The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRES NO 009-05RESOLUTION NO.0 0 9 ' 0 5 A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION PROPOSING PROCEEDINGS FOR ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD AS ANNEXATION NO. 4.70 LOCATED NORTH OF TAFT HIGHWAY, GENERALLY WEST OF STINE ROAD. (WARD 6). WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Bakersfield, in accordance with the provisions of Section 65353 of the Government Code, held a public hearing on MONDAY, JULY 14, 1997, and THURSDAY, JULY 17, 1997, on the prezoning for the territory, notice of the time and place of headng having been given at least twenty (20) calendar days before said hearing by publication in the Bakersfield Californian, a local newspaper of general circulation; and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 53-97 on July 17, 1997, the Planning Commission recommended approval and adoption of the prezoning by this Council and this Council has fully considered the findings made by the Planning Commission as set ~3rth in that Resolution; and WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield desires to propose a change of organization, to wit, the annexation to the City of Bakersfield of the hereinafter-described territory, pursuant to Section 56654 of the Government Code of the State of Califomia; and WHEREAS, the proposed annexation territory is within and consistent with the City of Bakersfield Sphere of Influence boundary; and WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield agrees to annex the territory located west of Calloway Drive, south of Seventh Standard Road into the City;, and WHEREAS, the City has agreed to serve the territory upon annexation; and WHEREAS, the property owner of the territory has consented to annexation; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Bakersfield that it hereby finds and determines as follows: That the City of Bakersfield hereby proposes the annexation to the City of Bakersfield of the territory in Exhibit "A" and shown on map marked Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part of this resolution as though fully set forth herein, located west of Calloway Drive, south of Seventh Standard Road. That a plan for providing services within the affected territory of the proposed annexation, in accordance with the provisions of Section 56653 of the Government Code, is marked as Exhibit "C", attached hereto and made a part hereof as though fully set forth herein. That this proposal for change of organization, to wit, annexation, is made pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hedzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, and it is requested that proceedings be authorized for annexation in accordance therewith. ORIGINAL 8. 9. 10. 11. That the reasons for the proposed change of organization are that the owners of the affected territory desire to receive municipal services from the City of Bakersfield, and the City desires to receive tax revenues for benefits given and to be given to the territory proposed to be annexed. That for this proposed annexation territory and the prezoning therefore, Ordinance No. 3819, which was adopted January 28, 1998, an Initial Study was conducted and it was determined that the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment. A Negative Declaration was prepared and posted on November 7, 1997. That the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and adoption of the environmental document as set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act have been duly followed. That the territory proposed for annexation as described herein has been determined to be uninhabited pursuant to Section 56046 of the Government Code. That the territory proposed for annexation as described herein has been determined to have 100% of property owners consenting to annexation. That the territory proposed for annexation as described herein is within the City of Bakersfield Sphere of Infiuence Boundary. That the Local Agency Formation Commission waive the protest headng proceedings pursuant to Part 4, commencing with Section 57000 of the Cortese- Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000. That the names of the officers of the City of Bakersfield who are to be furnished with copies of the Executive Officer's Report and who are to be given mailed Notice of Headng, if any, are: Pamela A. McCarthy City Clerk City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Alan Tandy City Manager City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Virginia Gennaro City Attomey City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 ORIGINAL 12. That the appropriate City officials shall file ten (10) copies of this Resolution, with Exhibits, with the Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission of Kern County at 5300 Lennox Street, Suite 303, Bakersfield, California 93309. ORIGINAL 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 .... . ,. ,.,,,,. , by the following vote: V/ j/ )/ ,/ t,/ r/ J COUNCILMEMBER COUCH, CARSON, BENHAM, MAGGARD, HANSON, SULLIVAN, SCRIVNER COUNClLMEMBER ABSTAIN: COUNClLMEMBER ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER PAMELA A. McCARTHY, CM(~,) CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Cl6rk of the Council of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED J J~'-~"~ ~ ~! ~' ~ ~'~ APPROVED AS TO FORM: VIRGINIA GENNARO City Attomey By: EXHIBITS: A Legal Description B Map C Plan for Services MO:djl December 14, 2004 S:~Annexation\Res of Applic~ann470.roa.doc 4 c.'~ ORiGiNAL ANNEXATION NO. 470 STINE NO. 12 EXHIBIT 'A' GHEGKP-L) Dy KEI-~N COUNTY SURVEYORS / ~ /~ ~proved by ALL THAT PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND THE WEST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 30 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, M.D.M., IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF THE COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE WEST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 34, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE CORPORATE CITY BOUNDARY OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD; THENCE ALONG THE FOLLOWING SIX (6) COURSES; 1) SOUTH 89°03'40'' EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE WEST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION AND ALONG THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD CORPORATE BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 330.52 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE WEST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE 2) DEPARTING SAID CITY OF BAKERSFIELD CORPORATE BOUNDARY, SOUTH 00030'29'' WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST HALF OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION, A DISTANCE OF 1,288.27 FEET TO A POINT 30.00 FEET NORTHERLY, AS MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE 3) NORTH 89°04'33'' WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 330.31 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE 4) CONTINUING NORTH 89°04'33" WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION, A DISTANCE OF 660.62 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE 5) NORTH 00°28'48" EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION, A DISTANCE OF 1,288.53 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE 6) SOUTH 89°03'40'' EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION, A DISTANCE OF 661.04 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEG~,,,~ CONTAINING 29.32 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. p:\PROJECTS\04020\LEGALS\Exhibit-A-ANNEXATION.doc JLM 11/10/2004 11:04AM - ~ ORIGINAL I Or08 3HSV ~/ oRIGtNAL L,U Z Z <~ > 0 n, 0 U. Z < o x x ORIGINAL _o n m ORIGINAL What effects, if any, would annexation of this territory have on the existing level of city/district services (i.e., need for additional emergency service personnel or construction of new facilities, etc)? The annexation of this territory will not affect the near term level or capability of the City to provide needed services. At the time of anv future development, it is unlikely that additional police officers would be required to maintain the current level of city service. The development of any public streets or municipal facilities within the territory will increase the future maintenance responsibility of the City but should not affect the existinR level of service. Would city/district require any upgrading or change in facilities to serve affected territory (roads, fire hydrants, mains, etc.): If so, would city/district or residents be responsible for financing? Private development provides and pays for maior facilities and dedicates them to the City. No upqradinR or chanRe in facilities will be required in the territory for annexation. Indicate and explain existing zoning in affected territory. The territory is presently zoned A (Aariculture) Zone. Indicate and explain proposed prezoning in area. (List effects on present land use that would occur as a result of annexation such as maintenance of livestock on property, etc.)The City has prezoned the territory to correspondinR City RS-10A (Residential Suburban - 10 acre minimum lot size) Zone. List city/district services that area will directly or indirectly benefit from such as decrease in fire insurance rate, shorter emergency response time, use of community facilities, etc. City Police should be able to respond in a more timely manner than present County Sheriff services. Parcels within the incorporated area are allowed to connect to available City sewer system lines. The present City refuse collection rate is substantially lower than fees county residents now pay to independent companies. No special assessments or char~les for street sweepino, leaf collection, street liRhtinR ener.qy costs and fire hydrants when located within the City's incoroorated area. City Rovernment also provides increased political representation for the residents within the corDorete limits. Please provide the following information relative to city/district and county taxes: List existing tax rate(s) in area. The existin.q tax rate in the area equals 1.102676% of assessed market value. This represents the total property tax rate. When annexed a desianated percantaRe of the total property tax of the area will accrue to the City and remainder to the County for providinq health care and social services. (Rate as shown is for County Auditor- Controllers 2004 Lien Date). Would affected area be subject to any bonded indebtedness of the city/district?: If so, explain. No, the last listed (1992-93) City bounded indebtedness has been paid off and the current tax rate list shows no city bonded indebtedness. How will the difference in tax rates affect a property with a market value of $50,000.007 The property rate will not increase due to annexation and re-assessment will not occur due to annexation. Is the proposed area subject to a Williamson Act Contract? No, the existinf:l annexation area is not subiect to a Wiiliamson Act Contract. Y:~ANNEXATION~Annex 470\Exhibit C.DOC 3