1. Social Equity Stakeholder
Roundtable Meeting
October 17, 2012

2. Agenda
• Welcome and introductions
• Introduction to the project
• Overview of recent studies
• Overview of Regional Housing Needs Allocation
• Review of new Environmental Justice
Methodology
• Policy Area Discussions
• Wrap up and next steps

3. Welcome and Introductions

4. Meeting Purpose
• To gain a better understanding of the
Directions to 2050 project
• To learn about how your transportation
choices affect your priorities for the future,
community assets, and funding expenditures

5. Ground Rules
• Common conversational courtesy
• All ideas and points of view have value
• Speak up, and share the time
• Cell phone courtesy
• Be comfortable

6. Introduction to the Project

7. Project Funding
• Directions to 2050 is funded in part by:
– California utility ratepayers and administered by
South California Edison
– Kern COG provides major funding for this project
to encourage activities that lead to long-term,
sustainable changes

8. Relationship to the
Kern Regional Blueprint effort
• Directions to 2050 builds on the Blueprint by:
– Revisiting the communities’ vision and guiding
principles
– Considering a full range of choices and associated
trade-offs
– Brainstorming locally-relevant strategies
– Identify and prioritize next steps
– Incorporate these next steps into the region’s plan

9. Relationship to
Local Government Plans
• Directions to 2050 and the 2014 Regional
Transportation Plan:
– Guides the development of the planned
multimodal transportation systems in Kern County
– Supports local planning efforts
– Developed through a comprehensive coordination
effort between local, regional, state and federal
agencies

10. Relationship to
Other Activities in the Region
• San Joaquin Valley Blueprint
• Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
• Region-wide transportation improvements
– Bicycle and pedestrian
– Transit
– Freight
• Social Equity and Environmental Justice

11. Directions to 2050
Cycle 1 Community Outreach
• 16 community
workshops throughout
the region
• RPAC meetings
• Stakeholder Roundtable
Meetings
• Website with
interactive activities,
background
information, and online
survey

12. Community Outreach – Key Findings
To-date
• Community members prioritized:
– Link education/training/youth mentorships with
economic development initiatives.
– Maintain and develop comprehensive community
services for health, education, safety, and recreation.
– Add, maintain, and improve sidewalks and bike lanes
for safer, active lifestyles.
– Maintain local streets and roads.
– Improve air quality.
– Invest in renewable energy production and
distribution, including wind and solar power.

13. Overview of Recent Studies

14. Overview of Recent Studies
• Kern County Bicycle Master Plan
• Long Range Transit Plan
• High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)/ Bus Rapid
Transit (BRT) Study
• Commuter Rail Feasibility Study
• Kern County Goods Movement Strategy
• Short Haul Rail Freight Study

15. Kern County Bicycle Master Plan
• Goal
– Assess existing bicycle
facilities
– Develop a plan for new
bicycle amenities
– Provide
recommendations for
complete streets

16. Kern County Bicycle Master Plan
• 664 miles of new bikeways including:
– 30 miles of Class I bike paths
– 297 miles of Class II bikes lanes
– 46.6 miles of Class III bike routes
– 186 miles for Class III bike routes on State routes

17. Long Range Transit Plan
• Goal
– Document the
relationship between:
• Population growth
• Employment growth
• Transit ridership demand
• Current operations
– Improve Customer Service
– Improve Cost-
effectiveness

18. Expanding Access to High Quality Transit

19. GET Long Range Transit Plan
• Short-Term Recommendations
– New Transit Center at CSUB
– Increased service to CSUB and BC
– Faster cross-town trips: Express routes, “Rapid”
routes, More direct routes
• Mid- Long- Term Recommendations
– Accommodate projected growth
– Phase out downtown and southwest Transit Centers
– Convert “Rapid” routes to full Bus Rapid Transit
– Introduce “enhanced” KRT intercity express bus routes

20. 2005 Transit Priority Areas – 5,600 Households

21. 2012 Transit Priority Areas – 127,600 Households

22. 2035 Transit Priority Areas – 415,000 Households

23. Employer
Subsidized Transit
• 19,000 employee
trips per year
• 1.4 Million Miles
Less Travel Annually

24. Kern Regional Transit (KRT)
Service Analysis
• Goal
– Determine whether KRT
might be able to take
advantage of the GET
changes to:
• Improve service for its
own customers
• Reduce operating costs

25. Kern Regional Transit (KRT)
Service Analysis

26. Draft High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)/
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Study
• Goal
– Examine the long-range
feasibility of
implementing HOV
lanes and/or BRT
services
– Assess the
performance, benefits,
and potential impacts
of HOV and BRT

27. High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)/
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Study
• Short- and Mid-Term Recommendations
– Improve rapid bus with:
• Traffic signal priority systems and queue jump lanes
• Exclusive HOV and bus lanes
– Introduce express bus service along SR 178/24th
Street/Rosedale Highway
– Construct truck climbing lanes eastbound SR-58
– Add express bus services
– Introduce ramp meters at identified interchanges
– Designate new peak period-only HOV lane

28. One Approach:
Phased Light Rail
Today
Bus Rapid
Transit
Long Range
Light Rail

29. Centers/Corridors Concept

30. Commuter Rail Feasibility Study
• Goal
– Examine a set of alternatives
for providing commuter rail
service within:
• Bakersfield metropolitan area
• Surrounding portions of Kern
County
• Eastern region of the county
– Identify corridors that may be
feasible for future service and
potential station locations

31. Commuter Rail Rosamond
Feasibility Study
Expansion of MetroLink
to Rosamond
Added stops to Amtrak
Northwest of Bakersfield
Possible Future South
Valley Commuter Rail
Link to Study: Delano
http://www.kerncog.org/docs/studie
s/KernCOG_Commuter_Rail_Draft_R
Wasco
eport_20120720.pdf
Bakersfield

32. Short-Haul Rail Freight Study Phase II
• Goal
– Expand on Short-
Haul Rail Freight
Study Phase I
– Focus on San
Joaquin Valley Rail
(SJVR) operations
– Profile existing
traffic base based on
shipper comments
– Forecast growth in
traffic base 10 years
into the future

33. Short-Haul Rail Freight Study Phase II
• Recommendations
– Proactively identify rail quality service issues &
solutions
– Engage KEDC, SJVR and communities to craft
solutions to attract rail-dependent industries.
– Develop multi-use facilities along Buttonwillow
and Oil City corridors
– Explore rail intermodal options
– Explore potential future uses for the southern
portion of the Arvin Subdivision

34. Kern County Goods
Movement Strategy 21%
• Goal
Survey
– Use data from SR-58, SR-
99/I-5, SR-223, 166, 119, 46 29% Locations
& 65 Origins & Destinations
Studies to inform future
project development
activities
– Propose future truck-
related capital
improvements through 9%
2035
– Determine the impact of
current and future
transportation projects on
goods movement

35. Kern County Goods
Movement Strategy
• Stakeholder Project Ranking
– SR-58 – From I-5/SR-58 to Allen Road – add through
lanes
– SR-58 – From Union Avenue to Cottonwood Road –
add through lanes
• Other Project Ranking – (not a complete list)
— Southbound SR-99 off-ramp – Panama Lane to Wible
Road - add auxiliary lane
— SR-119 – From Golf Course Road to aqueduct – add
through lanes
— SR-178 – From SR-184 to Rancheria Road – add
through lanes

36. 2013 Kern Regional Housing Report
and RHNA Plan
• PMC was retained to assist Kern COG with the
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
process
1. Determining a methodology for distribution of the
RHNA for each 11 cities and the unincorporated
county
2. Completing a regional housing data report to assist
with each jurisdictions Housing Element update

37. RHNA Process
• HCD is required to determine the RHNA, by income
category, for Council Of Governments (COGs).
• RHNA is based on Department of Finance population
projections and regional population forecasts used in
preparing regional transportation plans.
• Kern COG is responsible to allocate the projected needs
for the unincorporated County of Kern and to each of
the 11 incorporated cities.
• Pursuant to GC 65583, localities are required to update
their housing element to plan to accommodate all of
the RHNA share by income category.

38. SB 375/SCS/RHNA
• Intent of SB 375 is for housing planning to be
coordinated and integrated with the RTP.
• RHNA Plan
– Projects 8+ years, subset of the RTP horizon
– Updated at least every 8 years (relative to RTP
update)
• SCS
– Forecasts at least 20 years
– Updated at least every 4 years

39. Kern Regional Housing Data Report
• The Housing Element is one of the 7 mandated
elements of the General Plan.
• Housing Needs Assessment must be completed.
• Tables to be completed for each City and the County
– Growth Projections
– Annual Average Growth Rates
– Households by Income
– % of Housing in each income class
– % of total County growth by City
– Labor force/job per household
– Special Needs Populations
– Housing Conditions Survey Results (Kern COG)

40. Data Sources
• Sources of Data
– Kern COG RTP Projections
– Kern COG Housing Condition Survey Results
– 2011 Department of Finance
– 2000 and 2010 US Census
– American Community Survey
– Federal Housing and Urban Development
– CA Employment Development Department

41. Housing Preferences
• Kern COG completed a survey on Housing
Preferences
• Results indicated:
– Between 2008 and 2012 there has been a growing
acceptance of more compact development types
– Interest in a home with a large yard remained unchanged
at around 85%.
– Interest in houses with small yards grew from 65% to 78%.
– interest in condos grew from 40% to 52%.
– Interest in apartments grew from 29% to 35%.
– Interest in mixed use grew from 21% to 28%.

42. Kern County 2006 – 2013 RHNA
The total State housing allocation to Kern County was 41,640
units for the period January 1, 2006 to June 30, 2013.
County/City Total Very Low Low Moderate Above Mod
Arvin 532 129 88 97 218
Bakersfield 27,252 6,626 4,500 4,9601 11,166
CA City 407 99 67 74 167
Delano 1,817 442 300 331 744
Maricopa 16 4 3 3 6
McFarland 775 188 128 141 3183
Ridgecrest 379 92 63 69 155
Shafter 502 122 83 91 206
Taft 62 16 10 11 25
Tehachapi 454 110 75 83 186
Wasco 858 208 142 156 352
Unincorp. County 8,586 2,088 1,416 1,563 3,519

44. RHNA Next Steps
• Next Steps
– Finishing up data collection
– Draft Data Report - completed end of Nov. 2012
– Final Data Report - completed end of Dec. 2012
– Report will be reviewed by PSC and RPAC
– Public review draft RHNA plan for RPAC and Public
Hearing for TPPC – January 2013
– Check updates and meetings on Directions to
2050 website, www.directionsto2050.com

45. Review of new Environmental
Justice Methodology

46. Policy Area Discussions

47. Transportation Choices Online Activity
• Purpose
– To determine your group’s resource investment
preferences for the future
• How to Play
– Choose six priorities for the future
– Allocated resources to transportation policy areas
– Watch your budget and priorities for the future
change!

48. Report Out and Large Group
Conclusions
• Which priorities for the future were important
to your group?
• Which transportation policy areas were
important to your group?
• What surprised you?
• What didn’t surprise you?

49. Wrap Up and Next Steps

50. We are here

51. Next Steps
• Upcoming meetings and events
– RPAC meeting
– Stakeholder meetings
– Community presentations
– Community events

52. Social Equity Stakeholder
Roundtable Meeting
October 17, 2012