and old town kern areas effective March 2024. All commercial vacant buildings t hat are expected to be vacant for thirty (30) days shall be registered. This registry is maintained through the Rocksolid (Bakerfield Mobile APP). The registration shall include the identity of all record owners, the street address of the vacant building, a local contact. The vacant , commercial, building is required to have posted signage: no trespassing signs, and emergency contact signs, on the building. Staff developed a Commercial Vacant Building Registry page on the Code Enforcement website to assist property owners with the requirements and registration process.
Chronic Nuisance Property/Commercial Vacant Building Registry Progress
Attached please find exhibit “ A” the Chronic Nuisance Vacant Building Program Annual Report 2024 outlining the progress over the last year toward addressing chronic nuisance properties. Our intent is to continue to provide this same data on an annual basis to measure progress and review any need to explore other options.
CONCLUSIONS
City staff continues to take steps forward in systematically addressing our chronic nuisance properties.
The Chronic Nuisance Vacant Building Program Evaluation Group will continue to meet to assess appropriate action for these properties.
NEXT STEPS
Staff will take the direction of the Committee. Potential options include:
1. Receive and File the report
11/6/2024
7 0 5 3 3 r d S t s u f f e r e d f i r e d a m a g e O c t o b e r 2 0 2 3
7 0 5 3 3 r d S t a f t e r b e i n g d e m o l i s h e d b y t h e C i t y A p r i l 2 0 2 4
3 0 5 M o n t e r e y S t d e m o l i s h e d b y
c i t y A u g u s t 2 0 2 4
3 0 5 M o n t e r e y S t . s u f f e r e d f i r e d a m a g e A p r i l 2 0 2 4
CHRONIC NUISANCE VACANT BUILDING PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT 2024
The Code Enforcement Special Projects Team identified 127 properties in 2024 as chronic, vacant, and nuisance buildings. This includes properties that were posted as substandard or had sustained fire or structural damage.
Receiverships Update
There are currently eleven active cases for potential receivership action. Four properties have been forwarded to the City Attorney’s office for court review and processing, while seven properties are completing Code Enforcement’s administrative process.
Demolitions Update
Since 2024, a total of twenty-one demolitions have been completed, ten of which were carried out by property owners.
The City has completed eleven demolitions through the administrative process for Abatement of Dangerous Buildings.
A b a n d o n e d b u i ld in g Po s te d
Su b s ta n d a rd M a y 2 01 5
St ru c tu re s u f f e re d f i re d a ma g e
Po s te d Su b s ta n d a rd M a y 2 0 12
1 1 0 5 3r d S t S t r u c t u r e f i r e
3 0 6 N o r t h u p S t S t r u c t u r e s u f f e r e d f i r e
1 1 0 5 3r d S t d e m o l i s h e d b y
o w n e r
3 0 6 N o r t h u p S t d e m o l i s h e d
b y o w n e r
A b a n d o n e d b u i ld in g Po s te d
Su b s ta n d a rd A p r i l 2 01 6
8 1 5 G a g e S t s u f f e r e d f i r e d a m a g e .
D e m o l i t i o n i n p r o g r e s s b y t h e o w n e r . 3 1 4 A u g u s t a S t s e t f o r d e m o l i t i o n i n p r o g r e s s . 1 0 3 0 1 9 t h S t C o d e E n f o r c e m e n t i n t h e e a r l y s t a g e s o f t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p r o c e s s f o r d e m o l i t i o n .
5 5 4 3 B u e n a V i s t a R d
D e m o l i t i o n i n p r o g r e s s .
1 5 1 9 F l o w e r S t d e m o l i t i o n i n p r o g r e s s 1 4 1 2 C h e s t e r P l a w a i t i n g
d e m o l i t i o n i n p r o g r e s s .
There are seventeen active demolition cases in progress, under contract or in various stages of the Code Enforcement administrative process.
Rehabilitations Update
There are fourteen properties under construction, or which have owners actively working to obtain building permits for repair or rehabilitation.
Properties To Monitor Update
Eleven properties evaluated by the group were determined to be ineligible for acquisition, demolition, or receivership action. Code Enforcement will continue to monitor those properties.
Seventeen properties identified as chronic, nuisance, vacant buildings are pending evaluation by the group to categorize the appropriate remedy. Code Enforcement staff will compile relevant records to assist with the analysis of these properties.
9 3 1 M o n t e r e y S t b e f o r e
r e h a b i l i t a t i o n
2 2 0 0 B r u n d a g e L n b e f o r e
r e h a b i l i t a t i o n
9 3 1 M o n t e r e y S t a f t e r
r e h a b i l i t a t i o n A p r i l 2 0 2 4
1 4 1 4 E C a l i f o r n i a A v e b e f o r e
r e h a b i l i t a t i o n
1 4 1 4 E C a l i f o r n i a A v e a f t e r
r e h a b i l i t a t i o n A p r i l 2 0 2 4
2 2 0 0 B r u n d a g e L n a f t e r
r e h a b i l i t a t i o n A p r i l 2 0 2 4 .
F i r e d a m a g e d U R M b u i l d i n g o n
B a k e r S t r e e t P o s t e d S u b s t a n d a r d J u l y 2 0 1 7
B o t h b u i l d i n g s w e r e d e m o l i s h e d b y t h e o w n e r w i t h g r a n t
a s s i s t a n c e t h r o u g h E C D
F i r e d a m a g e d U R M b u i l d i n g o n
B a k e r S t r e e t P o s t e d S u b s t a n d a r d J u l y 2 0 1 7
B o t h l o t s c u r r e n t l y i n e s c r o w
w i t h E C D f o r r e d e v e l o p m e n t .
Posted Substandard Buildings Update
There are currently 322 buildings identified which have been posted substandard and unfit for occupancy. There have been 459 follow-up inspections of posted substandard buildings to verify their status in 2024.
There were five joint enforcement operations conducted by staff from the Code Enforcement Special Projects and Rapid Response Teams, Bakersfield Fire Department Arson Units, and Bakersfield Police Department Impact and Animal Control Units. These operations focused on inspecting vacant buildings posted as unfit for occupancy and enforcing violations related to unlawful occupancy and other offenses.
During the joint enforcement operations, 25 vacant buildings were inspected, resulting in 26 arrests by the Bakersfield Police Department for violations related to entering or occupying posted buildings, as well as other misdemeanor and felony warrants. Animal Control impounded two dogs. No individuals accepted services or were transported to local shelters. Code Enforcement staff boarded up a total of 22 buildings to re-secure them against entry.
ECONOMIC COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT UPDATES
The Economic and Community Development Department (ECD) started outreach efforts with property owners of chronic nuisance or blighted properties w ithin the City of Bakersfield to review potential redevelopment opportunities with them.
Staff assessed the qualifications of projects and a ttempted to match them with available programs with the potential to revitalize blighted properties into beneficial uses.
Since 2023, ECD staff has engaged 56 property owner s through solicitation and is pursuing seventeen properties through the tax default acquisitions through the Kern County Tax Collector’s Office. To date, most of the properties pursued by ECD align with pr iority areas, such as the Prosperity Neighborhood Initiative, the Transformative Climate Communities program, and future redevelopment plans. Six properties have been acquired; one is pending a fin al sales contract. Four properties are pending communication from the owners which have expressed interest. Seventeen properties are being pursued through the County’s tax default sales proc ess, known as Chapter 7 sales. Twenty-one received solicitation letters and are pending further responses. Eighteen notified staff that they are not interested in selling their properties. Seven properties are no longer being pursued for various reasons (e.g. sold to another buyer, owner is actively reha bbing) . 26 properties that the City has pursued had structures demolished either by the City or the property owner in 2023 or 2024.
Active Demolition Cases
# ADDRESS WARD TYPE CASE # STATUS
1 3801 Mt. Vernon Ave. 3 ADB 23-7259 Active
2 1017 Espee St. 2 ADB 24-0822 Active
3 430 S Williams St. 2 ADB 23-11373 Active
4 1412 Chester Pl 2 ADB 24-2703 Active
5 1101 Inyo St 2 ADB 24-3197 Active
6 508 S Haley 2 ADB 24-3269 Active
7 1914 16th St. 2 ADB 24-3443 Active
8 1308 E California Ave. 2 ADB 24-3672 Active
9 426 Chester Ave. 2 ADB 24-3734 Active
10 625 19th St. 2 ADB 24-3846 Active
11 4415 Wilson Rd 1 ADB 24-4416 Active
12 324 E 4th St. 2 ADB 24-5065 Active
13 511 Bernard St. 2 ADB 24-5568 Active
14 815 Gage St 2 ADB 24-0000978 Active
15 1519 Flower St 2 ADB 24-0000964 Active
16 314 Augusta St 2 ADB 24-0001142 Active
17 5543 Buena Vista Rd 5 ADB 24-0001133 Active
Completed Demolition Cases
# ADDRESS WARD TYPE CASE # OWNER/CITY
1 913 Watts Dr 1 ADB 23-8453 Demolished by City
2 705 33rd St 3 ADB 23-8529 Demolished by City
3 6501 Gosford Rd 5 ADB 23-11223 Demolished by Owner
4 829 Chester Ave. 2 ADB 22-3381 Demolished by Owner
5 3109 California Ave. 2 ADB 23-8882 Demolished by Owner 6 326 Jefferson St 2 ADB 23-10840 Demolished by Owner
7 310 E 21st St 2 ADB 23-10323 Demolished by Owner
8 3207 Union Ave 3 ADB 23-5267 Demolished by City
9 3601 S. Chester Ave #56 1 ADB 23-4271 Demolished by City 10 4415 Wilson Rd. 1 ADB 24-0382 Demolished by City
11 1509 Potomac Ave 2 ADB 23-0050 Demolished by City
12 718 E 19th St 2 ADB 24-0499 Demolished by City
13 238 Dr MLK 2 ADB 24-0037 Demolished by Owner
14 425 East 21st St. 2 ADB 24-0779 Demolished by Owner
15 730 N St 2 ADB 23-1278 Demolished by City
16 1228 Chester Pl 2 ADB 23-11091 Demolished by City
17 1105 3rd St 2 ADB 24-1505 Demolished by Owner
18 305 Monterey St 2 ADB 24-2694 Demolished by City
19 1105 3rd St 2 ADB 24-1505 Demolished by Owner
20 306 Northup St. 2 ADB 24-2488 Demolished by Owner
21 615 33rd St 3 ADB 24-0227 Demolished by City
Rehabilitation by Owner
# ADDRESS WARD TYPE CASE # STATUS Permits /Status
1 3508 Horne St. 1 PM 19-6326 Closed Permit #23-556 7 Final Insp AP 10/11/23 2 413 Texas St. 2 ADB 23-1753 Closed
Permit #23-12373 Final Insp AP 10/30/23.
Permit #22-13156 Final Insp AP 10/30/23
3 416 Bill Ave. 2 ADB 23-5074 Closed Permit #22-164 12 Final Insp AP 11/9/2023 4 1020 Gage St. 2 ADB 12-1439 Closed Permit #23-376 4 Final Insp AP 11/29/23 5 300 Tyree Toliver St. 6 PM 12-7068 Closed Permit #21-12701 Final Insp AP 1/12/24 6 1721 De Wolfe St 2 PM/BLDC 22-1867 Closed Permit #23-2884 Final Insp AP 2/20/2 4 7 1200 11th St. 2 PM 06-1482 Closed Permit #23-10 389 Final Insp AP 3/1/24 8 1116 West Point Dr 3 ADB 23-7491 Closed Permit #2 3-10513 Final Insp AP 3/5/24 9 2200 Brundage Ln 2 PM 14-0237 Closed Permit #20-8 348 Final Insp AP 4/18/24 10 7102 Rogue River Dr. 6 ADB 23-4816 Closed
Permit #23-12259 Disapprove Final Insp AP
4/25/24, Permit #23-10760 no inspections
11 2105 23rd St 2 ADB 23-6529 Closed
Permit #23-13437 Final Insp AP 11/20/23
Permit #24-1989 Final Insp AP 3/5/24 . Permit
#23-13371 Final Insp AP 4/24/24 .
12 2100 Earlene Ct 7 ADB 22-6034 Closed
Permit # 24-5725 Final Insp 6/21/24 Permit
# 24-5095 Final Insp AP 6/21/24
13 3712 Harmony Dr 3 ADB 17-1511 Closed
Permit # 23-9487 Final Insp 8/10/23 Permit
# 22-5237 Final Insp AP 7/27/23
14 440 19th St 2 ADB 22-1667 Closed Permit # 23-11292 Final Insp AP 1/8/24 15 931 Monterey St 2 ADB 22-4050 Closed Permit # 22-52 37 Final Isp AP 7/27/23 16 1414 E California Ave 2 ADB 17-7429 Closed Permit # 18-1365 Fina Insp AP 5/10/21 17 3905 Rickey Way 6 ADB 18-4735 Closed Permit # 23-12 622 Final Insp AP 10/20/23
Property to Monitor Cases
# ADDRESS WARD TYPE CASE # STATUS
1 802 Union Ave. 2 ADB 17-7457 Active
2 631 Bernard St. 2 ADB 18-0014 Active
3 6300 Dennen St. 7 ADB 18-3658 Active
4 601 Melba Ln. 2 ADB 22-0294 Active
5 500 H St. 2 ADB 23-3068 Active
6 3412 Harvard Dr. 3 ADB 21-4768 Active
7 2688 Oswell St. 3 ADB 14-0658 Active
8 207 H St. 2 ADB 22-1194 Active
9 1400 18th St. 2 BLDC 22-2347 Active
10 1313 Niles St. 2 ADB 22-6467 Active
11 1001 S. Owens St. 2 ADB 17-0789 Active
12 200 E 19th St 2 ADB 24-2745 Active
13 5905 Camp St. 1 ADB 19-2485 Active
14 6100 Quaking Aspen 6 ADB 23-1324 Active
15 5703 Alice Springs Ave 1 ADB 22-0353 Active
16 1125 Snyder Ln 2 ADB 1009106 Active
17 2011 Chester Ave 2 ADB 22-5582 Active
18 330 S. Chester Ave 2 ADB 18-2698 Active
19 2604 Fairview Rd. 7 ADB 18-7690 Active
20 3604 K St. 3 ADB 14-2252 Active
21 820 Real Rd. 2 ADB 18-0964 Active
22 700 Hogan Way 6 ADB 22-3806 Active
23 1418 Terrace Way 2 ADB 17-7671 Active
24 239 18th St. 2 ADB 15-4733 Active
25 318 Vernal Pl 2 ADB 17-7612 Active
26 721 Grace St 2 ADB 13485 Active
27 80 Union Ave 2 ADB 21-5412 Active
28 1500 Pacheco Rd 1 ADB 19-5107 Active
ECD Property Status Update
Project Area
Property Status Old Town Kern Maritn Luther
King Area
Downtown Area Other
Property Acquired/In
Escrow 4 1 0 1
In negotiations/set to
be appraised 2 1 0 2
Solicitation Letter
Sent 2 9 2 8
Declined Offer
6 7 0 5
Pursuing Through Tax
Default 1 8 0 8
Sold to another
buyer/No Longer
Pursuing
1 2 2 1
Total
16 28 4 25
ECD Property Pursuit – Demolished Properties
Project Area
Property Status Old Town Kern Maritn Luther
King Area
Downtown Area Other
Property Demolished
By the City/Owner in
2023 or 2024
7 11 0 8
Properties Under Escrow/Purchased
Address APN Neighborhood Status
812 Baker St. 016-060-07 Old Town Kern Purchase Complete 808 Baker St. 016-060-08 Old Town Kern Purchase Complete 800 Baker St. 016-060-10 Old Town Kern Purchase Com plete 1509 Potomac Ave. 018-091-14 Southeast Purchase Com plete 1201 Niles Street 015-240-20 Old Town Kern Purchase Complete 901 Union Avenue 009-502-10 Southeast Purchase Comp lete
Commercial Vacant Building Registry Update
As of October 2024, there are a total of 60 identified properties within the service area (downtown and oldtown kern).
• 20 of the 60 properties have been identified as occupied
o 2 of the 20 properties have been moved from vacant to occupied following the Commercial Vacant Building Registry program.
# ADDRESS STREET WARD OWNER
6 440 19th St 2/DT HAKOBYAN TONIK
8 2401 M St 2/DT 24TH & M ASSCS L P
• 40 of the 60 properties are identified as commercial vacant buildings.
o 10 of the 40 properties currently have an active building permit or planning review application.
o 18 of the 40 properties are following the sign requirements. There have been no citations issued to non-compliant properties at this time.
# ADDRESS STREET WARD OWNER
1 2000 Chester Ave 2/DT MONTANA FAMILY L P
2 2014 (2016) Chester Ave 2/DT MARTINEZ JOSE
3 1219 (1231/1225/1219) 19th St 2/DT BKFD LLC
4 1822 M St 2/DT 1822 M. ST LLC
5 2407 Chester Ave 2/DT COHN SHELL FMLY SURV TR
6 716 19th St 2/DT SAGUARO INVESTORS LLC
7 902 (906) 19th St 2/DT SAGUARO INVESTORS LLC
8 1917 N St 2/DT AMIDI PARTNERS LLC
9 2020 G St 2/DT
BAKFLD FIREFIGHTERS
HISTORICAL
10 3105 F St 2/DT SAMERAH CORP
Planning and Development Committee – Nov 4, 2024
City Council Referral
(Ward 2)
City Council Committee Meeting
Planning & Development
Chronic Vacant Nuisance Property Update
Vacant Commercial Building Registry
Background
Background
Update of progress since the Jan 1, 2024, Planning and
Development Committee meeting. This is an annual update on the status of both programs in relation to vacant buildings.
Update
Update on Nuisance Property Program
• Memo attached as Exhibit “A”.
• Identified 127 properties as chronic vacant nuisance buildings • 11 properties with active receivership action
• 4 receivership cases forwarded to the City Attorney’s Office • 21 total demolitions, 10 by property owners (table in report) • 17 active demolition cases in various stages (table in report)
Rehabs
Rehabilitations Update
• 14 properties where owner is working to rehab.
931 Monterey St
ECD Project Summary
Economic Community Development Projects
ECD Property Status Update
Project Area
Property Status Old Town Kern Maritn Luther
King Area
Downtown Area Other
Property Acquired/In
Escrow 4 1 0 1
In negotiations/set to
be appraised 2 1 0 2
Solicitation Letter
Sent 2 9 2 8
Declined Offer 6 7 0 5
Pursuing Through Tax
Default 1 8 0 8
Sold to another
buyer/No Longer
Pursuing
1 2 2 1
Total 16 28 4 25
Registry Program
Registry Program
• 60 identified properties to review in Downtown and Old Town Kern • 20 of the properties were identified as occupied.
• 18 of the 40 have complied including the sign requirements. • 10 properties have active planning or building processes.
Initial Boundaries
Program Boundaries
Next Steps
Next Steps
• Receive and file the chronic vacant nuisance building annual report.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 4, 2024 AGENDA CATEGORY: New Business TO: Planning and Development Committee
FROM: Gary Hallen, Assistant City Manager
DATE: October 31, 2024
SUBJECT: Update on the City Facility Assessment and City Space Downtown Planning
[Document Description]
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends receive and file the City Facility Assessment Update.
BACKGROUND:
City of Bakersfield engaged with Moss Adams a consulting firm to provide the City a Facility Assessment in order to address a referral from Council Member Freeman that requested we investigate the City Space in the downtown as well as City wide.
This is not a space planning exercise but more a point in time assessment of the condition of our major system, space and very general space utilization. Moss Adams was tasked with reviewing how the City makes decisions on major systems improvements and space , as well as assisting on advising the City’s policy and short/long term planning tools concerning space and facility improvements.
Some of the outcomes from Moss Adams report are listed below:
• Develop a multi -year strategic business policy to articu late the vision, goals, and performance measures for the City’s properties with supporting financial plan • Complete a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis for all City buildings
• Create a deferred maintenance program and incorporate into GIS/ESRI • Establish a more comprehensive and more formal Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), one exists for a 5 year duration and a 10 year plan for facilities in industry standards.
A more formal facility assessment presentation will be provided to the Committee at the meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There will be no financial impact to the Cit y, with the action of the presenting the Facility Assessment .
When the City takes further action on space planning and improvement a detailed cost will be outlined at the time of those actions.
COUNCIL GOAL:
Reliable Infrastructure.
ATTACHMENTS:
City of Bakersfield
Facilities Assessment
Steve Bacchetti, Partner
Agenda
01 02
03 04
2 Overview
Results
Implementation Plan
Questions and Open Discussion
Executive Summary
Overview
• Moss Adams LLP (Moss Adams) was engaged by the City of Bakersfield (the City) to perform a facilities assessment.
• The assessment was conducted between May and November 2023. • The full results can be found within our report deliverable. • The goal of this engagement was to establish employee use definitions, develop baseline matrices to measure current and future key performance indicators (KPIs), and evaluate current facilities and forecast utilization needs and resources over the next 10 years.
City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment 3
Executive Summary (continued)
Overview
• Key objectives included the following:
• Objective 1: Develop and establish employee use definitions. • Objective 2: Identify KPIs and create a baseline current use matrix to measure future performance against. • Objective 3: Evaluate all existing facilities to understand their current age, condition, and efficiency. • Objective 4: Review current utilization, effectiveness, and other factors of existing City buildings used by staff.
• Objective 5: Gather growth projections from City leadership to inform forecast of 10-year space utilization needs.
• Objective 6: Conduct scenario planning work sessions with City staff to refine 10-year needs.
City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment 4
Good Practices Observed
Results
Throughout our work, we noted:
• Excellent collaboration between departments and colleagues • A culture that looks for best practices and opportunities for improvement It was clear from all City employees we worked with how much passion there is for Bakersfield and concern for its progress and future. The contributions from these dedicated employees undoubtedly elevated this report, and we again share our thanks.
City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment 5
Scenario Planning Framework
Implementation Plan
Recommendation 6a:
• Develop a multi-year strategic business plan to articulate the vision, goals, and performance measures for the City’s properties, including hold and exit strategies, with capital plan considerations. The approach, activities, and performance measures can form the foundation for the final strategic business plan.
• Create a financial plan to track and coordinate funding sources to support achievement of the strategic plan.
PRIORITY: MODERATE
6 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Scenario Planning Framework
Implementation Plan
Management Response 6a: Management agrees a longer-term plan with a Vision, goals and financing plan with specific funding sources will help the City.
Primary Responsible Party: CMO and PW
Target Completion Date: 2025
7 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Scenario Planning Framework
Implementation Plan
Recommendation 6b: Develop the appropriate role and responsibility documentation such as a Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed (RACI) matrix, authorization matrix, or organization chart to demonstrate how various stakeholder groups are meant to work together and ensure that individuals in positions of leadership have appropriate authority thresholds to accomplish their work.
PRIORITY: HIGH
8 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Scenario Planning Framework
Implementation Plan
Management Response 6b: RACI will increase communication and accountability. City strongly agrees with the implementation of a RACI.
Primary Responsible Party: CMO and PW
Target Completion Date: 2025
9 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Scenario Planning Framework
Implementation Plan
Recommendation 6c: The City should consider establishing a formal communication plan for key stakeholders and/or committees to review and discuss key real estate information at a set frequency (e.g., monthly, quarterly, or annually) where the health of City real estate property inventory can be evaluated so informed decisions can be made.
PRIORITY: MODERATE
10 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Scenario Planning Framework
Implementation Plan
Management Response 6c: Establishing a formal feedback to and from stakeholders (City Executive and other staff) regarding space and maintenance to be done will improve how we operate regarding our spacing planning.
Primary Responsible Party: CMO and PW with an assist from third party consultants Target Completion Date: 2026
11 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Scenario Planning Framework
Implementation Plan
Recommendation 6d: The City should partner with departmental leadership to develop a formal space plan per building that aligns with future space goals and addresses current concerns. The plan should be a practical, actionable guide for the next three to five years of activities. In the short term, the City should focus on resolving the need for storage and consider using a space planner to ensure spaces are being utilized as efficiently as possible.
PRIORITY: HIGH
12 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Scenario Planning Framework
Implementation Plan
Management Response 6d: Engagement with a formal space planner will help shape how we use our current space effectively. Staff agrees
Primary Responsible Party: CMO and PW with an assist from third party consultants Target Completion Date: 2025
13 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Space Utilization Strategy
Implementation Plan
Recommendation 7a: In the short term, the City should prioritize its highly utilized sites and consider engaging an architect specializing in space utilization to provide layout recommendations that optimize space and workflow. If the architect assesses all sites, they may also be able to make department relocation recommendations based on existing work style and projected growth.
PRIORITY: HIGH
14 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Space Utilization Strategy
Implementation Plan
Recommendation 7a (continued): In the long term, the City should establish a proactive real estate strategy (see Objective 6). The City must dedicate a department or create a team of representatives from multiple departments whose sole focus is to actively review the market for opportunities to lease or purchase additional facilities. This strategic approach will ensure the City secures suitable spaces in a timely manner to support its expanding operations.
PRIORITY: MODERATE
15 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Space Utilization Strategy
Implementation Plan
Management Response 7a: Engagement with a formal space planner will help shape how we use our current space effectively. Staff agrees
Primary Responsible Party: CMO and PW with an assist from third party consultants Target Completion Date: 2027
16 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Space Utilization Strategy
Implementation Plan
Recommendation 7b: The City should develop policies and procedures around conducting a SWOT analysis for all properties. The policies and procedures should identify who prepares and reviews this information to help guide strategy on reaching utilization goals vs. plan and identifying opportunities for improvement on current properties to better serve City personnel.
PRIORITY: HIGH
17 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Space Utilization Strategy
Implementation Plan
Management Response 7b: Long term goal established for City facilities will set a goal and framework. Staff agrees
Primary Responsible Party: CMO and PW with an assist from third party consultants Target Completion Date: 2026
18 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Space Utilization Strategy
Implementation Plan
Recommendation 8a: The City should formalize the existing CIP by adding critical information and develop a policy and procedure for reviewing the CIP on an ongoing basis. At a minimum, the policies and procedures should include the following items:
• Defined roles and responsibilities for updating and reviewing the CIP • Defined thresholds and approval steps for project budgets PRIORITY: HIGH
19 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Capital Planning
Implementation Plan
Recommendation 8a (continued):
• Required reporting and frequency to key stakeholders
• Defined KPIs (see Objective 2) and metrics supporting the various projects Once policies and procedures are created, they should be made available in a centralized location, such as an intranet.
PRIORITY: HIGH
20 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Capital Planning
Implementation Plan
Management Response 8a: Improving policies and standard practices relating to the 5 year and 10-year long term plans will help the City be more prepared for the future.
Primary Responsible Party: CMO and PW with an assist from third party consultants Target Completion Date: 2025
21 City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment
Questions and
Open Discussion
City of Bakersfield Facilities Assessment 22