HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES NO 22-83RESOLUTION NO. 22-83
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BAKERSFIELD INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR ANNEXA-
TION OF TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
IDENTIFIED AS PROCEEDING NO. 792, ANNEXATION
NO. 285 (RIO BRAVO NO. 2), IN ACCORDANCE WITH
IAFCO RESOLUTION MAKING DETERMINATION.
WHEREAS, a proposal was submitted to the Local Agency
Formation Commission of Kern County ("Commission") for the annexa-
tion of territory to the City of Bakersfield designated as Annexa-
tion No. 285 (RIO BRAVO NO. 2); and
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing upon said proposal
was held before the Commission on the 28th day of December, 1982;
and
WHEREAS, following said public hearing the Commission,
on December 28, 1982, adopted its Resolution Making Determination,
being Resolution No. 82-22, recorded in Minute Book 29 of said
Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the
City of Bakersfield as follows:
1. Preliminary proceedings for annexation of territory
to the City of Bakersfield designated as Annexation No. 285
(RIO BRAVO NO. 2) were authorized by the City Council of the City
of Bakersfield by action at a regular meeting thereof held on
July 7, 1982; Application for Annexation dated July 19, 1982, was
transmitted to LAFCO: the Certificate of filing of the Executive
Officer of the Commission shows that the proposal was filed by
him on the 3rd day of November, 1982.
2. The distinctive short form designation assigned by
the Commission to the territory proposed to be annexed is: "City
of Bakersfield Annexation No. 285 (RIO BRAVO NO. 2)."
3. The description of the exterior boundaries of the
territory proposed to be annexed is contained in Exhibit "A",
attached hereto, and incorporated in this Resolution as though
fully set forth herein.
4. The territory proposed to be annexed is uninhabited
as determined by the Commission in its Resolution Making Determina-
tion.
5. The reasons for the proposed annexation as set
forth in the proposal thereof submitted to the Commission are
that the owner and the developer of the affected territory desire
to correct a survey location error discovered in the original Rio
Bravo area annexation to the City in 1977, and the City desires
that the entire area approved previously for development by the
City of Bakersfield be within the City of Bakersfield in order
that the City may receive tax revenues for benefits given and to
be given to the territory proposed to be annexed and to facilitate
dedication to the City of Miramonte Drive within the territory of
the proposed annexation.
6. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Wednesday, the 9th day
of March, 1983, at the hour of 7 p.m. (or as soon thereafter as
the matter may be heard) in the Council Chambers of the City
Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, is hereby
fixed as the time, date and place of hearing on the proposed
annexation where any owner of land within the said described
territory may appear before the Council of the City of Bakersfield
and show cause why such territory should not be annexed. Any
owner of land within the territory may file a written protest
against the annexation with the City Clerk of the City of Bakersifeld
at 1501 Truxtun Avenue at any time prior to the conclusion of the
hearing on the proposed annexation.
7. That the Negative Declaration as to this project
having previously been approved by LAFCO (the lead agency) is
hereby adopted and approved by the City of Bakersfield. The
project will not have a significant effect on the environment.
8. The land and improvements within the territory to
be annexed shall be liable for the general indebtedness of the
City existing at the time of annexation.
9. A certified copy of this resolution shall forthwith
be transmitted to the executive Director of LAFCO.
.......... o0o ...........
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was
passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a
regular meeting thereof held on the 2nd day of February, 1983, by
the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEN: BARTON, CHRISTENSEN, MEANS, pAYNE, RATTY, ROCKOFF, '~T~
NOES: COUNCILMEN: //L2f'F~'t-(2
ABSENT: COUNCILMF-jJ: 1~9'2'1~
ABSTAiNiNG: COUNCILMEN: /'~('y'A'-f/--'~
CITYC~L/E~d/~erk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APP this 2nd day of February, 1983
%t~eC~ersfield
APPROVED as to form:
RJO/bl 3'.
1-31-83
i~YNE)U~TION NO. 28S
RIO BRAVO NO. 2
A parcel of land situated in the County of Kern, State of
California, being a portion of Sections 1S ana 23, Township 29 South,
Range 29 East, H.D.B. & M., more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the northeast corner of said Section 23, said
corner being.a point on the existing Corporate Boundary of the City
of Bakersfield and the True Point of Beginning for this description;
THENCE (1) Departing said Corporate Boundary southerly along the
east line of said Section 23 to intersect the south line of the
north 180 feet of said Section 23;
THENCE (2) Westerly along the last named south line one mile, more
or less, to intersect the west line of said Section 23;
THENCE (3) Northerly along the last named west line to intersect
the north line of said Section 23, said intersection being the
northwest corner of said Section 23 and the southeast corner of
said Section IS;
THENCE (~) South 89° 59' 20" West along the south line of said
Segtion 1S a distance of 462,08 feet to a point on a non-tangent
curve concave to the east which bears South 67° 07' 04" West a
radial distance of 124S feet from the center of said curve, said
point also being a point on the west right of way line of the
proposed Miramonte Drive;
THENCE (S) Continuing along the last named right of way line through
the following S courses: northerly along the last named curve
through a central angle 1Oo 28~ S6I' an arc length of 22?.77 feet;
TnENC:n
point on a
1245 f~et;
North 12° 24' 00" West a distance of 641.04 feet to a
tangent curve concave to th~ east having a radius of
THENCE (7) Northerly along the last named curve through a central
angle of 38° 03~ 30" an arc length of 826..98 feet;
THENCE (8)
point on a
I!SB feet;
North 25° 39' 30" East a distance of 967.62 feet to a
tangent curve concave to the west having a radius of
THENCE (9).Northerly along the last named curve through a central
angle of 6° 31' S3" an arc length of 131.66 feet to a point on the
north line of the south half of said Section iS, said point being
a point on the Existing Corporate Bomndary of the City of Bakersfield;
~%iENCE (10) Easterly and southerly and easterly along the last named
Corporate Boundary to the Point of Beginning.
Containing S3.05 acres (~.)
EXHIBIT "A"
1632
Our File i~o.
Name and address of Sponsor(s) of l}roject:
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
1501 Truxtun A~en__u,E/_..~akersfield, CA 93301
2. Location of Project: Rio B_ ~_v_o__.~r_.e__a_~_.S_.Q~_~.~=..Q_f__[~_'_i_g~way__178
and East of future Miram_o_~l~_e__D_r_~le____a_n,d__.,_sp_u, th__e,_a_,s~~__Q,_f__R..~.o_
Bravo Airport.
3, Description of Project as Proposed: Annexation No. 285 (Rio
Bravo No. 2) by the City of Bakersfield for approximately 53
acres. Annexation is necessary to coi~S'~.._a s~_e_~_!o_~_a.t__~gn__'
error ~i~overed in tS~"b'~iginal Rio Bravo Annexation to the
City in 1977. Area involved in annexation includes golf course
of future single-family lots approved in the Rio Bravo Annexa-
--fion--Erll-i~SV~l-~--17/7-67-'
The undersigne~ having consid<lred the lnl%iters provjd[ed in City
Courtell Rcsc!utjon ~7o. 60-g0; l<ty of 13c~kcrsfie!d does hereby
f'i~d and deterr!=ine t!'~at the ab<=ve d~scr!beg project will not
have a significant effect on the envirc~rnert.
It is proposed that the City of Bakersfield adopt
the Negative Declaration prepared and adopted by
the Local Agency Formation Commission on
December 14, 1982 for this project, The Initial
Study consisting of an EDvironmental Assessment
is on file and may be inspected at the City of
Bakersfield Planning Department at CityHall~
1501 Truxtun Avenue~ Bakersfield, California.
Dated: JanU{rl 31 , 198_3~_ Posted: january 31 ,
BEFORE "?, LOCZI~ AG.':~'NCY
C0t]NTY OF KERN ST'ATE 0F CALit;'O}:,SqiA '
in 'the Matter of:
: PrOceeding No 792
CiTY 0)i,' BAKEF{SFIEi,D: :
Annexa-t::tol'7{S'f'bi}l"' : ENVIRONMENTAL IHPACT
(Rio Bravo No. 2) : NEG$~Tr%rE DEC!,ARATi0N
:
The EnviPonm}ntal Assessment Siled in 't, his matter on %he JJ%h day
of ~aAiS%tst __~ 19 82 was heard and considered by -the above en-t:t%led
comaission: at a public l~earing upon this proposal held on %he _%-hh~ day
of December 2_., 198Z
The project as proposed is as follows:
Annexation No. 289 (Rio Bravo No. 2)
%he City of Bakersfie'ld
The ~avironmental Assessment was prepared by:
Dewey Sceales, Planning Director
The ~virosental Assessment was Peviewed and reported upon %o this
commission by i%s executive officer. A copy of the assessment and repor~
may be obtained at the staff office of %he commission at ]!10
Bakers fi e!d ~ Caiifo:mia.
Pursuan-8 %o its Minute item ~2/qI~/82-2 %he comrnission has foumd and
dete:n~ined that the proSect will[ not'have a significant effect on the
envirormen% for the f'ollowing reasons: (a) %he proOect does not contemp!a-t:e
~he destruction of any na%ura!~ cu!tural~ historical or scenic sights;
(b) the proOect will not significan-~ly contribute %o, or be affected by any
pollution problem; (c) the project does not indicate a
in land use or population centers.
By order of the Local Agency ~orma-~;ion Co~!mission,
made %he lZl-th day of December ~ 1902.
ATTEST:
significant chenge
County of Kenn,
ROBERT N. WHITT'ENORE
Executive Officer'
BEFORE THE Y,,C~AL AGENCY FC?2,1A'i'ION CO:,I,{iSS!ON
COUNTY 02' !iZRl'{ STATE OF CALIFONNiA
in 6he Ratter of :
: Proceeding No.
Annexation No. 285
(Rio Bravo No. 2)
:
ENVIRONI,~ENTAL ASSESSZfENT
PART "A': TO BE FILLED OUT BY APPLICANT.
YES NO
Answer following questions by placing check:
(Please put "NsA." if answer does not apply.)
X
X
x
x 5.
Will this project involve a different land use from
those now in %he area (i.e., commercial in a resi-
dential area, residential in a rure. i area)? (See
Notes Page 6)
Is the project site in or near~ or does it contain~
an important recree.%iona!~ scenic, or aesthetic
resource?
Could the project affect the f'~nctioning of an
established com~unitp~? (See Notes Page 6)
Will implementation of the project require relocation
of cor~unity residents?
Are any of the natural or man-made features in the
project area unique~ that is, not found in other
parts of the County,'State, or Nation? (See Notes
Page 6)
Will this project involve the use, extraction, or
conservation of a scarce mineral resource? (See
Notes Page 6)
Will this project result in the erection of structures,
streets, etc., over a scarce mineral resource? (See
Notes Page 6)
LAPCKC #30 A (1/TS)
-I-
X tl.
X 12o
X
N/A ~ N/A ..
x 16.
x i7.
x
x 19.
x 20.
X 21.
X 22.
Is ~.. project ares in
SO!II, SS 1' wa.i ey soilFees ~
gered species of birds,
or nea~\,-~ sting groiinds~ food
e~:c., ,}d by rare qr er{!an--
witdtife~ or fish?,
Does the project site contain rare or endangered
plant species?
Is the proeosed project within an agricultural preserve
and/or under an Agricultural Contract with the County
of Kern?
Is the project proposed v~zhin the boundaries of a
Specific Plan?
is the project located in or near any public lands
(i.e., Fores-~ Service, Federal~ State, or local
parks, etco)?
Either during or after construction, could the project
result mn significant erosion of land?
Is the project located in an urbanized or an
undeveloped area?
urbanized
X
undeveloped
If in an urbanized area~ }.i!l the project intensify
use of the area by changing existing densities and
uses (i.e., .from single-family residences to multi-
family~ or com~mercial to industrial)?
Is the project in conflict with the densities and land
uses reco~mmended in the Kern County General Plan or
other adopted plans?
Will the project involve application, use, or disposal
of potentially hazardous materia!s~ either during or
after construction? (See Notes Page 6)
Will the project result in generation of significant
amounts of noise, either du~ing or after construction?
Will the project generate significant amounts of dust,
either during or after construction?
Will the project involve burning of brush, trees,
construction materials, etco~ either during or after
construction?
Is any part of the project area subjectlto inundation
or located in or near a floodplain?
Are any of the slopes to be graded 10~ or greater?
LAFCKC #~0 A (1/78) -2-
~ ~"" pare el! t,!'ae project l~-~_, ~d in the area
kno', earthquake fault?
Will this pro~eo% reouire cradling~ If v~s~ exoiafn.
source
If you have answered yes to one or more of these questions~ bu~c you still
think the project ~i!! have no significant envirommenta! effec%s~ in6icate
your reasons below. (Attach additional sheets if necessary)-
The project responds to an original surveying error i'n the location of the southwest
corner of Section 14, Township 29 South Range 29 East. The true corners of Section 14
are approximately 180 feet North and 243 feet East, i.lost of the 53 acre annexation has
been approved as part of the Rio Bravo Golf Course and associated residential develop-
ment by the City of Bakersfield prior to the discovery of the surveying error and is
covered within the EIR prepared for the Rio Bravo Annexation (adopted 1976) and
referenced in the Rio Bravo Land Use and Transportation Element and the Negative
Declaration approved for the golf course development.
Briefly describe the proposed project. (Attach additional sheets if
necessary).
As indicated above, the project responds to a survey error and it will allow the City
to annex an area for which it has previously approved plans and environmental documents
and will allow for the continued processing of parcel maps for the sale of a portion
(31.23 acres) of the southeast quarter of Section 15, Township 29 South, Range 29 East
and a portion of the North part (21.7 acres) of Section 23 by the City of Bakersfield.
The present owner is the Southern Pacific Land Company and the purchaser is La Hacienda,
Inc. The annexation will also allow the dedication of approximately 1/2 mile of
Miramonte Drive (to be a major collector street) to the City of Bakersfield.
LAFCKC #30 A (1/78) -3-
What specific off:-site improvements, not now existi'n8~
required to provide servicei; or access -uo the project?
Percentage of ground area within project that will be covered
by buildings, streets~ and drive~.;ays. Less than 20%.
If proiect is residential, how many people will it ultimately
house usin~ average fP~il.y size as dete~zined by most recent
County Planning Department Population Estimate for your sued~-
region and a 5% vacancy factor)? lY0
How many K-t2 children? eat. max. 30
~. Distance to nearest elementary school 5 miles
Junior High 6 miles High Schooi~5~m_i]j.s
Existing Park_4 miles Shopping Facility 2-1/2 miles, convenience
7 miles, neighb0rhood
Commercial.
NAME, r~D~'mSS AND TELEPHONE IqU!.~ER OF APPLICANT:
City of Bakersfield
]501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield _93301 (805) 326-3733
'~p cod~ea code)
ADDR~eS A!qD TELEPHONE NUI,9ER OF APPLICAIqT'S
REPRESENTATIVE ~ IF AI~:
Date
DEWEY SCEALES, Planninq Director
City of Bakersfield, 1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield 93301 (805) 326-3733 (zip code) (area code)
'rUSigna ur~ of Appti,ant or Agent)
PLANNING DIRECTOR
(Title)
LAFCKC #30 A (1/78)
2ART' ' C':
!~ T~.e project
Plan of the
TO BE Fit, i{ -,,UT }Y LAg'C0 STAiF,
is cpnsistent with
Coua~,ty of Kerz:!:
Housing
Circulation
Land Use
D. Open Space
Conservation
F. Safety
Ga Seismic Safety
H. Noise
Scenic Highways
the Elements of the' Q-enar'al
Yes No
(Initials)
Date
Reviewed by:
Local Agency Formation Cor~nission
County of Kern
LAFCKC #30 A (1/78)
Will this project f,n'vo!ve a different land
area?
use from
th ~3, n6w in
o~e
the
--The project ares includes the imaediate location of the project as
well as more remote areas that may be directly or indirectly affecv~ed
by consultation anS/or operation cf the project.
Could the project affect the functionin~~, of sn established
Examples include, but are not limited tO:
---Changes in traffic patterns
--Effects on access within the community to comnnercial estab!is~m~ents~
schools, parks, etc.
--introduction of activities not presently found vithin the community
Are any of the natural or man-made features in the project. area unique~
that is, not found in other Darts of the County, State~ or Nation?
---Unique features include those areas~ struqtures, biological
phenomena, etc.~ that exhibit distinguishing characteristics not fo~nd
in other areas, or only in a small number of. other areas. Such featur?
can be either good or bad for h~nan health, safety, comfort, or conven-
ioncoo
Will this project ~nvolve the use~ extraction, or conservation of a
scarce mineral resource?
--Uses which effectively preclude the multiple use of regional natural resources in scarce supply
--Activities which tend to diminish the supply or availability of
regional natural resources that are in scarce supply
Will this project result in the erection of structures~ streets, etc.,
over a scarce mineral resource?
--Developments which effectively preclude the extraction of the regior=~z
rock~ sand, gravel, or other mineral resources
Will the project involve application, use, or disposal of potentially
hazardous materials, either durin~ or after construction?
--Examples include, but are not limited to, toxic substances and
radioactive wastes.
LAFCKC #30 A (1/78) -6-