The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05-1 Final Engineers Report !~ ,. A~ FTi,FT) FnR FINAi, APPR(1VAT. ASSESSMENT ENGINEER WILSON & ASSOCIATES 7600N. Ingram Avenue, Suite, 202 Fresno,'California 937II (559)436-6644 October 25, 2005 '..,, ',, ' ENGINEER'S REPORT `: CITY OF BAKERSFIELD !' ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. OS-1 (CITY IN-THE HILLS) AS FILED .FOR FINAL APPROVAL CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Mavor and City Council ~., Harvey L. Hall, Mayor Irma Carson, Councilmember First Ward Sue Benham, Councilmember Second Ward ~ Mike Maggard, Vice Mayor, Councilmember Third Ward David R. Couch, Councilmember Fourth Ward i" , Harold Hanson; Councilmember Fifth Ward ~ ' Jacquie Sullivan, Councilmember Sixth Ward (~ Zack Scrivner, Councilmember Seventh Ward ` City Staff Alan Tandy, City Manager Virginia Gennaro, City Attorney Pamela A. McCarthy,. City Clerk Raul M. Rojas, Public Works Director Nelson K. Smith, Finance Director BOND COUNSEL UNDERWRITER Samuel A. Sperry Tom Lockard ~,_ Omck, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP Stone & Youngberg LLC San Francisco, California San Francisco, California ASSESSMENT ENGINEER DISCLOSURE COUNSEL Ed Wilson Bruce 7. Graham Wilson & Associates Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP Fres o,. alifornia Los Angeles, California ~QROfESS/p~,q~ ~ ~ ~ 2~, . s`i~s j a`~ ~PRD : APPRAISER ~ w ~° °x m Randall Franz s No. 23269 A Kern Appraisal Company * ~p.i2/3i/oa * ~~,,, a Bakersfield, California ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.OS-1 (CITY IN THE HILLS) CERTIFICATE OF FILING AND CONFIRMATION OF ASSESSMENT I, Pamela A. McCarthy, City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield, do hereby certify that-the following "ENGINEER'S REPORT, CTfY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.05-1"including the Assessment and Assessment Roll in the amounts set forth therein as the "Pretiminary Assessment," with the Assessment Diagram attached thereto, was filed with me on the 29'" day of September, 2005; for preliminary approval on October 12, 2005, by City Comrcil Resolution No. 227-05. ~_ o~, r_ , C~~{~,n,.. Pamela A. McCarthy, CMC, City erk City of Bakersfield, Califorma i have prepared this Engineer's Report for final approval and do hereby certify that the amount set forth herein as the "Confirmed Assessment" on Exhibit A, attached hereto, has been computed by me in accordance with the order of the City Council of the City of Bakersfield contained in a Resolution of Invention adopted as Resolution of intention No. 1384 on May 25; 2005. L..~ , w.~~--- Edward J. Wilson, R.C.E. 23269 Assessment Engineer, Assessment District No. OS-1 I, Pamela A. McCarthy, City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield do hereby certify that the following "ENGINEER'S REPORT, CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DJSTRICT NO. 05-I" and the Confz~~r~~J??ed Assess ent contained therein were approved by the City Council of the C of Bakersfield on the ~1t~, day of ~~~~q~-i , 2005, by CoLmcil's adoption of Resolution No. ~~~- b5 . _~~~~~f 1~~~ Pamela A. McCarthy, CMC, City Clerk City of Bakersfield, Califorma I, Raul M. Rojas, as Director of Public Works of the City of Bakersfield, do hereby certify that a certified copy ofthe following "ENGINEER'S REPORT, CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. OS-l," together with the Assessment Diagram attached thereto, was recorded in my office on the ~ay of ~.n1~1~~~-c-r~ , 2005. Raul M. Rolas, Director of Pub c orks City of Bakersfield, California f O /l~ 2005, the Assessment Diagram C nmunity Facrliues~rstricts at Pages/ through DocumentNo.~~,§"~jf''+?(r~ of0 cialRetacr of Kem, Califorma. ~ 29G70FerCer.wpd 1 in Booktl~~_ of Maps of Assessment and and a Notice of Assessment was recorded as s office of the County Recorder of the County James W. Fitch, Courrty As Cormty of Kem, California -o- ] 0/25/05 '~ i ~;;; TABLE OF CONTENTS i;•'.', ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 05-1 (CITY IN THE HILLS] DESCRIPTION PAGE Certificate, of Filing and Confirmation of Assessment ..:.....:.................:.......... i Table of Contents , .: .:......:.............. .......... ii SECTIONS SECTION I ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PURPOSE, GENERAL DESCRIPTION ~~" OF BOUNDARIES AND ASSESSMENT AREAS, AND ENGINEER'S REPORT SUBMITTAL STATEMENT ..........:.... I-1 !:': Assessment District Purpose .: ............................::.......... I-1 ~' General Description of Boundaries and Assessment Areas .:................. I-2 ,, .. Existing City of Bakersfield Assessment District No. 93-I Lien ............... I-4 Community Facilities District Special Tax Lien ............................ I-4 Environmental Review Status ..................:......:............... I-4 ' Engineer's Report Submittal Statement ....................:.......:..... I-5 Description of Engineer's Report Exhibits A, B, and G .......: .............. I-7 SECTION II GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK AND ACQUISITIONS ........ . .... II-1 Project Description .......:: ...:..........................:........ II-I Description of Project Improvements, Incidental Work, and Annual Assessment .. II-1 General Description of AD OS-I Improvement Acquisitions ................. II-2 General Description of AD OS-1 Improvement and Assessment Proceeding Incidental Work and Expense ......................... II-5 General Description of Proposed Annual Assessment ...................... II-6 SECTION III PROPOSED ASSESSMENT OF ESTIIvIATED IlVIPROVEMENT i' : ACQUISITION COSTS AND EXPENSES .............:........ III-1 Report Requirements ..................... IH-I Proposed Assessment of Estimated Improvement Acquisition Costs and Expenses .................... . . . ........ III-2 '`'' Statement of Total Assessment .......................:.............. III-2 Statement of Maximum Annual Pazcel Assessment for Recovery of I Assessment District Administration Costs and Expenses ............. III-3 l :' Bond Declaration .....:............:............................. .III-4 29670Fefi'OC.wpd - -ii- - 10/25/05 q;>,-- ~- ~`; .; r.: ~~ , .DESCRIPTION PAGE REPORT EXHIIiITS EXHIBIT A Assessment Roll. EXHIBIT B TABLE B-I Engineer's Estimate of Total Cost and Assessment TABLES B-II Engineer's Itemized Estimate of Improvement Acquisition Cost - TABLE B-II-A Summary of City in the Hills Improvements to Be Acquired TABLE B-II-B .Details of City in the Hills Improvements to Be ,Acquired TABLE B-III Payoff Calculation for Assessment DistricYNo. 93-1 Assessments. Nos. 1087 Through 1091 and' 1093 Through 1101 EXI-IIBIT C TABLE C-I Consolidated Tabulation of Parcel Assessment Data TABLE C-II Details of City in the Hills Estimated Assessment Reallocations - for Proposed Development per City Code Section 13.08.070 TABLE C-III Details of City in the Hills Estimated Benefit Assessment Allocations for Proposed Development TABLE C-IV Comparison of City in the Hills Benefit Assessment Allocation and Assessment Reallocation per City Code Section 13.08.070 EXHIBIT D DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT SPREAD METHOD ............: ......... ..:... D-1 Introduction ...................... ..... ...... D-1 Assessment District Purpose ....................._ ......................: ...... D-1 Authorization far Assessment Reallocations ............ . ..................... ...... D-2 Description of Assessment Reallocation Method ........... , .................. ...... D-3 Calculation of Reallocated Assessments ..................................... ...:.. D-7 Description of BenefitlCost Based Assessment Allocation Method .........:....... ...... D-8 Comparison of Reallocation Method and Benefit/Cost Based Assessment. Allocation Method; Assessment Spread Results .......................... .... . D-14 Assessment Engineer's Statement of Findings on the Assessment Spread Method ..... ..... D-14 Assessment Proceeding Incidental and Bond Issuance Cost .Allocation .............. ..... D-IS Assessment Apportionments to Future Subdivisions . , . ......................... . .... D-15 Assessment Engineer's Certification of the Assessment Spread Method ............. ..... D-20 EXHIBIT E Location Map Showing Assessment District No. OS-1 Improvements 29670FerTOC.wpd -iii• 10/25/05 DESCRIPTION. PAGE j REPORT APPENDICES APPENDIX A Map of Proposed Boundaries ~ (On file with the City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield; reduced; not to scale copy attached) APPENDIX B ~, Assessment Diagram (On file with the City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield; reduced, not to scale copy attached) . APPENDIX C is _" i, „. Names and Addresses of Property Owners APPENDIX D Location Map Showing Product Type Lot Designation for Tract No. 6444 29670FerTOC.wpd -iv- 10/25/OS ~:-, ;: p ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. OS-I (CITY IN THE HILLS} SECTION I ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PURPOSE, GENERAL DESCRiPTiON OF BOUNDARIES AND ASSESSMENT AREAS, AND ENGINEER'S REPORT SUBMITTAL STATEMENT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PURPOSE r-r , L, !. i; Assessment District No. OS-1 {City in the Hills), hereafter referred to as "AD OS-1," has been formed by the City Council of the City of Bakersfield (the "City Council") in response to a Petition submitted by Mountain View Bravo, LLC (hereafter referred to as the "District Proponent") which, at the time the Petition was filed, was the owner of more than 60% of the land area proposed to be assessed as part of the AD OS-1 proceedings. The Petition is on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield {herein "City Clerk") along with a Certificate signed by tFte City Director of Public Works attesting to its sufficiency under the requirements of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the "Streets and Highways Code"). The Petition was accepted by the City Council on May 25, 2005, by Council's adoption of its Resolution No. 110-05, Resolution Accepting Petition and Determining to Undertake Special Assessment Proceedings -City of Bakersfield Assessment District No. OS-1. AD 05.1 has been formed pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code (the "1913 Act") for the purpose of financing the cost of acquisition andtor construction by the City of Bakersfield (the "City") of certain street, water, sanitary sewer, storm water drainage, and. regulated public utility infrastructure improvements, and to pay off existing parcel assessments confirmed pursuant to City of Bakersfield Assessment District No. 93-1 (Northeast Sewer), herein referred to as "AD 93-1." Bonds aze to be issued by the City pursuant to the Improvement Bond Act of 1415, being Divisiasl0 of the Streets and Highways Code (the "1915 Act") to provide funding for the AD OS-1 parcel assessments not paid in cash by the property owners during an assessment cash payment period that is to be determined by City Council resolution. A description of the AD 05-1 boundaries and of the properties to be apportioned a share of the total cost proposed to be assessed under the AD OS-1 proceedings is presented below. A detailed description of the improvements proposed to be acquired and of related incidental costs and expenses proposed to be funded by AD OS-1 is presented in Section II of this report and a statement of the, total assessment and of the amount proposed to be approved as an annual administrative assessment for AD OS-1 are presented in report Section III.. A detailed description of the method developed for allocating the AD OS-1 costs among the assessed pazcels is presented in the attached Exhibit D. All of the AD OS-1 properties are located within the existing Corporate Limits of the City of Bakersfield (the "City Limits"). 29°70FerLwpd I-1 toi2sios The improvement acquisitions and incidental costs to be financed by AD OS-1 will be spread to the assessed parcels pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code ("Municipal Code") Section is 13.08.070-Benef:i Sprettd, added to the Municipal Code on AprIl 5, 1995, by City Council's adoption of Ordinance No. 3643.. Section 13.08.070 provides for the use of "... an alternate method and rate of assessment reallocating assessments to alternate properties." GENERA.I. DESCRIPTION OF BOUNDARIES AND ASSESSMENT AREAS AD OS-1 is a single community area in northeast Bakersfield that is identified on the AD OS-1 Boundary Map and in this report and assessment as: . '. ` City in the Hills Area, generally bounded on the south by the northwesterly boundary of the right-of--way for the future alignment for State Route No. 178 {"Highway 178"), a portion of the northerly boundary of the right-of--way for the existing Highway 178, and a portion of the s.N centerline for the City Hills Drive right-of--way, by Vineland Road on the west, by Paladino Drive on the north, and by Masterson Street on the east. The City in the hills Area covers the (;`; entire areas of Parcels 5, 6, 8, 9, IQ and 11, and most of the areas ofPazcels 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7 of `' Parcel Map No. 11013 {"PM 11013"). It is also identified as Lat A of Lot Line Adjustment No. 05-0427 ("LLA OS-042?"}, Lots 1 through 4 of Lot Line Adjustment No. OS-0480 ("LLA OS- '. , 0480"}, Lots 1 and 2 of Lot Line Adjustment No. OS-0550 ("LLA 05-0550"), and Lots A, B, and D of Lot Line Adjustment No. 05-1188 ("LLA OS-1188"}. The City in the Hills Area covers an azea of approximately 517.8 acres. ~ ' The AD OS-1 City in the Hills irregularly shaped community area is located within a rectangular section of northeast Bakersfield that has a north-to-south dimension of about one and one-sixteenth rz, ; (.;.; miles as measured from the north end to the south end of the City in the Hills Area, and awest-to- east dimension of about one and one-quarter miles as measured from the west end to the east end of the City in the Hills Area. Various parts of the City in the Hills Area are involved in various stages of the land development entitlement and/or site development process. A portion of the City in the Hills. Area identified as Lots 1 through 4 of LLA OS-0480 (also identified as the AD OS-1 Assessment Nos. 1 through 4, respectively) has been approved for subdivision into a combined. total of 752 single-family residential (R-I) lots; 1 private lodge/recreation facility lot, and several private landscape/pocket park lots, as a future"active adult" gated community pursuant to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6444 ("Ten. TR 6444"). No phases of the final map for Tract No. 6444 ("TR 6444") are planned for recording with the Kern County Recorder prior to confirmation of the AD 05-1 assessment. A portion of the City in the Hills Area identified as Lots l .and 2 ofLLA OS-0550 {also identified as the AD OS-1 Assessment Nos. Sand 6, respectively) has been approved-for subdivision mto a !;; combined total of 421 R-l lots, 1 public park pazcel, 1 public recreation area lot, and several landscape/pocket pazk lots pursuant to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6498 ("Ten. TR 6498"). No phases of the final map for Tract No'. 6498 ("TR 6498") are planned for recording with the Kern County Recorder prior to confirma"on of the AD OS-1 assessment. (~ ~.- 29670FaLwpd I-2 10/25!05 ,,>; e:_ !' '" A portion of the. City in the Hills Area identified as Lot D of LLA OS-1188 (also identified as the AD OS-I Assessment Na. 7} has been approved for subdivision into a combined total of 181 R-1 lots and several private landscape/pocket pazk lots, as a future gated community pursuant to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6452 ("Ten. TR 6452"). No phases of the final map for Tract No. 6452 ("TR 6452") are planned for recording with the Kern County Recorder prior to confirmation of the AD _ OS-1 assessment A portion of the. City in the Hills Area identified as Lot A of LLA OS-0427 and Pazcel 5 of PM 11013 (also identified as the AD OS-1 Assessment Nos. 8 and 9, respectively) has been approved for subdivision into a combined total.of 396 R-1 lots, 1 public park pazcel, and several landscape/pocket pazk lots pursuant to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6406 ("Ten. TR 6406"). No phases of the final map for Tract Na. 6406 ("TR 6406") aze planned for recording with the Kern County Recorder prior to confirmation oftfie AD OS-1 assessment. A portion of the City in the Hills Area identified as Lots A and B of LLA 05-1188 (also identified as the AD OS-1 Assessment Nos. 10 and 11, respectively) is planned for subdivision into a combined total of approximately 200 R-1 lots pursuant to a proposed (pending, not approved yet) Vesting Tentative.Tract No. 6696 ("Ten. TR 6696"). No phases of the final map for Tract No. 6696 ("TR 6696") are planned for recording with the Kern County Recorder prior to confirmation of the AD OS-Lassessment. As of the date of this Engineer's Report for AD OS-1 (hereinafter referred to as the "Engineer's ~ Report") was completed by the AD OS-1 Assessment Engineer, accept for the pazcel identified as Assessment No. 9 (Lot A ofLLA OS-0427), all ofthe parcels proposed to be assessed a share of the AD OS-1 improvement acquisition cost were owned by the District Proponent. However, prior to con&•mation of the AD OS-1 assessment, the ownership of several parcels in AD OS-1 is planned to be transferred to other merchant buildersldevelopers, as follows: (i) the parcels identified as Assessments Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 5 will be owned by Regent Land Investment; LLC, (ii) the parcel identified as Assessment No. 2 will be owned by K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Bakersfield, LLC, ' (iii) the parcel identified as Assessment No: 6 will be owned by K. Hovnanian at Rosemary Lantana, LLC, and (iv) the parcels identified as Assessments Nos. 8 and 9 will be owned by D. R Horton Los Angeles Holding Company, Inc., (Note: Assessment No. 9 is akeady owned by D. R. Horton Los Angeles Holding Company, Inc.). AD OS-1 wIll finance the acquisition of various "off-site" and/or "on-site" (in-tract) subdivision improvements and related incidental costs, where those improvements. are either akeady required or aze expected by the District Proponent to be required to be installed as conditions of final subdivision or site plan approvals within the AD OS-1 community area. The entire AD 05-1 is classified as one assessment area for the purpose of assessment allocation. The costs financed by AD 05-1 for the acquisition of infrastructure improvements located within or adjacent to the City in the Hills community area aze assessed. only to properties that are located within that community area. Therefore, all of the improvements proposed to be financed beaz a rational nexus to the public infrastructure improvements needed for the subdivision of the property that is proposed to be assessed a shaze of theAD OS-1 total cost. The assessments are apportioned according to the special benefits received by the lots, pieces, and parcels of land within the assessment district. The 29610Fed.wpd 1_3 - 10/25/05 f l proportional special benefit derived by each parcel is determined in relationship to the entirety ofthe capital cost of the improvements. No assessment is proposed to be apportioned on any parcel. that ~'' exceeds the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that pazcel, unless authorized pursuant to Municipal Code Section 13:08.070 and approved by 100010 of the AD 05-1 property owners. See the attached Exhibit D, Description of Assessment Spread Method for a description of the special benefit each assessed pazcel will receive from the ,improvement - acquisitions proposed to be financed by AD OS-1. The map entitled "PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF CITY OF Bt1KERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.OS-1 (CITY IN THE IIII,LS), COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA" (the "AD 05-1 Boundary Map"}, consisting of four (4) sheets, is on file in the office of the City Clerk. Reference is made to the AD OS-1 Boundary Map for a defailed description of the AD 05-I .boundaries. Said AD OS-1 Boundary Map being too bulky to be bound with this Engineer's Report, a reduced and not to scale copy is attached as Engineer's Report Appendix A and incorporated herein by reference: The AD OS-1 Boundary Map shows and describes the exterior boundaries of the property proposed to be assessed pursuant to the AD OS-1 proceedings. The assessment district encompasses a composite and consolidated area of about 518 acres. EXISTING CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-I LIEN -- The AD OS-1 properties are also located within the existing boundaries of AD 93-1. Table B-III in Exhibit B to this Engineer's Report is a statement of the costs to payoff the remaining principal ( balance for existing pazcel assessments confirmed pursuant to AD 93-I (AD 93-1 Assessments Nos. 1087 through 1091 and 1093 through 1101), including related bond call expenses. Accordingly; the AD 93-1 existing assessment payoff costs for. those fourteen parcels will be funded as a part of the i ' AD 05-1 proceedings. All installments of all of the affected pazcels' shares of the AD 93-1 principal and interest through the 2004/2005 tax year tax bills have been paid. COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT SPECIAL TAX LIEN As of the date of filing this Engineer's Report; it has been confirmed that none of the properties in AD OS-1 are within the existing boundaries of any special tax districts formed pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California. ENVIItONMENTAL REVIEW STATUS Pursuant to the. Municipal Code; the formation of a City assessment district is exempt from compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"}. Accordingly, a Notice of exemption from CEQA was filed by the City for the AD OS-1 proceedings on September 20, 2005. i_: Separate environmental review proceedings will be conducted for the improvement projects proposed to be financed by AD 05-1,'as part of the CEQA compliance associated with the land use entitlement and subdivision approval process within the AD 05-1 community area. "' r ~`:_ . -- 29b70F'erLwpd I-4 30125/03 ENGINEER'S REPORT SUBMITTAL STATEMENT I, Raul M. Rojas; Public Works Director and Superintendent of Streets. of the City of Bakersfield, have been appointed the Engineer of Work for. AD OS-1 (herein "Engineer of Work") by adoption of City Council Resolution of Intention No. 1384 to do and perform all services in making preliminary surveys, preparing plans, estimating costs, and preparing a diagram and assessment. Pursuant to the provisions of the 1913 Act, and to Section 10204 contained therein, and pursuant to the Municipal Code, including Section 13.08.070 of Chapter 13.08 thereof, and in accordance with Resolution of Intention Na. 13 84, adopted by the City Council on May 25, 2005, being a resolution declaring its intent to order the acquisition and/or construction ofimprovements in AD 05-I (herein "Resolution. of Intention No. 1384"), herewith submit the "Engineer's Report" for AD OS-1 consisting of six parts as follows: 1. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS,MRPS AND DESCRIPTIONS OF IMPROVEMENTS AND LANDS TO BE ACQUIRED: A. Improvements to Be Acquired: At the time this Engineer's Report was being prepazed for filing with the City Clerk and for final approval by the- City Council, all of the plans and specifications for the improvement acquisitions to be funded by AD OS-1 had not been completed and/or finally approved by the City Engineer. :Therefore, this assessment is based on the cost estimates prepared by McIntosh & Associates, the civil engineering consultant hired by the District Proponent to design the AD OS-1 improvements to be acquired andlor constmcted within AD OS-L The civil engineering consultant McIntosh & Associates is hereinafter referred to as the "AD OS-1 Design Engineer." The AD 05-1 Improvement Acquisition Costs are itemized in Engineer's Report Exhibit B, Tables B-II-A and B-Ii-B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference: The improvements funded by AD OS-1 are to be constructed by the District Proponent and acquired by the City, pursuant to that certain City Agreement No. OS-285, being Acquisition and. Disclosure Agreement, City of Bakersfield Assessment District No. 05-1, between the City and the District Proponent, approved as to form and substance by City Council Resolution No. 164-OS on 7uly 20, 2005 (the "AD OS-1 Acquisition Agreement"}. B. Maps and Descriptions of Lands, Easements, and Rights-af--way to Be Acquired: As of the date of filing this Engineer's Report there were no land, easement, orrights-of--way acquisitions proposed to be financed by AD' OS-l. Accordingly, no maps or descriptions have been prepared and filed with the City Engineer. 2. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK AND ACQUISITIONS: A General Description of Work and Acquisitions to be completed pursuant to the AD 05-1 proceedings is included as Section. II of this Engineer's Report. The AD OS-1 improvement acquisitions are also generally shown and described on the map included in Engineer's Report Exhibit E. - - 29670FerLwpd ~ I-5 10125!05 ,, ~- ;:.; ;<;, 3. ESTIMATE OF TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT Il4IPROVEMENT ACQUISITION AND INCIDENTAL COSTS: A "Statement of Total Assessment" is presented in Section III of this report. An itemized breakdown of the estimated total improvement acquisition and incidental costs and expenses; including the estimated cost of preparing; printing, registering, servicing, and collecting bonds issued pursuant to these proceedings, is included in Exhibit B, Table B-I, "Engineer's Estimate of Total Cost and Assessment" ("Table B-I"); attached hereto.. 4. ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM: The diagram entitled "ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM OF CITY OF Bt1KERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. OS-1 (CITY IN'i'E-IE HQ.,L$), COITNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA" (the "AD OS-1 Assessment Diagram"}, consisting of three (3) sheets, is on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference. -Said AD OS-l Assessment Diagram being too bulky to be bound with this Engineer's Report, a reduced and not to scale copy is attached hereto as Engineer's Report Appendix B and incorporated herein by reference. The AD OS-1 Assessment Diagram shows all of the following: A. The exterior boundaries of AD OS-1; ~' ~,- I '. B. The boundaries of existirlg AD 93-1 (or parts thereof) for those areas in which AD OS-1 is also located; acid C. By reference to the Maps of the Assessor of the County of Kern and to maps and deeds of record, the lines and dimensions aze shown for each sepazate lot, parcel, and subdivision of land within AD 05-1 as they existed at the time this Engineer's Report was filed with the City Clerk, each lot,- pazcel, and subdivision of land having been assigned a sepazate assessment number upon the AD OS-1 Assessment Diagram, which corresponds with the number shown for each parcel on the AD OS-1 Assessment Roll (Exhibit A contained herein}. Il i 5. PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AND ASSESSMENT ROLL: A. A proposed assessment of the estimated total improvement acquisition cost and of the incidental expenses in connection with the AD OS-1 proceedings is presented in Section III of this Engineer's Report. B. Assessment Roll: An Assessment Roll for AD OS-1 is attached .hereto as Exhibit A. The Assessment Roll shows the exact amount of the total estimated cost of the proposed improvement acquisitions, incidental work, and expense that is assessed upon each of the lots and pazcels 296?OFuLwpd I-6 10725105 within AD 05-1. The assessment numbers that appear on the Assessment Roll correspond to the assessment numbers shown on the AD OS-1 Assessment Diagram. ~,; ` ' C. Maximum Annual Parcel Assessment for Recovery of Assessment District Administration ~ . Costs and Expenses: Pursuant to Paragraph 3 of Resolution of Intention No. 1384, Section III of this Engineer's Report includes a statement bf the proposed $50.00 maximum annual assessment upon each of the parcels in AD OS-1. The purpose of this sepazate annual assessment is to pay the costs. incurred by the City of Bakersfield, and not otherwise reimbursed, which result from the administration and collection of assessments, from compliance with Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12 for continuing disclosure requirements, or from the administration and registration of any associated bonds and reserve or other related funds. This maximum annual assessment is proposed to be levied pursuant to Subdivision (f) of. Section 10204 of the Streets and Highways Code. 6. ASSESSMENT SPREAD METHOD: A description of the assessment spread method used to apportion a share to each pazcel in AD ,, OS-I ofthe total estimated cost proposed to be financed for the acquisition andtor construction ~ ' of improvements and payment of incidental costs is attached hereto as Exhibit D and _ incorporated herein by reference. DESCRH'TION OF ENGINEER'S REPORT EXHIBITS A, B, AND C I, i Exhibits A, B, and C that are attached to this Engineer's Report include a total ofnine (9} tables of AD OS-1 cost estimates and/or assessment spread cost allocations. A brief description of each of the i::; three report exhibits and of the sepazate tables contained in each exhibit is presented below. Engineer's Report Exhibits A through C have been designed for the purpose of presenting a r;;:., step-by-step breakdown of how the AD OS-1 total assessment has been spread to the individual ~~ ! pazcels that are proposed to be assessed. The Exhibit C tables present separate breakdowns of parcel assessment data based on the Reallocation Method (per Municipal Code Section 13.08.070), and based on the 1913 Act benefit based Assessment Allocation Method (see Engineer's Report Exhibit D for a description of the Assessment Allocation Method and of the Reallocation Method): A third group of Exhibit C tables provides comparisons of the calculated assessment amounts derived in accordance with the Allocation and Reallocation Methods. The exhibits and their tables begin with: I. A listing in Exhibit A, Assessment Roll, of the exact amount proposed to be assessed to every existing parcel in AD OS-1; then 2. The ExhibitB tables present the major items of total system costs and incidental: expenses for all of AD 05-1 (Table B-I), the breakdown of those major items in Tables B-II- (A and B), with 296?OFerLwpd I-7 10/25/OS '_...., _ ~ Table B-II-A summarizing the total improvement, contingency, and incidental costs for. each project, and Table B-II-B presenting the itemized quantity and cost estimates for the improvement acquisitions in AD OS-1. Table B-II-B also breaks. each project into the separate improvement systems that are the focus of the Assessment Spread Method that is described in r =. Engineer's Report Eldribit D. Table B-III in Eachibit B to this Engineer's Report is a statement "` of the costs to payoffthe remaining principal balance for existing pazcel assessments conErmed pursuant to AD 93-1 (AD 93-1 Assessments Nos. 1087 through 1091 and 1093 through 1101}, including related bond call expenses. 3. Exhibit C has four (4} tables that provide a detailed breakdown of individual parcel assessment ~ data as follows: A. Details for parcel assessments calculated using the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method of i~;i assessment spread authorized by Municipal Code Section 13.08.070 are presented in Tables _ C-I and C-II; B. Details for parcel assessments calculated in accordance with the AD OS-1 Allocation Method of assessment spread that is a benefit/cost based assessment spread method aze shown in Table C-III; and C. Table C-IV presents a comparison of the assessments calculated by-each of the two spread ~,.. methods referenced. in 3.A and 3.B, above, and described in Exhibit D. 10/25/05 i ~; ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.05-1 (CITY IN THE HILLS). PROJECT DESCRIPTION GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK AND ACQUISITIONS The separate improvement systems to be acquired and their related incidental work and costs' eligible for financing pursuant to the AD OS-1 proceedings (hereinafter the "improvement Acquisitions") are described below. The descriptions of the improvement Acquisitions and of the termini of the proposed work do not necessarily extend for the full length of their description. The plans and profiles of the Improvement Acquisitions shall be controlling as to their correct and detailed description. ?, The general scope of the Improvement Acquisitions includes the acquisition of gublic infrastructure improvements that will be owned, operated, and maintained by the City, and the payment of certain improvement, assessment proceeding, and bond issuance incidental costs and expenses related to the AD OS-1 Improvement Acquisitions and. to the assessment proceedings. All of the AD OS-1 ,, Improvement Acquisitions aze public infrastructure improvements that are either ah-eady required to be installed or are expected by the District Proponent to be required to be installed as conditions { ; of tentative or final subdivision and parcel map approvals, or of land use entitlement approvals !"_" within the AD OS-1 City in the Hills Area. As stated in Section I, the AD OS-1 Improvement Acquisitions are proposed to be financed by the City in accordance with the terms and conditions of the AD OS-I Acquisition Agreement. .That agreement defines the specific scope of public infrastructure improvements to be constructed and installed by the District Proponent and, upon their completion, be acquired by the City using funds provided only through the AD OS-I proceedings. ;> ~~ f, „,,_ DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS, INCIDENTAL W ORK, AND ANNUAL ASSESSMENT SECTION II General descriptions are presented below of the Improvement Acquisitions and of any incidental work and expense to be financed by AD 05-1 that are related to (hose Improvement Acquisitions or to the AD OS-i proceedings. A general description of the proposed annual assessment to be levied pursuant to Section 10204(f) of the Streets and.Highways Code and to the AD OS-1 proceedings for the recovery of certain costs that may be incurred by the City in future years from the administration of the AD OS-I bonds and reserve fund, from the administration and collection of annual assessment debt service installments, or from compliance with bond issue continuing disclosure requirements is also presented in following portions of this Section II. 29670Fernwpd II-1 10(2ilOS GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF AD 05-1 IMPROVEMENT ACQUISITIONS The AD OS-1 Improvement Acquisitions include the construction-and installation as separate improvement systems of certain City-owned infrastructure improvements, of certain utility improvements to be owned and operated by regulated public utility companies, and incidental work described below. The Improvement Acquisitions aze to be constructed in accordance with plans and specifications prepared by the AD OS-1 Design Engineer and as approved by the City Engineer. As stated in Section 1, the plans and specifications for all of the Improvement Acquisitions had not been completed andlor finally approved by the City Engineer at the time this Engineer's Report was prepazed. Accordingly, the following description ofwork is based on schematiq preliminary, and/or t,-; approved plans, quantities, and estimates that have been prepazed by the AD OS-1 Design Engineer. 7:;;i The Improvement Acquisitions to be made pursuant to the AD OS-1 proceedings aze described below. In addition, the map in Engineer's Report Exhibit E, attached hereto and incorporated herein -': by reference; shows and describes the general location of the several improvement projects, which together comprise the Improvement Acquisitions that are to be financed by AD OS-1: Citv in the Hills Area ~` ~: The City in the Hills Area (the entire AD OS-1) boundaries encompass an approximately 511.8-acre block of land that is planned for subdivision into: (i) a combined total of 752 R-1 lots, 1 private lodge/recreation facility lot, and several private landscape/pocket pazk lots pursuant to Ten. TR 6444, (ii) a combined total of 421 R-1 lots, 1 public park parcel, 1 public recreation area lot, and several landscape/pocket park lots pursuant to Ten: TR 6498; (iii) a combined total of 181 R-1 lots and several private landscapetpocket park lots pursuant to Ten. TR 6452; (iv) a combined total of 39b R-1 lots, 1 publicparkparcel; and several landscape/pocketparklotspursuantto Ten. TR6406, and (v} a combined total of approximately 200 R-1 lots pursuant to Ten. TR 6696. For the purpose of the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method. and the benefit based Assessment Allocation Method .(as described in detail in the Engineer's Report Exhibit D), the Improvement Acquisitions for the entire City in the Hills Area are presented below as a single group of improvements related to the development of that AD OS-I community area. The District Proponent (Mountain View Bravo, LLC) is the original developer and subdivider of the City in the Hills Area, and is currently developing portions of the City in the Hills Area identified as Ten. TR 6452 and Ten. TR 6696. The portions of the City in the Hills Area covered by Ten. TR 6444, Ten. TR 6406, and Ten. TR 6498 will be developed by other builders/developerstyho have purchased, or will be purchasing, respective properties from the District Proponent. Accordingly, all of the Improvement Acquisitions for the City in the Hills Area aze improvements related to the development of those subdivisions and are generally described as improvements in and along City Hills Drive, Panorama Drive, Vineland Road, Masterson Street, Paladino Drive, Canteria Drive, and various City development fees that are required to be constructed andtor paid, ar are expected by the District Proponenf to be required to be constructed andtor paid, as conditions of approval for those subdivisions. The general. location and extent of the planned Improvement Acquisitions aze described below and an itemized cost estimate and adetailed- listing of all AD 05-1 Improvement Acquisitions are presented in the Engineer's Report Exhibit B, Table B-II-B: 29670FerRwpd II-2 10/25/05 is r`~ f l.r~. ._. City Hills Drive (entire street, east portion): Construction of City Hills Drive (entire street). from Canteria Drive to Panorama Drive, including grading, paving, curb, .gutter, meandering sidewalk, handicap ramps, streets signs, median curb, street lighting and conduits and pull boxes for street lighting, subdivision block wall, sanitary sewer pipeline with manholes, storm drain pipeline with manholes and catch basins, and traffic signal at the intersection of City Hills Drive and Panorama Drive. Also included in the scope of work for this portion of City Hills Drive are incidental expenses for, but not limited to, dusf control, street maintenance, slope protection, and Metro Bakersfield Habitat. Conservation and Protection ("MBHCP") fee. City Hills Drive (entire street, west portion): Construction of City Hills Drive (entire street) from Canteria Drive to Vineland Road, including grading paving, curb, gutter, meandering sidewalk, handicap ramps; streets signs, median curb, street lighting and conduits and pull boxes for street lighting, subdivision block wall, storm drain. pipeline with manholes and catch basins, and traffic signal at the intersection of City Hills Drive and Vineland Road. Also included in the scope of work for this portion of City Hills Drive are incidental expenses for, but not limited to, dust control, street maintenance, slope protection, and MBHCP fee. Panorama Drive (entire street): Construction ofPanorarna Drive (entire street) from Vineland Road to Masterson Street, including grading, paving curb, gutter, meandering sidewalk, handicap ramps, streets signs, median curb, street lighting and conduits and pull boxes for street lighting, subdivision block wall, sanitary sewer pipeline with manholes, and storm drain pipeline with manholes and catch basins. Also included in the scope ofwork for Panorama Drive aze incidental expenses for, but not limited to, dust control, street maintenance, slope protection, and MBHCP fee. Vineland Road (east side, north portion): control, street maintenance, slope protection, and MBHCP fee. Construction of the east side of Vineland Road from Paladino Drive to Panorama Drive, including grading, paving curb, gutter, sidewalk, handicap ramps; streets signs,. street lighting and conduits and pull boxes for street lighting subdivision block wall, storm drain pipeline with manholes and catch basins, traffic signal at the intersection of Vineland Road and Panorama Drive, traffic signal at the intersection of Vineland Road and Paladino Drive, and median deposit. Also included in the scope ofwork for this portion of Vineland Road are incidental expenses for, but not limited to, dust Vineland Road (east side and entire street, south portion}: Construction of the east side of Vineland Road from Panorama Drive to 664 feet south of City I-fills Drive (south 664 feet full width), including grading, paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk; handicap ramps, streets signs, street lighting and conduits and pull boxes for street lighting, subdivision block wall, ~~'. 296~OFarII.wpd II-3 10/25/05 ~' storm drain pipeline with manholes and catch basins, and median deposit. Also included in the ,` scope of work for this portion of Vineland Road are incidental expenses for, but not limited to, dust control, street maintenance, slope protection, and MBHCP fee. Masterson Street (west side and entire, street): Construction ofthe west side of Masterson Street from Paladino Drive to the existing Highway 178 (south 1514 feet full width}, including .grading, pacing, curb, gutter, sidewalk, handicap ramps, streets signs, street lighting and conduits and pull boxes for street lighting, subdivision block wall, stone drain pipeline with. manholes and catch basins, traffic signal at the intersection of Masterson Street and the future alignment of Highway 178; and median deposit.. Also included in the scope of work for Masterson Street are incidental expenses for, but not limited to, dust control, street maintenance, slope protection, MBHCP fee. Paladino Drive (south side): Construction ofthe south side ofPaladino Drive from Vineland Road to Masterson Street, including grading, paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lighting and conduits and pull boxes for street lighting, subdivision block wall, and median deposit. Also included in the scope of work for ~> Paladino Drive are incidental expenses for, but not limited to, dust control, street maintenance, slope protection, and MBHCP fee: ';' Canteria Drive: Construction of storm drain pipeline with manholes and catch basins and sanitary sewer pipeline with manholes. Also included in the scope. of work for Canteria Drive are incidental expenses for, but not limited ta, MBHCP fee. On-site Storm Drain: Construction of a complete storm drain sump located at the northwest earner of the intersection of is Highway 178 and Canteria Drive, including excavation, outlet structures, fence with redwood slats .and curb, and access gate. City of Bakersfield Facilities Fees: The planned City facilities fees funded as a part of the Improvement Acquisitions include the City Park Land In-lieu and Development Fees for Ten. TR 6498 only. Also included in the City in the Hills Area Improvement Acquisitions aze the District Proponent's incidental costs, including, but not limited to the design engineering, improvement bonds, ..construction staking, soils and materials analysis and testing, plan check fees, inspection fees, dust l control expenses, slope protection and erosion expenses, and MBHCP fees, all as itemized in Table B-II-B in Engineer's Report Exhibit B and as generally shown on the map in Engineer's Report Exhibit E, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Note: certain components of the 29670Fern.wpd II-4 10/25/05 ImprovementAcquisitionsapproved by Resolution oflntenlion No.1384 have been "zeroed out" on the attached F~hibitB, Table B-II-B, to achieve a carotin level of assessment amounts desired by the District Proponent However, all Improvement Acquisitions originally approved by Resolution of Intention No. 1384 are listed and described in this Engineer's Report, in order to allow for their acquisition and payment by the City in the event that the overall final (as-built) AD OS-1'Improvement Acquisitions costs and/or costs of any of their components end up below the estimates shown in Exhibit B, Table B-II-B. GENERAL DESCRII'TION OF AD 051 IMPROVEMENT AND ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING INCIDENTAL WORK AND EXPENSE The total cost proposed to be financed by AD 05-1.includes work to be performed and fees or expenses to be paid that are incidental to the construction of the separate improvement system acquisitions. In addition, the cost and expense related to the conduct, by the City of the AD 05-1 proceedings and to the issuance and sale. of bonds to finance the total assessed cost and not paid by the property owners and/or not paid by public agency contributions are also proposed to be financed by AD OS-1. The incidental costs and expenses proposed to be funded by AD OS-1 are. described as follows:. A. The acquisition of all rights of way, easements, franchises, licenses, and- permits, and the construction of all auxiliary work, and the payment of all incidental expenses necessary and/or convenient to the accomplishment of the foregoing and for the conduct of special assessment proceedings and the issuance of special assessment bonds, as may be approved by the City, for the financing of all or a portion of the foregoing, including, but not limited to, the incidental expense to cover the estimated cost ofpreparing,-printing, registering, servicing, and collecting the improvement bonds proposed to be issued to represent the assessments, and the incidental expense to cover the estimated cost during the first two years following issuance of any bonds for. City compliance with Securities-and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12 for continuing disclosure requirements, as maybe applied to any AD OS-1 bonds issued by the City; B. The payment and/or reimbursement to the City and to the District Proponent of 1) all eligible sums under the Streets and Highways Code advanced by the City, including all associated City incurred district formation and assessment proceeding administration costs and expenses, and 2) all eligible sums under the Streets and Highways. Code and pursuant to the AD OS-1 Acquisition Agreement advanced by the District Proponent, including all costs advanced for the preparation of construction plans for the Improvement Acquisitions; and C. The funding of not to exceed one (1) yeaz's capitalized interest on any bonds issued in the amount of the unpaid assessments, where said bonds aze to be issued pursuant to the Municipal Code and to the 1915 Act. All of the foregoing improvement acquisitions, incidental work and expense shall be made and done . pursuant to the grovisions of the Municipal Code and the 19.13 Act. 296'70Fernwpd II-3` 10/25/05 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ANNUAL ASSESSMENT Section- III of.this Engineer's Report also includes a "Statement. of Maximum. Annual Parcel Assessment for RecoveryofAssessmentDistrict Administration Costs and Expenses." The purpose of the proposed $50.00 annual assessment is to .pay costs incurred by the City from the administration and collection of assessments, from. compliance with Securities and Exchange Commission Rule lSc2-12 for continuing disclosure, or from the administration or registration of any associated bonds and reserve or other related funds, pursuant to Subdivision {f} of Section 10204 of the Streets and Highways Code. 29670Fern.wpd II-6 10/25/05 ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.05-1 (CITY IN THE HILLS) .REPORT REQUIItEMENTS PROPOSED ASSESSMENT OF ESTIMATED IMPROVEMENT ACQUISITION COSTS AND EXPENSES {{f 1. On May 25, 2005, the City Council, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code and of the 1913 Act, adopted its Resolution of Intention No. 1384 declaring its intent to order the acquisition andlor construction of the improvements described in the foregoing Engineer's Report Section II, to levy a special assessment on each parcel of land benefited by the Improvement Acquisitions and to levy a maximum annual assessment pursuant to Subdivision (f) of Section 10204 of the Streets and Highways Code.. The Subdivision (f) declaration provides for the levy of an annual assessment upon each of the parcels of land in AD 05-1 to recover costs incurred by the City and not otherwise reimbursed; resulting from the administration and collection of assessments and from the administration of registration of any associated reserve or other related funds. Resolution of Intention No. 1384 further declares that the lands within the exterior boundaries shown on the AD OS-1 Boundary Map shall be designated SECTION ffi CITY OF BAKER$FIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.05-I COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA (CITY IN THE HILLS) Resolution of Intention Na. 13 84 appointed the City Public Works Director as the Engineer of Work for AD OS-1 and directed him to make and file the report (the "Engineer's Report") required by Section 10204 of the Streets and Highways Code. The Engineer's Report requirements set forth in Section 10204 of the Streets and Highways Code aze summarized in Section I of this report under the subsection entitled "Engineer's Report Submittal Statement." Reference is made to Resolution of Intention No. 1384. and to the general description of the improvements proposed to be acquired and/or constructed, as presented in Section II of this Engineer's Report, fot more detailed information on the declazed intent of the City Council for conduct of the AD OS-1 assessment proceedings. 29670FernLwpd III-1 10125/DS ,; ,; ~. PROPOSED ASSESSMENT OF ES7`IMATED IMPROVEMENT ACQUISITION COSTS .AND EXPENSES NOW, THEREFORE, I, Raul M. Rojas, the duly appointed Engineer bf Work for AD 45-1, by virtue of the power vested in. me under the Municipal Code and under the 1913 Act and the order of the City Council, asset forth in Resolution of Intention No. 13 84, hereby make the following assessment to cover the portion of the estimated cost of the acquisition andlor construction ofimpravements and the costs and expenses incidental thereto to be paid by AD OS-1: I . The amount to be paid by AD OS-1 for the acquisition andlar construction of improvements, and the expenses .incidental thereto is generally as shown in the following Statement of Total Assessment: STATEMENT OF TOTAL ASSESSMENT i" t.. CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.OS-1 (CITY iN THE HILLS) Assessment Amount As Preliminarily Confirmed Approved 10112105 Assessment Amount A. Acquisition Cost of hnprovements, Fees, Contingency, and Incidental Expense (Exhibit B, Table B-I, Item 1} $13,114,022.00 $ 13,114,022.00 B. Payoff of Existing Assessmenrt District No. 93-1 Assessments Nos. 1087 Through 1091 and 1093- Through 1101 (Exhibit B, Table B-I, Item 2} $ 159;299.03 $ 159 299.03 C. Total Cost of Improvemerrts, Fees, Contingency, Incidental Expense and Additional Fees/Costs (Payoffs) (Exhibit B, Table B=I, Item 3} $13,213;321.03 $ 13,273,321.03 D. Assessment District Proceeding Cost and Expense (Exhibit B, Table B-I, Item 4) $ 335,830.55 $ 335,830.55 E. Subtotal $13,609,151.58. $ 13;609,151.58 F. Deduct Cash Collections. $ 0.40. $ 0.00 G. Subtotal Cost to 1915 Act Bond Financing (Exhibit B, Table B-I, Item 7} $13,609,151.58 $ 13,609,151.58 H. 1915 Act Bond Issuance Cost and Reserve (Exhibit B, Table B-I, Item 8} 1. Underwriter's (Bond) Discount $ 149,499.00 2..Capitalized Interest $ 680,260.00 3. Bond Reserve Fund $ 1,381,089.42 4. Total 1915 Act Bond Issuance Cost and Reserve $ 2,2.10;848.42 I. Total Amount Assessed (Table B-I, Item 9} $15,820.000AO 29670FertILwpd III-2 $ 149,499:00 $ 680;260.00 $ 1.381,089.42 $ 2,210,848.42 $ 15,820,000.00 10/25/05 ~. III:? A detailed breakdown of the itemized costs for the: acquisition andlor construction of improvements, and expenses incidental thereto is presented in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference: ,I 2. Pursuant to the provisions of law and of Resolution of Intention No. 1384, I have assessed the ia; total amount of the cost of the acquisition andlor construction of improvements and of the '- '' expenses incidental thereto upon the several parcels of land liable therefor and hereinafter numbered to correspond with the numbers shown on the attached AD 05-1 Assessment Diagram,. all',,as is more particularly set forth in the Assessment Roll, attached hereto as Exhibit A and inci~rporated herein by reference. The numbers on the Assessment Roll correspond with the nuritiibers assigned to each respective pazcel as shown on the AD OS-1 Assessment Diagram. t Eac~z subdivision of land assessed is described within the Assessment Roll by reference to its I,<' "' parcel number as shownon the Assessor's Maps of the County of Kern for the fiscal year 2005!2006, or`by reference to maps and deeds of record on file in the office of the County" k Recgrder of said County. ~..; 4,.^r For a more particular description of the manner in which the Estimated Total Improvement Acquisition Cost and Incidental Expenses have been assessed upon the several pazcels of land in AD i)5-1, reference is made to the Descriptiori ofAssessment Spread Method, attached hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated herein by reference. 3. As required by the 1913 Act, the AD OS-1 Assessment Diagram is onfile in the office of the City Clerk aild is attached hereto in reduced, not to scale form, as Appendix B and incorporated herein bj~ reference. For a more particular description of the AD OS-1 exterior boundaries, - ' referenc ~ is made to the AD OS-1 Boundary Map. (on file m the office of the City Clerk), attached hereto in~reduced and not to scale form as Appendix A and incorporated herein by reference. k STATEMENT OF MAXIMUM ANNUAL PARCEL ASSESSMENT FOR RECOVERY OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT I ADMINISTRATION COSTS AND EXPENSES Pursuant to Subdivision (f) of Section 10204 of the Streets and highways Code, I present the following states41ent ofa proposed maximum annual assessment upon each parcel and subdivision ~:°: of land in AD 0~-1, in the amount of $50.00. t Said annual assessment shall be levied by the City Council to pay various costs and expenses '. incurred from tithe to time by the City and not otherwise reimbursed, which result from the administration and collection of assessment installments, from compliance with Securities .and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12 for continuing disclosure requirements, or from the i;_" administration or',registration of the improvement bonds and the various funds and accounts pertaining thereto: The City Council shalt determine, by resolution, the amount of the annual assessment for this'Iourpose, which shall not exceed the maximum assessment stated above and shall not exceed a reasonable estimate of costs actually incurred. The above stated maximum annual" assessment amount'Ishall be sepazate from and in addition to any costs and expenses that "may be charged to property owners in AD OS-1 by the City, pursuant to Sections 8682 and 8682.1 of the Streets and Highway s Code. 29670FerIILwpd 111+3 10125!05 BOND DECLARATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that pursuant to Resolution ofIntention Na. 1384 serial and/or term bonds representing the unpaid assessments, and bearing interest at a rate not to exceed twelve percent (12%) per annum, will be issued in the manner provided by the 1915 Act, and the last installment of the bonds shall mature in not to exceed twenty-four (24) years from the second day of September next succeeding twelve (12} months from their date. The provisions of Part I1.1 of the 1515 Act providing a procedure for the collection of assessments. and advance retirement of bonds shall apply: The total amount assessed pursuant to the AD OS-1 proceedings includes an incidental expense to cover the estimated cost afpreparing; printing registering, servicing; and collecting the improvement bonds proposed to be issued pursuant to the 1915 Act to represerit any unpaid assessments. ` The AD OS-1 Engineer's Report was filed in the office of the City Clerk on September 29, 2005, for preliminary approval on October 12, 2005, pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 227-05. This Engineer's Report was. filed with the City Clerk on October 28, 2005, for final consideration and approval by the City Council after the close of the hearing scheduled for November 9, 2005. The proposed AD OS-1 "final" assessment amount shown in the .preceding "Statement of Total Assessment" in Engineer's Report Section III on page III-2, under the "Confirmed Assessment Amount" column, and the individual parcel proposed "final" assessment amounts are shown in Exhibit A, Assessment Roll, under the "Confirmed Assessment Amount" column. Pursuant to the finding of the AD OS-1 AssessmenfEngineer, as stated in Engineer's Report Exhibit D, Description of Assessment Spread Method, the proposed Assessment Reallocation Method is in general ~,; conformance with the requirements of Municipal Code Section 13.08.070. Therefore, the ' undersigned recommends that the AD OS-1 Engineer's Report be approved by the City Council as the Final Report, that the parcel assessments shown herein be levied, and the proposed improvements and/or acquisitions financed by AD OS-1 be ordered. Raul M. Rojas, Public Works Director and,Engineer of Work, City ofBakersfield, Assessment District No. 05-] 29670Fecltl.wpd III--4 10!25/Oi EXHIBIT A ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIEID ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.05-1 COUNTY OEKERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ASSESSMENT ROLL DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY CONFIRMED ASM'i' ATNf AREA ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT NO. DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION - PROPERTY OWNER- AMOUNT AMOUNT PORTIONS OF LOTIIN LOT LINEADJU5TMENT NO. 7 531-010-40 AND 47 05-0450 (PORTIONS OF PARCELS 8 AND 9 REGENT LAND INVESTMENT, LLC 2;307,432.43 2,307,432.43 Iry pARCEL MAP N0.1 i013) PORTIONS OF LOT21N LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. K HOVNANIAN'S FOUR SEASONS AT 2 531-010'40, 47, OS-0480 {PORTIONS OF PARCELS 8, 9, . gAKERSFIELD LLC 1,572,538.43 1,572,539.43 AND 42 AND 10 IN PARCEL MAP NO. 71013) , PORTIONS OF L0T31N LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 3 531-01042 AND 43 OS-0480 (PORTIONS OF PARCELS 10 AND 11 N BARGEE MAP NO. 11013) REGENT LAND INVESTMENT, LLC - - 1,023,846.79 1,023,648.79 PORTIONSOF LOT 4IN LOT UNE ADJUSTMENT NO. 4' 31.01042 AND 43 05-0480 fPORT1ONS OF PARCELS 70 AND REGENT LAND INVESTMENT, LLC 690.088.74 890,088.74 91 N PARCEL MAP N0. 11013) PORTIONS OF LOT 1 IN LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 5 531-01045, 48, OS-0550 (PORTIONS OF PARCELS 3, 8, REGENT LAND INVESTMENT, LLC 2,067,501.71 2,067,507.71 AND 47 ANO 71N PARCEL MAP NO. 11073) e PORTIONS OF 531 07045 AND de LOT 21N LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. OS-0550 (PORTIONS OF PARCELS 6 AND 7 K. HOVNANIAN AT ROSEMARY N 1,345,903.08 7 345 903.08 - -IN PARCEL MAP NO. 71013) LA TANA, LIC , , PORTIONS OF LOT D IN LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 7 591-01045, 46, 05-1188 (PORTIONS OF PARCELS 3, 6, MOUNTAIN VIEW BRAVO, LlC 1,934,469.27 1,934,469.27 AND 47 AND T IN PARCEL MAP NO. 77073) 8 PORTIONS OF LOT A IN LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. OS-0427 {PORTIONS OF PARCEL 2 IN D. R. NORTON LOS ANGELES 1 063 30610 1 063 306 20 531-010-39 ppRCEI MAP NO. 11013) HOLDING COMPANY; INC , , , , . 9 531-01044 PARCEL S IN PARCEL MAP NO. 71013 D. R. NORTON LOS ANGELES HOLDING COMPANY. INC 2 252,799.71 2,252,189.71 PORTIONS OF LOTAIN LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 10 537-Ot0-34 AND 35 05-1788 {PORTIONS OF PARCELS t AND 4 MOUNTAIN VIEW 8RAV0, lLC 914,303.95 .914,303.95 IN PARCEL MAP NO. 11013) PORTIONS OF LOTA IN LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. iy 531-010-29 AND 34 05-7188 (PORTIONS OF PARCEL 41N MOUNTAIN VIEW BRAVO, LLC 648,608.71 848,808.71 PARCEL NtAP N0. 11013) - TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: 15,820,000.00 15,820,000.00 MAP AND DOCUMENT REFERENCES: 1. PARCEL MAP NO. 11013 RECORDEDSEPTEMBER i6, 2004, IN BOOK 530E PARCEL MAPS, AT PAGE3130 THROUGH 1-08, KGB. 2. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR LOT IINEAQIUSTMENT NO.05-04T/RECORDED 3ECTEMBER 9,2WS, AS DOCUMENT N0.02052467t9,OR. 3. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMEM NO. 05-0480 RECORDED 6EPTEM6ER 28,2005, AS DOCUMENT NO.0205265732, O.R: 4. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR LOT LINEAO.IUSTMENT N0. 05-0550 RECORDED OCTOBER 24,2005, AS DOCUMENT N0.0205284020, O.R. 5. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR LOT IINEAOJVSTMEM NO.OS-it86 RECORDED 2005,AS DOCUMENT NO. .O.R. PREPARED BY: WILSON & ASSOCIATES FRESNO. CALIFORNIA 'lJJ( (/7''''" , ~ 1. ~(/,~t o,~ - APPROVED BY: - ~JU ~ • w"' r /...: ~-. SS . \ DATE: i~ (Z~~O`7 EDWARD J. WILSON, R.C.E. 23269 (EXPIRES t2-31-05) Q q~~ No. 23269 ExP. 12!31(05 Of CPt 29670EXA A-1 70(2512005 1: TABLE B-I TABLES B-H EXHIBIT B Engineer's Estimate of Total Cost and Assessment Engineer's itemized Estimate of Improvement Acquisition Cost - TABLE B-II-A Summary of City in the Hills Improvements to Be Acquired TABLE B-H-B Details of City in the Hi11s Improvements to Be:Acquired TABLE B-III Payoff Calculation for AssessmenYDistrict No. 93-1 - Assessments Nos. 1087 Through 1091 and 1093 Through 1101 EXHIBIT B TABLEB-I ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.05-1 COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE OF TOTAL COST AND ASSESSMENT ~ ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION ~ ASSESSMENT _ (Note: See Tables &II for improvemeni cost details) 1. CITY IN THE HILLS IMPROVEMENT COST A. IMPROVEMENTS AND FEES $9,742,430.00 B: CONTINGENCY $923,723.00 C. INCIDENTALS $2,447,869.D0 Si' D. TOTAL GITY IN THE HILLS IMPROVEMENT, $13,114,022.00 CONTINGENCY, AND INCIDENTAL COST 2. PAYOFF OF EXISTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.93-1 $159,299.03 I.,j A33E33MENT5 NOS.1087 THROUGH 1091 AND _ 7.093 THROUGH 1101 (Note: See Table &111 Por details} I'.;- 3. TOTAL COST OF IMPROVEMENTS, CONTINGENCY, $13,273,321.03 INCIDENTALS, AND ADDITIONAL FEES/COSTS (PAYOFFS) 4. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PROCEEDING COST AND EXPENSE A. ASSESSMENT ENGINEER $54,000.00 B. BOND COUNSEL $60,000.00 "" C. APPRAISAL $23,000.00 (, D. BOND ISSUANCE EXPENSES ~ t. Bond and Other Printing $10,000.00 2. Bond Administration and Registration $5,D00.00 3. Legal Publications, Notices, Recording, and Mailing $3,ODD.00 ? a. Auditor's Record $5,000.00 . 5. CDAC, MSRB, PSA Fees $0.00 s. Disclosure Counsel. $39,000.00 ,. 7. Continuing Disclosure Compliance (First Two Years After Jssue} $15,000.00 a. TOTAL BOND ISSUANCE EXPENSE $77,000.00 E. ENVIRONMENTAL APPROVAL PROCESSING $0.00 F. CITY ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING COST AND ,: PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND ACQUISITION ADMINISTRATION t. City Assessment Proceeding Cost $15,169.02 2. Project Construction and Acquisition Administration $106,661.53 (1°J° of Improvement Cost and Contingency; Items 1.A and 1.6) a. TOTAL CITY ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING COST AND $121,830.55 PROJECT CONSTRUCTIONtACOUISITION ADMINISTRATION G. TOTAL ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT $335,830.55. PROCEEDING-COST AND EXPENSE 5.SUBTOTAL COST TO ASSESSMENT $13,609,151.58 6. DEDUCT CONTRIBUTIONS AND CASH COLLECTIONS $0.00 TO REDUCE ASSESSMENT 7.TOTAL COST ASSESSED TO 1915 ACT BOND ISSUANCE $13,609,151.58 -- AFTER CONTRIBUTIONS AND CASH COLLECTIONS 8.1915 ACT BOND ISSUANCE COST AND RESERVE A. UNDERWRITER'S DISCOUNT $149,499.00 B. CAPITALIZED INTEREST $680,260.00 C. BOND RESERVE FUND $1,381 089.42 ~, '°- D. TOTAL 1915 ACT BOND ISSUANCE COST AND RESERVE $2,210,848.42 9.TOTALAMOUNTASSESSED (Add Lines 7 and B.D.) $15,820,000.00 2967061 B-1-1 09/19/2005 EXHIBIT B TABLE B-11-A ' ENGINEER'S REPORT - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.05-1 GOUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. ~~ ~ ENGINEER'S ITEMIZED ESTIMATE OF IMPROVEMENT ACQUISITION COST SUMMARY OF CITY IN THE HILLS IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ACQUIRED A. CITY HILLS DRIVE {ENTIRE STREET, EAST, PORTION) IMPROVEMENTS {From Canteria Drive to.Panorama Ddve) - t'! -' a. Improvements $1,286,673.00 " b. Contingency $128,667.00 ~~- c. Incdentals $294,722.00 d: Total City Hills Ddve (Entire Street, East Portion) Improvement Cost $1,710,062.00 - B. CITY HILLS DRIVE (ENTIRE STREET, WEST PORTION) IMPROVEMENTS (From Vineland Road to Canteda Drive) a. improvements" ~ $535,571.00 - b. Contingency - - - - $53,557A0. c. Incidentals $111,921.00 ~;,; d. Total City Hills Ddve (Entire Sfreet, West Portion) Improvement Cost " $701,049.00 t ~, C. PANORAMA DRIVE {ENTIRE STREE-f) IMPROVEMENTS . (From Vineland Road to Masterson Street) a. Improvements $2,520,670.00 b. Contingency $252,067.00 alncidentals $579,540.00 d. Total Panorama Drive (Entire Street) Improvement Cost $3,352,277.00 D. VINELAND ROAD (EAST SIDE, NORTH PORTION) IMPROVEMENTS (From Paladino Ddve to Panarama Ddve) _ a. Improvements - $749,875.00 b. Contingency $74,988.00 c. Ihcidentals $166,930.00 d. Tatal Yneland Road (East Side, North Portion) Improvement Cost - $991,793.00 ;. E. VINELAND ROAD (FAST SIDE & ENTIRE STREET, SOUTH PORTION) IMPROVEMENTS (From Panorama Dnveto 664 Feet South of City Hills Drive; South 664 Feet Full Width) t ~ a. Improvements ~ $681,027.00 ~- ~ b. Contingency $68,103.00 c. Incidentals $203,616.00 -; d. Total Vineland Raad {East Side, South Portion) Improvement Cost $952,746.00 F. MASTERSON STREET {WEST SIDE & ENTIRE STREET) IMPROVEMENTS (From Paladino Ddve to Hwy 178; South 1514 Feei Fult Width) a. Improvements $1,432,734.00 b. Contingency $143,273.00 " ~'~ c. Incdentals. $485,267.00 ~ d. Total Masterson Street {West Side & Entire Street) Improvement Cost - $2,061,274.00 ' - G. PALADINO DRIVE (SOUTH SIDE) IMPROVEMENTS (From Vineland Road to Masterson Street) G'< a. Improvements. $1,979,358.00 b. Contingency $197,936.00 c. incidentals .$463,672.00 d. Total Paladino Drive {South Side) Improvement Cost - ~ $2,640,966.00 H. CANTERIA DRIVEIMPROVEMENTS - _ (From City Hills Drive to South End of Storm Drain Sump) a. Improvements $51,322.00 "--- b. Contingency - $5,132.00 c. Incidentals $142;201.00 d. Total Canteria Drive Improvement Cost $198,655.00 h ON-SITE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS - a. Improvements ~ $0.00 -- b. Contingency $0.00 c. incidentals $0.00 d. Total On-site Stonn Drain Improvement Cost $0.00 J. CITY OF BAKERSFIELD FACILITIES FEES a. City Park Land In-lieu and: Development Fees - $505;200.00 ' K. TOTAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTCOST a. Improvements and Fees (Add Lines A,a.; B.a., C.a., D.a., E.a., F.a., G.a., H.a., La., and J.a.) $9,742,430.00 b. Contingency (Add tines A.b., B.b., 0.b., D.b., E.b., F.b., G.b., H.b., and Lb.) $923,723.00 ,~ ~ c Incidentals (Add Lines A.c., B.c., C.c. D.c. E.c. F.c. G.c., H.c., and Lc.) $2 447 869.00 d. Total Project Improvement Cost - - $13,114,022.00 Note: Ali improvement cohbngency and inddental cost esMnates shown (n ibis table am based on the Information providetl 8y the District Proponent and its Subdivision Engineer. 29670H2A B-II-A-1 09119/2005 EXHIBIT B .TABLE B-II-B ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 05-1 COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ENGINEER'S ITEMIZED ESTIMATE OF IMPROVEMENT ACQUISITION COST DETAILS OF CITY IN THE HILLS IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ACQUIREp DESCRIPTION ~ QUANTITY ~ UNITS ~ COST ~ TOTAL A. CITY HILLS DRIVE (ENTIRE STREET, EAST PORTION) IMPROVEMENTS (From Canteria Drive to Panorama Drivep a. ,GRADING Mobilization (5% of construction items) 1 LS 61270.00 $61,270.00 Roadway Excavation 24691 CY 3.00 $74,073.00 TOTAL GRADING $135,343A0 ' i,'., b. STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS s. 18" Stonn Drain Pipe 748 CF 26.00 $19,448.00 24" Storm Drain Pipe 534 LF 32A0 $17,088.00 " 48" Storm Drain Pipe 582 LF 75.00 .$43,650.00. ` Type R Catch Basin 1 EA 1600.00 $1,600.00 Manhole 6 EA 1900.00 $11,400.00 TOTAL STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS $93,186.00 i'' c. SEWER IMPROVEMENTS 8" Sewer Pipe 2456 LF 18.04 $44,208.00 Standard Manhole 8 EA 1900.00 $15,200.00 ,. TOTAL SEWER IMPROVEMENTS $59,408.00 d. STREET IMPROVEMENTS A.C,Paving 5511 TON- 45.00 $247,995.00 Aggregate Base 6837 CY 33.00 $225,621:00 Subgrade Preparation 24129 SY 1.00 $24,129.00 I! 6" Curb & Gutter 6285 LF .9.25 $58,229.00 8' Meandering Sidewalk 51248 SF 2.50 $128,120.00 Handicap+2amps 4000 SF 2.50 $10,000.00 Metro Street Sign 9 EA .300.00 $2,700.00 Stop Sign 1 EA 200.00 $200.00 Street Light - Shakespear 9500 Lumen 9 EA 6500.00 $58,500.00 Street Light Conduit & Conductor 5400 LF 3.00 $16,200.00 Street Light Pull Box 36 EA 15Q:00 $5,400.00 Interconnect Conduit 3203 LF 4.00 $12,812.00 Traffic Signal @ Gity Hills Dc & Panorama Dc 1 EA 130000.00 $130,000.00 Monument Encasement 8 EA 25Q.00 $2,000.00 Landscape Meter Pedestal 2 EA 1100.00 $2,200.00 Median Curb 5557 LF 8:00 $44,456.00 Striping (Detail 9 -White Skip Stripe) 5420 LF 0.50 $2,710.00 Striping (Pavement Arrow Markings) 180 SF 1.00 $180.00 Striping (Detail 38 - Channelizing Line) 1429 LF 1.00 $1,429.00 Striping {Channelizers at 15' O.C.) 17 EA 15.00 $255.00. TOTAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS $973,136.00 e. MISCELLANEOUS Standard Block Wall 0 SF 11.60 $0.00 Dust Control 1 LS 16000.00 $16,000.00 Slope Protection & Erosion 1 LS 9600.00 $9,600.00 TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS $25,800:00 f. SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST $1,286;873.00 " g. CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10%} $128,667.00 h. I 'i .' SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST AND CONTINGENCY $1,415,340.00 29670B2B B-11-B-1 09!19!2005 I ' " EXHIBIT B TABLE B-II-B ENGINEER'S REPORT GITY'.OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.05-1 '" COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ENGINEER'S IIrEMIZED ESTIMATE OF IMPROVEMENT ACQUISITION COST DETAILS OF CITY1N THE HILLS" ~'~~ IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ACQUIRED i. INCIDENTAL COST Design Engineering ~~ $87;815.00 , Engineering Reimburseabies & Prints $1,312.00 ~ Improvement Bonds (City} $10,615.00 Plan Check Fees (City) ! $18,045.00 Inspection. Fees (City) ! $29,721.00 '1 MBHCP Fees (City) 16.84 AG 1240.00 $20,886.00 ~'~ ConsWction Staking ' $63,489.00 Soils and Materials Testingland Report $42,459.00 ,.. Construction Inspection $20,380.00 i TOTAL INCIDENTAL COS ~ $294,722.00 j. TOTAL CITY HILLS DRIVE~tENTIRE STREET, EAST PORTION) $1,710,062.00 (From Canteria Drive to Pa orama Drive) "; IMPROVEMENTS; CONTIN ENCY, AND INCIDENTALS i B. CITY HILLS DRIVE (ENTIRE ST EET, WEST PORTION) IMPROVEMENTS (From Vineland Road to Canters Drive) ~ ' a. GRADING. Mobilization (5% of canstructi~n items) 1 LS 25503.00 $25,503.00 Roadway Excavation ~ 9533 GY 3.00 $28,599.00 TOTAL GRADING $54,102.00 b. STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS ! 18" Storm Drain Pipe I 154 LF 26.00 $4,004.00 " Type A Catch Basin 'I 2 EA 1600.00 $3,200.00 ;; c. STREET IMPROVEMENTS I A.C. Paving 2253 TON 45.00 $101,385.00 Aggregate Base 2795 CY 33.00 $92,235.00 Subgrade Preparation ., 9866 SY 1.D0 $9,866.00 I' , 6" Curb ,~ Gutter 2564 LF 9.25 $23,717.00 8' Meandering Sidewalk 20800 SF 2.50 $52,000.00 Handicap Ramps 1600 SF 2.50 $4,000.00 Metro Street Sign 2 EA 300.00 $600.00 Stop Sign 1 EA 200.00 $200.00. Street Light - Shakespear 9500 Lumen 3 EA 6500.00 $19,500.00 Street Light Conduit & Conductor ', 1800 LF 3.00 $5,400.00 Street Light Pull Box 12 EA 150.00 $1,800.00 " Interconnect Conduit 1300 LF 4.00 $5,2W.00 ' Traffic Signal @ City Hillsbr. & Vineland Rd. 1 EA 130000.00 $130,000.00 Monument Encasement 3 EA 254.00 $750.00 Landscape Meter Pedestal I, 1 EA 1100.00 $1,100.00 Median Curb ~ 2314 LF 8.00 $18,512.00 ' TOTAL STREET1MPROVEMENTS I $466,265.00 d. MISCELLANEOUS ', Standard Block WaIF i 0 SF 11.60 $0.00 Dust Control ~~ 1 LS 5000.00 $5,000.00 Slope Protection & Erosion 1 LS 3000.00 $3,000.00 TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS ~ $8,000:00 ~ e. SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST ~~ $535,571.00 29670B2B B-I I-B-2 09/1912005 i• ' EXHIBIT B f TABLE B•II-B ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. DS-1 COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ENGINEER'S ITEMIZED ESTIMATE OF IMPROVEMENT ACQUISITION COST 1:-; DETAILS OF CITY IN THE HIt.LS IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ACQUIRED f. CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10°k) $53;557.00 g: SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST AND CONTINGENCY $589,128.00 _ h. INCIDENTAL COST Design Engineering $33,299.00 Engineering Reimburseables & Prints $403.00 Improvement Bonds (City) $4,419.00 Plan Check Fees (City} $7,512.00 Inspection Fees (City) $12,372.00 MBHCP Fees (City) 1.64 AC 1240.00 $2,036.00 Construction Staking $23,836.00.. Soils and Materials Testing and Report $17,675.00 Construction Inspection $10,369.00 TOTAL INCIDENTAL COST $111,921.00 i. TOTAL CITY HILLS DRIYE (ENTIRE STREET, WEST PORTION) $701,049.00 (From Vineland Road to Canteria Drive) IMPROVEMENTS, CONTINGENCY, AND INCIDENTALS ,, r" C. PANORAMA DRIVE (ENTIRE STREET) IMPROVEMENTS ~ (From Vineland Road to Masterson Street) ( a. 'GRADING Mobilization (5% of construction items) 1 LS 120D32.00 $120,032.00 f :' Roadway Excavation 39930 CY 3.00 $119,790.00 TOTAL GRADING $239,822.00 b. STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS 18" Storm Drain Pipe 2237 LF 26.00 $58,162.00 24" Storm Drain Pipe 529 LF 32.00 $16,928.00 30" Storm-Drain Pipe 0 LF 40.00 $0.00 36" Storm drain Pipe 0 LF 50.00 $0.00 42" Storm Drain Pipe 0 LF 60.00 .$0.00 F' "` Type A Catch Basin 0 EA 1600.00 $0.00 , Manhole 2 EA 1900.00. $3,800:00 TOTAL STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS $78,890.00 c. SEWER IMPROVEMENTS 8" Sewer Pipe . 1846 LF 18.OD $33,228.00 Standard Manhole 9 EA 1900.D0 $17,100.00 TOTAL SEWER IMPROVEMENTS $50,328.00 d. STREET IMPROVEMENTS A.C. Paving 6356 TON 45.00 $286,020.00 Aggregate Base 7885 CY 33.00 $260,205.00 Subgrade Preparation 2783D SY 1.00 $27,830.00 6" Curb & Gutter 10890 LF 9.25 $10D,733.00 ' `, 6' Meandering Sidewalk 65340 SF 2.50 $163,350.00 Handicap Ramps 3200 SF 2.50 $S,OOD.00 Metro Street Sign 8 EA 300:00. $2,400.00 j ' Stop Sign 4 EA 200.00 $800.00 Street Light - Shakespear 9500 Lumen 16 EA 6500.00 $104,000.00 Street Light Conduit & Conductor 9600 LF 3.00 $28,800.00 Street Light Pull Box 64 EA 150.00 $9,600.00. ~ ~ Interconnect Conduit 5445 LF 4.00 $21,780.00 29670626 B-I I-B-3 09!19/2005 '`-`' k' ~;;I EXHIBIT B TABLE B-11-6 ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICTNO. 05-1 COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ENGINEER'S ITEMIZED ESTIMATE OF IMPROVEMENT ACQUISITION COST DETAILS OF CITYiN THE HILLS IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ACQUIRED ~ DESCRIPTION ~ QUANTITY UNITS ~ COST ~ TOTAL I ' d. STREET IMPROVEMENTS (continued) Monument Encasement 10 EA 250.00 $2;500.00 Landscape Meter Pedestal 1 EA 1100.00 $1,100.00 ` Median Curb 10890 LF .8.00 $87,120.00 TOTAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS $1,104,238.00 e: MISCELLANEOUS ~, Standard Biock Wail 87120 SF 11.80 $1,010,592.00 ~.:. Dust Control 1 LS 23000.00 $23 000 00 Slope Protection & Erosion 1 LS 13800 00 , . $13 800 00 TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS $1,047,392.00 ~: , f. SUBTOTAL'IMPROVEMENTCOST $2,520,670:00 g. CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10°h) $252,067.00 h. SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST AND CONTINGENCY $2,772,737.00 i. INCIDENTAL COST Design Engineering $200,777.00 Engineering Reimburseables & Prints $2,000.00 Improvement Bonds (City) $21,523.00 ~ Plan Check Fees {City) $36,589.00 Inspection Fees {City) $60,265.00 MBHCP Fees {City) 16.24 AC 1240.00 $20,138.00 Construction Staking $94,761.00 j Soiis and Materials Testing and Report $86,092.00 - Construction Inspection $57 39500 TOTAL INCIDENTAL COST $579,540.00 " j. TOTAL PANORAMA DRIVE (ENTIRE STREET) $3,352,277.00 (From Vineland Road to Masterson Street) IMPROVEMENTS, CONTINGENCY, AND INCIDENTALS •- D. VINELAND-ROAD (EAST SIDE, NORTH PORTION)1MPROVEMENTS (From Paladino Drive to Panorama Drive) a. GRADING Mobilisation (5°h of construction items) 1 LS 31611.00 $31,611.00 Roadway-Excavation 8126 CY 3.00 $24 378 00 TOTAL GRADING $55,989:00 b. STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS 18" Storm Drain Pipe 33 LF 26.00 $858:00 24" Storm Drain Pipe 552. LF 32.00 $17,664.00 Type A Catch Basin 1 EA 1600.00 $1,600.00 Manhole 1 EA 1900.00 $1,900.00 TOTAL STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS $22,022.00 c. STREET IMPROVEMENTS ` A.C. Paving 1984 TON 45.00 $89,280.00 Aggregate Base. 2462 CY 33.00 $81,246.00 Subgrade Preparation 8688 SY 1.00 $8,688.00 ~,, 6" Curb & Gutter 2151 LF 9.25 $19,897.00 Sidewalk 11831 SF 2.50 $29,578.00 Handicap Ramps 800 SF 2.50 $2,000.00 I Metro Street Sign 1 EA 300.00 $300.00 ;', 29670626 B-I I-B-4 09!1912005 it"°'` c ~, ~,.: i ,: ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 05-1 COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA EXHIBIT B TABLE B-II-B ENGINEER'S ITEMIZED ESTIMATE OF IMPROVEMENT ACQUISITION COST DETAILS OF CITY IN THE HILLS IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ACQUIRED DESCRIPTION ~ QUANTITY ~ UNITS ~ COST ~ TOTAL, c. STREET IMPROVEMENTS {continued) Street Light -Mast Arm 9500 Lumen 4 EA 2100.00 $8,400.00 Street Light Conduit & Conductor 1200 LF 3.00 $3,600.00 Street Light Puil Box 10 EA 150.00 $1,500.00 Monument Encasement 2 EA 250.00 $500.00 Sawcut 2151 LF 10D $2,151.00 PavemenfRemoval {disposal on-site) 2151 SF .0.20 $430.00 Interconnect Conduit 2151 LF 4.00 $11,604.00 Traffic Signal @ Vineland Rd. & Panorama Dc 1 EA 120000.00 $120,000.00 Traffic Signal @ Vineland Rd. &Paladino Dr. 1 EA 31560.00 $31 560.00 TOTAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS $407,734.00 d. MISCELLANEOUS Standard Block Wall 14525 SF 11.60 $168,490.00 Median Deposit 2151 LF 40.D0 $86,040.00 Dust Gontroi 1 LS 6000.00 $6,000.00 Slope Protection & Erosion 1 LS 3600.00 $3,600.00 TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS. $264,130.00 e. SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST $749;875.00 f. CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10%) $74,988.00 g. SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST AND CONTINGENCY $824,863,06 h. INCIDENTAL COST Design Engineering $58,168.00 Engineering Reimburseables & Prihts $667.00 Improvement Bonds (City}. $6,186.00 Plan Check Fees (City) $10,517.00 Inspection Fees {City} $17,322.00 MBHCP Fees (City} 2.72 AC 1240.00 $3;368.00 Construction Staking $29,459.00 Soils and Materials Testing and Report $24,746.00 Construction Inspection $16,497:00 TOTAL INCIDENTAL COST $166,930.00 i. TOTAL VINELAND ROAD (EAST SIDE, NORTH PORTION) $991,793.00 (From Paladino Drive to Panorama Drive) IMPROVEMENTS, CONTINGENCY, AND INCIDENTALS E. VINELAND ROAD {FJiST SIDE & ENTIRE STREET, SOUTH PORTION) IMPROVEMENTS (From Panorama Drive to 684 Feet South of City Hills Drive; South 664 Feet FuII Width) a. GRADING Mobilization (5% of construction items} 1 LS 28977.00 $28,977.00 Roadway Excavation 11863 CY 3.D0 $35589.00 TOTAL GRADING $64,566.00 b. STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS 18" Storm Drain Pipe 1'60 LF 26.00 $4,160.00 30" Storm Drain Pipe 0 LF 40.00 $0.00 36" Storm Drain Pipe 0 LF 50.00 $0.00 48" Storm Drain. Pipe 0 LF 75.00 $0.00 Grated Inlet 1 LS SOOOAO $5,OOOA0 Type A Catch Basin 3 EA 1600.00 $4,806.00 Manhole 9 EA 1900.00 $17,100.OD 29670826 B-I I-B-5 0 9/1 912 005 EXHIBIT B TABLE B-II-B ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO: OS-1 COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ENGINEER'S ITEMIZEp ESTIMATE OF IMPROVEMENT ACQUISITION COST DETAILS OF CITY IN THE HILLS IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ACQUIRED r- DESCRIPTION I OWANTITY I UNITS ~ COST I TOTAL a .STREET IMPROVEMENTS A.C: Paving 2550 TON 45.00 $114;750.00 .Aggregate Base. 2456 CY 33.00 $81,048.00 Subgrede Preparation 11165 SY 1.00 $11,165.00 6" Curb & Gutter 3140 LF 9.25 $29,045.00 Sidewalk 17271 SF 2.50 $43,178.00 Handicap Ramps 800 SF 2.50 $2,000.00 Metro Street Sign 1 EA 300.OD $300.00 Street Light -Mast Arm 9500 Lumen 8 EA 2100.00 $16,800.00 Street Light Conduit & Conductor 2400 LF 3.00 $7,200.D0 Street Light Puli Box 20 EA 150.OD $3,000.00 Monument Encasement 2 EA 250.00 $500.00 Landscape Meter Pedestal 1 EA 1100.00 $1,100.00 Median Curb 1327 LF 8.00 $10,616.00 Sawcut 2151 LF 1.00 $2,151A0 Pavement Removal (disposal on-site) 2151 SF 0.20 $430.00 Interconnect Conduit 2477 LF 4.00 $9,908.00 TOTAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS $333,191.00 d. MISCELLANEOUS Standard Block Wall 14525 SF 11.60 $188,490.00 Median Deposit {Panorama. Dr. to City Hills Dr.) .1813 LF 40.OD $72,520.00 Dust Control 1 LS 7000.00 $7,000.00 Slope Protection & Erosion 1 LS 4200.00 $4 200.00 TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS !r~~~ pan nn e. SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST f. CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10°k) g. SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST AND CONTINGENCY h. INCIDENTAL COST $681,027.00 $68,103:00 $749,130.00 Design Engineering $75,867.00 Engineering Reimburseables & Pririts $930.00 Improvement Bonds (City) $7,372.00 Plan Check Fees (City) $12,533.00 Inspection Fees (City) $20,642.00 MBHCP Fees (City) 2.29 AC 1240.00 $2,839.00 Construction Staking $34,286.00 Soils and Materials Testing and Report $29,488.00 Construction Inspection $19 659.00 TOTAL INCIDENTAL COST $203,616.00 TOTAL VINELAND ROAD {EAST SIDE 8 ENTIRE STREET, SOUTH PORTION) $952,746.00 (From Panorama Drive to 66d Feet South of City Hills Drive; South 664 Feet Full Width) IMPROVEMENTS, CONTINGENCY, AND INCIDENTALS F. MASTERSON STREET {WEST SIDE 8: ENTIRE STREET) IMPROVEMENTS (From Paladino Drive to Hwy 178; South 1514 Feet Full Width) a. GRADING Mobilization (5°l0 of construction items) 1 LS 68225.00 $68,225.00 Roadway Excavation 40069' CY 3.00 $120,207.OD Import 14692 CY 5.00 $73 460.00 TOTAL GRADING $261;892.00 29670628 B-11-B-6 09!19/2005 !"' EXHIBIT B f TABLE B-II-B ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.05-1 COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ENGINEER'S ITEMIZED ESTIMATE OF IMPROVEMENT ACQUISITION COST DETAILS OF CITY IN THE HILLS IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ACQUIRED I" b. STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS 18" Storm Drain Pipe 800 LF 26.00 $20,800.00 ' -` Type A Catch Basin 2 EA 1600.00 $3,200.00 ~ Manhole 2 EA 1900.00 $3,800.00 TOTAL STORM DRAINIMPROVEMENTS $27,800.00 c. STREET IMPROVEMENTS lift-: ~ A.C.Paving 11741 TON 45.00 $528,345.00 [`": Aggregate Base 5331 CY 33.00 $175,923.00 Subgrade Preparation 39986 SY 1.00 $39,986.00 6" Curb & Gutter 6256 LF 9.25 $57,868.00 Sidewalk 37536 SF 2.50 $93,840.00 t '! Handicap Ramps 400 SF 2.50 $1,000.00 Metro Street Sign 19 EA 300.00 $5,700.00 ~ - Street Light -Mast Arm 9500 Lumen 13 EA 2100.00 $27,300.00 Street Light Conduit & Conductor 3900 LF 3.00 $11,700.00 -. Street Light Pull Box 33 EA 150.00 $4,950.00 Monument Encasement 5 EA 250.00 $1,250.00 Sawcut 5278 LF 1.00 $5,278.00 f Pavement Removal (disposal nn-site) 126672 SF 0.20 $25,334.00 - Interconnect Conduit 4742 LF 4.00 $18,968.00 Traffic Signal @ Masterson St. & Hwy 178. 1 EA 120000.00 $120 000.00 ~,; TOTAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS $1,117,442.00 ~,- d. MISCELLANEOUS Right-of-way Acquisition 0 LS 626735.00 $0.00 Standard Block WaII 0 SF 11:60 $0.00 Median Deposit 0 LF 40.00 $0.00 ~' Dust ConVol 1 LS 16000.00 $16,000.00 Slope Protection & Erasion 1 LS 9600.00 $9,600.00 TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS $25,600.00 ~ e. SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST $1,432,734.00 f. CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10%) $143,273.00 g. SUBTOTALiMPROVEMENTCOSTANDCONTINGENCY $1;576,007.00 h. INCIDENTAL COST Design Engineering $143,081.00 Engineering Reimburseables & Prints $2,000.00 Improvement Bonds (City} $20,401.00 Plan Check Fees (City) $34,681.00 Inspection Fees (City) $57,122.00 MBHCP Fees (City} 2.30 AC 1240.00 $2,849.00 GonstructiodStaking $89,128.00 Soils and Materials Testing and Report $81,603.00 Construction Inspection $54,402:00 rnr., ,.,.+,.~.~.,,-r~ n.~,~r xn RG ~a~ nn c '-' r:, TOTAL MASTERSON STREET (WEST SIDE & ENTIRE STREET) (From Paladino Drive to Hwy 178; South 1514 Feet Full Width) IMPROVEMENTS, CONTINGENCY, AND INCIDENTALS $2,064,274.00 29670828 B-11-6-7 0911 912 00 5. EXHIBIT B TAEi,LE B-11-B ENGINE R'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.05-1 COUNTY OF KERN, f TATS OF CALIFORNIA ENGINEER'S ITEMIZED ESTIMATE d~MPROVEMENT ACQUISITION COST DETAILS OF CI IN THE HILLS IMPROVEMENTS 70 BE ACQUIRED . r UNIT 1 DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNITS COST TOTAL ts; c:' , ;: G. PALADINO DRIVE (SOUTH SIDE) IMPROVE (From Vineland Road to Masterson Street) a. GRADING Mobilization {S°1o of construction items) Roadway Excavation Imbort 1 LS 84215.00 3631 t CY 3.00 TOTAL GRADING $259,718.00 b. STREET IMPROVEMENTS A.C. Paving ~. 11068 TON 45.00 $498,060.00 Aggregate Base j 5026 CY 33.00 $165,858.D0 Subgrade Preparation 37696 ~ SY 1.00 $37,696.00 6" Curb & Gutter ~, 5271 LF 9.25 $48,757.00 Sidewalk 28991 SF 2.50 $72,478.00 Street Light -Mast Arm 9500 Lumen 10 EA 2100.00 $21,000.00' Street Light Conduit & Conductor 3000 LF 3.00 $9,000.00 Street Light Pull Box 25 EA 150.00 $3,750.00 Pavement Removal.{disposal on-site) 26504 SF 0.20 $25,301.00 Monument Encasement 2 EA 250.D0 $500.00 Landscape Meter Pedestal 2 EA 1100.00 $2,200.00 Interconnect Conduit 5271 LF 4.00 $21,084.00 TOTAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS $905,684.00 a MISCELLANEOUS Standard Block Wall 4 510 SF 11.60 ..$574,316.00 Median Deposit 271 LF 40.00 $210;840:00 Aust Control ~ 1 LS ' 18000.00 $18,000.00 Slope Protection & Erosion ', 1 LS 10800.00 $10,800.00 d. SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST $1,979,358.00 e. CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10°l0) $197,936.00 f. SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST AND CONTINGENCY $2,177,294.00 g. INCIDENTACCOST Design Engineering $166,010.00 Engineering Reimburseables & Pririts $2,000.00 Improvement Bonds (City) $16,330.00 Plan Check Fees (City) $27,761.00 Inspection Fees (City} $45,724:00 MBHCP Fees (City) 6.6G AC 1240.00 $8,253:00 Construction Staking $88,729.00 Soils and Materials Testing and Report $65,319.00. Construction Inspection $43,546.00 TOTAL INCIDENTAL COST $463,672.00 h. TOTAL PALADINO DRIVE (SOUTH SIDE) I, $2,640,966.00 ' (From Vineland Road to Masterson Street) IMPROVEMENTS, CONTINGENCY, AND INCIDENTALS 29670626 B-II-B-8 09119/2005 EXHIBIT B I` r. TABLE B-iI-B _I ENGINEER'S REPORT I('; CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 05-1 COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ENGINEER'S ITEMIZED ESTIMATE OF IMPROVEMENT ACt2UISITION COST f DETAILS OF CITY IN THE HILLS i7) IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ACQUIRED ~ DESCRIPTION ~ QUANTITY ~ UNITS ~ COST ~ TOTAL ~-'' H. CANTERIA DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS {From City Hills Drive to South End of Storm Drain Sump) a. STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS ,, 18" Storm. Drain Pipe 214 LF 26.00 $5,564.00 24" StormDrairi Pipe 32 LF 32.00 $1,024.00 42" Storm Drain Pipe 0 LF 60.00 $0.00 r ; 48" Storm Drain Pipe 0 LF 75.00 $0.00 _~ (i6" Storm Drain Pipe 0 LF 150.00 $0.00 Type A Catch Basin 4 EA 1600.00 $6,400.00 Manhole 0 EA 1900.00 $0.00 f ! TOTAL STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS $12,988.00 b. SEWER IMPROVEMENTS 8" Sewer Pipe 1538 LF 18.00 $27,684.00 Standard Manhole 5 FA 1900A0 $9,500.00 Adjust Existing Manhole 1 EA 1150.00. $1 150.00 TOTAL SEWER IMPROVEMENTS $38,334.00 c. SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST $51,322.00 ! d. CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10%} $5;132.00 !,.` - e. SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST AND CONTINGENCY $56,454.00 f. INCIDENTAL COST Design Engineering $76,293.00 Engineering Reimburseables & Prints $688.00 Improvement Bonds (City}. $1,551.00 Plan Check Fees {City) $2,636.00 ~': Inspection Fees (City} $4,342.00 MBHCP Fees {City} 5.68 AC 1240.00 $10,759.00 Construction Staking $35,594.00 Soils and Materials Testing and Report $6,203.00 ``' Construction Inspection $4,135:00 j;;; TOTAL INCIDENTAL COST $142,201.00 g. TOTAL CANTERIA DRIVE $198,655.00 (From City Hills Drive to South End of Storm Drain Sump) IMPROVEMENTS, CONTINGENCY, AND INCIDENTALS I. ON-SITE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS a. GRADING Mobilization {5°!0 of construction items) 0 LS 0.00 $0.00 Excavation (39.33 acre-ft basin} 0 CY 2.00 $0.00 TOTAL GRADING $0.00 b. STORM DRAIN SUMP IMPROVEMENTS Outlet Structure (North) 0 LS 5000.00 $0.00 Outlet Structure {Southeast} 0 LS 2500.00 $0.00 Outlet Structure (South) 0 LS 10000.00 $0.00 TOTAL STORM DRAIN SUMP IMPROVEMENTS $0.00 . a MISCELLANEOUS 6' Fence with Redwood Slats arid Curb 0 LF 20.00 $0.00 ',, ^ ; 12' Access Gate 0 EA 700.00 $O.OD ~ , , TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS $0.00 29670B2B B-it-B-9 09/19/2005 ~': EXHIBIT B TABLE B-11-B _ ENGINEER'S REPORT GIN OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.05-1 '`' COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ENGINEER'S ITEM2ED ESTIMATE OF IMPROVEMENT ACQUISITION COST c:.... _ ~; DETAILS OF CITY IN THE HILLS !:'' IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ACQUIRED DESCRIPTION QUANTITY ( UNITS ~ COST ~ TOTAL d. .SUBTOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST $0.00 e. CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10%) $0.00 f: SUBTOTALIMPROVEMENT COST AND CONTINGENCY $0.00 g. INCIDENTAL COST Design Engineering $0.00 Engineering Reimburseables & Prints $0.00 Improvement Bonds (City) $0.00 Plan Check Fees (City) $0.00 Inspection Fees (City} $0.00 MBHCP Fees (City) $D:00 Construction Staking $0.00 Soils and Materials Testing and Report $0.00 Construction Inspection $0.00 ' h. TOTAL ON-SITE STORM DRAIN $0.00 IMPROVEMENTS, CONTINGENCY, AND INCIDENTALS J. CITY OF BAKERSFIELD FACILITIESFEES a. Gity Park Land In-lieu and Development Fees for Tract No. 6498 421 UNIT 1200.00 $505,200.00 TOTAL CITY PARK FEES $505,200.00 1°` b. CITY OF BAKERSFIELD FACILITIES FEES $505,200.00 K: TOTAL CITY IN THE HILLS IMPROVEMENT COST (Add Items A through J) a. IMPROVEMENTS AND FEES $9,742,430.00 b. CONTINGENCY $923,723.00 c. INCIDENTALS $2,447,869.00 d. TOTAL CITY IN THE HILLS IMPROVEMENT COST $13,114,022.00 Nofe: : Atl improvement, contingency and incidental cost estimates shown in this table are based on the information "" provided by the District Proponent and its Subdivision Engineer. p,..:. 29670828 B-II-B-10 09/19/2005 I°•tl '' ' r f-> EXHIBIT B TABLE B-III ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. D5-1 COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA PAYOFF CALCULATION FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.93-1 ASSESSMENTS NOS. 1087 THROUGH 1091 AND 1093 THROUGH 1101 fi,,.. ~;': I ASSESSMENT PAYOFF DESCRIPTION DETAILS A. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1087 PAYOFF. CALCULATION ~ '; 1. REMAINING ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT (EFF. 01/0112006): 11,230:28 ,,, 2. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR (2005/2006): 2,308.45 3. SUBTOTAL: 13,538.73 _ 4. BOND CALL PREMIUM: 0.00- ' 5.ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR BOND CALL AND LIEN RELEASE {City time): 53.16 ~.,' 8: LIEN RELEASE 11.00 7. CREDIT TO RESERVE: 0.00 8. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT: 0.00 ~''.:; 9. INTEREST DUE TO NEXT BOND CALL: 537.90 t. 10.TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0. 93-1 ASSESSMENT N0. 1087 PAYOFF COST $14,140.79 r - B. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1086 PAYOFF CALCULATION ' 1. REMAINING ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT (EFF. 01/01!2006): 10,983.47 2. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR (2005/2006): 2;257.71 3. SUBTOTAL: 13,241.18 4. BOND CALL PREMIUM: 0.00 5:ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR BOND CALL AND UEN RELEASE {City time): 53.16 B. LIEN RELEASE 11;00 7. CREDIT TO RESERVE: 0.00 B.ADMINISTRATIVERDJUSTMENT: 0.00 9. INTEREST DUE TO NEXT BOND CALL: 526.08 10.TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1088 PAYOFF COST $13,831.42 C. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NQ. 93-0 ASSESSMENT NO. 1089 PAYOFF CALCULATION 1. REMAINING ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT (EFF. 01/01/2006}: 4,812.98 2. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR (200512006): 989.33 3. SUBTOTAL: 5,802.31 4. BOND CALL PREMIUM: 0.00 ~' 5.ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR BOND CALL AND LIEN RELEASE (City time): 53.16 6. LIEN RELEASE 11.00 7. CREDIT TO RESERVE: 0.00 !~ B.ADMINISTRATIVEADJUSTMENT: 0.00 9. INTEREST DUE TO NEXT 80ND CALL: 230.53 10.TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1089 PAYOFF COST $6,097.00 !, D. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1090 PAYOFF CALCULATION 1. REMAINING ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT (EFF. 01!01!2006): 61.71 2. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR (2005/2006): 12.68 > 3.SUBTOTAL: 74.39 4. BOND CALL PREMIUM: -- 0:00 5.ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR BOND CALL AND LIEN RELEASE{City time): 53.16 6. LIEN RELEASE 11.00 7. CREDIT TO RESERVE: 0.00 S.ADMINISTRATIVERDJUSTMENT: 0.00 9. INTEREST DUE TO NEXT BOND CALL: 2.96 1D.TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0. 93-1 ASSESSMENT Np. 1090 PAYOFF COST f,`. , $141.51 2967063 B-III-1 09!1912005 i, I "-~ - EXHIBIT B TABLE B-Ilf ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.05-1 COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA PAYOFF CALCULATION FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.93-1 ASSESSMENTS NOS. 1087 THROUGH 1091 AND 1093 THROUGH 1101 .ASSESSMENT PAYOFF DESCRIPTION DETAILS E. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1091 PAYOFF CALCULATION j 1: REMAINING ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT{EFF. 01101!2006): 1,048.99 i.'-_ 2. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR (2005/2006}: 215.62 3. SUBTOTAL: 1,264.61 4. BOND CALL PREMIUM: 0.00 5.ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR BOND CALL AND LIEN RELEASE (City time}: 16 53 .. 6. LIEN RELEASE: . 11.00 7. CREDIT TO RESERVE: 0.00 S.ADMINISTRATIVEAbJUSTMENT: O,Op 9.INTEREST DUE TO NEXT BOND CALL: ' 50.25 i 10. TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0. 93-1 ASSESSMENT N0. 1091 PAYOFF COST $1,379.02 F. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1093 PAYOFF CALCULATION I, 1. REMAINING ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT (EFF. 01101 /2 0 0 6): 11,353.69 2. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR (2005/2006}: 2,333.82 3. SUBTOTAL: 13,687.51 ( 4. BOND CALL PREMIUM: 0.00 5.ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR BOND CALL AND LIEN RELEASE (City time): 53.16 6. LIEN RELEASE: 11:00 7. CREDIT TO RESERVE: 0 00. (j 8.ADMINISTRATIVEADJUSI'MENT: . 0.00 '' 9. INTEREST DUE TO NEXT BOND CALL: 543.81 10. TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRIGT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1093 PAYOFF COST $14,295.48 i ~ G. ASSESSMENT DISTRIGT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1094 PAYOFF CALCULATION 1. REMAINING ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT (EFF. 01/01/2006): 10,860.06 2. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR (20D5/2006}: 2,232.34 3. SUBTOTAL: 13,092.40 4. BOND CALL PREMIUM: 0.00 - 5.ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR BOND CALL AND LIEN RELEASE {City time): 53.16 6. LIEN RELEASE: 11.00 7. CREDIT TO RESERVE: 0.00 ~~ 8.ADMINISTRATIVEADJUSTMENT: 0.00 9. INTEREST DUE TO NEXT BOND CALL: 520.17 10. TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1094 PAYOFF COST $13,676.73 H. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1095 PAYOFF CALCULATION 1. REMAINING ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT (EFF. 01(01!2006): 10,921.76 2. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR (2005!2006): 2,245.03 3. SUBTOTAL: 13,166.79 4. BOND CALL PREMIUM: 0.00 5. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR BOND CALL AND LIEN RELEASE (city time): 53.16. 6. LIEN RELEASE: 11.00 ,i 7.CREDITTORESERVE: 0.00 8. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT: 0.00 9. INTEREST DUE TO NEXT BOND CALL: 523.12 10.TOTALA5SESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1095 PAYOFF COST $13,754.07 2967083 6-III-2 09/19/2005 EXHIBIT B TABLE B-III. ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.05-1 COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA PAYOFF CALCULATION FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT fUO.93-1 ASSESSMENTS NOS. 1087 THROUGH 1091 AND 1093 THROUGH 1101 ASSESSMENT PAYOFF DESCRIPTION DETAILS 1. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1096 PAYOFF CALCULATION '.`'` . 1. REMAINING ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT (EFF. 01!0112006}; g,g3q,48 2. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR (2005!2006}: 2,042.09 3. SUBTOTAL 11,976.57 4. BOND CALL PREMIUM: 0 00 I ? S.ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR BOND CALL AND LIEN RELEASE (City time): . 53.16 `! 6. LIEN RELEASE: 11.00 7. CREDIT TO RESERVE: 0.00 S.ADMINISTRATIVEAD1USTMENT: 0.00 9.INTEREST DUE TO NEXT BOND CALL: 475.83 10.TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO: 1096 PAYOFF COST $12,516:56 J. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-i ASSESSMENT NO. 1097. PAYOFF CALCULATION 1: REMAINING ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT (EFF. 01/01/2006}: 3,517.18 2. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR (2005/2006}: 722,87 3. SUBTOTAL: 4,240.15 ~ 4. BOND CALL PREMIUM: 0.00 5:ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR BOND CALL AND LIEN RELEASE (City time): 53.16 E 6. LIENREIEASE: 11.:00 7. CREDIT TO RESERVE: 0.00 8.ADMINISTRATIVEADJUSTMENT: 0.00 9. INTEREST DUE TO NEXT BOND CALL 168.46 10. TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1097 PAYOFF COST $4,472.77 K: ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1098 PAYOFF CALCULATION 1. REMAINING ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT (EFF. 01 /0 112 0 0 6): 15,487.92 2. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR (2005/2006}; 3,183.63 3. SUBTOTAL• 18,671.55 4. BOND CALL PREMIUM: 0.00. 5.ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR BOND CALL AND LIEN RELEASE (City time}: .53.16 6. LIEN RELEASE: 11.00 7. CREDIT TO RESERVE: 0.00 8. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT: 0.00 9. INTEREST DUE TO NEXT BOND CALL: 741.83 10. TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1098 PAYOFF COST $19,477.54 L. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1099 PAYOFF CALCULATION ` 1. REMAINING ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT (EFF. 01101/2006): 7,1.57.76 2. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR (2005/20D6}: 1,471.32 3. SUBTOTAL: 8,629.08 4. BONG CALL PREMIUM: O,Op 5.ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR BOND CALL AND LIEN RELEASE (City time): 53.16 6. LIEN RELEASE: 11.00 7. CREDIT TO RESERVE: 0.00 8. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT: 0.00 9. INTEREST DUE TO NEXT BOND CALL: 342,84 10.TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1099 PAYOFF. COST $9,036.08 29670B3 B-III-3 09/19/2005 ;;';; EXHIBIT B TABLE B-111 ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT , GOUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF GALIFORNIr PAYOFF CALCULATION FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRIC ASSESSMENTS NOS. 1087 THROUGH 1091 AND 1093 TH NO. 05-1 T N0.93-1 !ROUGH 1101 _ ASSESSMENT PAYOFF DETAILS ~ULATION M. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1100 PAYOFF CALF 1. REMAINING ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT (EFF. 01!01/2006): 2. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR {2005/2006): 3. SUBTOTAL: 4. BOND CALLPREMIUM: S.ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR BOND GALLAND LIEN RELEASE (City time): 6. LIEN RELEASE: 7. CREDIT TO RESERVE: 8. ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT: 9.INTEREST DUE TO NEXT BOND GALL: 10.TOTALASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1100 PAYOFF 14,624.05 3,006.06 17,630.11 0.00 53.16 11.00 0.00 0.00 700.45 ;OST $18,394.72 N. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1101 PAYOFF GALCUL ATION 1: REMAINING ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL AMOUNT {EFF. 01I01l2006): 14,377.23 2. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT FOR THE CURRENT TAX YEAR (200512006): 2,955.32 3. SUBTOTAL: 17,332.55 4. BOND CALL PREMIUM: 0.00 5. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR BOND CALL AND LIEN RELEASE {City time}: - 53.16 8. LIEN RELEASE: 11.00 7. CREDIT.TO RESERVE: 0.00. 8.ADMINISTRATIVERDJUSTMENT: 0.00 9. INTEREST DUE TO NEXT BOND CALL: 688.63 tO.TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENT NO. 1101 PAYOFF COS $18,085.34 O. TOTAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.93.1 ASSESSMENTS $759,299.03 NOS. 1087 THROUGH 1091 AND 1093 THROUGH 1.101 PAYOFF COST NOTES: (a) PAYOFF CALCULATION DATA SHOWN /S AS PROVIDED BY THE CITY FINANCE DEPARTMENT. (b) THE AMOUNTS SHOWN IN THIS TABLE REPRESENT'THE TOTAL AMOUNT NEEDED TO BE PAtD IN O, DER TO CLEAR THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 ASSESSMENTS NOS. 90871'HROUGH 1091 AND 1093 THROUGH t `Ol GEN. 2967063 B-III-4 09/19/2005 EXHIBIT C Consolidated Tabulation of Parcel Assessment;Data - Details of City in the Hills Estimated Assessment .Reallocations . for Proposed Development per. City Code Section 13.08.070 :TABLE C-III Details of City in the Hills Estimated Benefit Assessment Allocations for Proposed Development TABLE C-IV Comparison of City in the Hills Benefit Assessment Allocation and Assessment Reallocation per City Code Section 13.08.070 r' ~." I:. I o e E-!. za U i E ~ O w N LL f N~ 1 Oti b Q J gzLL fIS KNF S y~ mJ W Q NWF LL ~ ~~ Wa~ F SOW Y F W y O 0 I W W a? W ~ WOy~ 1 TO ~ ° N U Z U i I_ i;_ LY91 x m r ~ s ~ ~ t y O~ rv P m .. ~ 4 N m L ~~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ m O~ ° N ~ rv rv n Ni Zp Z° Q !O y ~ l n u m ~ ~ ~i} ~ p Y O q A T- ~ ~ .'@i '7m' q q Li ~ 'Te ~ ~ ~ ° m ~. m R ~ v^i ~U _ _ ~ Y Q .S ~ 0 ~ 0 ° ~, a 2 ~° 0 0 ~v~$4 YGYL` ~3 °(°1 ~ ~ x _ N e ~ ~ z i ~vo v n m $ ~ a rv ~ a ~ ~ - . $ M¢V ~ . m°~ T 6 a g~a~ _ ~ m m _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o Q~ ~ s a ~ ~ R ~ R ~ ~ o ~ `e ~ a "` $ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° n e ~ °~ m n m g e5 w ~ ' o£ O K _Z 3 ~ ~~ "~ ~ F F e n a C '^ q ti -S '^ m o 8 o~ ua ° N rL ~ ~ q i e J ~ ~ w Y f m u ~ -~ n o H=o wig m~ ° ° =r 00o z gm°~. J w~=o 6 ~^ zzz ° ° ~=o wa ~ zi'^ ° J ore wp zzZ°~ ~ o=o jgiF_ w o== Z=m~o _ ~ ow gow " ~ um mo ' o=~ iOm_e 3 ow wp~°n °z z a ~ o d zz§z o d a z z ~ io 6 n z ~ z o o owz~ 0~6 z o~rc oid oW oq g s~ -' d z^ ~~ d z' 0°6 w za'z o do wi ' ~ ~~v s ?~4° ~~ u i p o ~~&°~ w g ~md n~ a z~Es+~s og z'z i^; zmn ?~a~y zm z~S^^~ z z~$ng mz s 6 ?~4~~ S zz ?~n~z°°. ~i ° ° , wllu~ pJpS°m t[ ~ W ~ °ojo $~y ~ $ w~ ^ O~ YJ $O$wW Q~ R wu {~ y O~ ~ °Vru Og ^~U ° °mw~ O~ p 4JnVryq ~l OL y2 VQq' Y '2 QjmUW ~~ QzJmV< ~ a QOp~ p y~ p 40~4 q q od4 O~q p y p y o6 ~ I K ± ~ 6 q ~ < 6' QdK < ~ao~ .. 6 d 3 O OT O~ 6z° O° Oa O ° 0 + Om O OZ° wOZ 6 C ZG FQ ` K2q O °a m4'm' Oe ~ m1'4 Oq F 2~ ° a 2 ~ Oa° F- m4 O ~ Z4° Oo° 2~ O'~ 4 o s Za O~ a Z¢ Om Fa ~ f. rc.- rc4 m ¢~ a~ ¢4~ ~ c43 z - n ~ o O4 a^ ^ a4 a4 n5Z a4 ¢^ n m 4 .°~ a4 rc u i d 4Z ~ .„ ., . m .. m m O w ~~~o ~~ 8~~~~ ~~~~~ ~$~ss '»z~ ~s;ss ~~ssLL ~~~ °s i~~~u 5353 Z ~F~FG o ag~~~ ~NrfYu r Y w W $ $- $ a - a ~ a ~ E ~ $ ~ m ~ s % <` $ s a o ° - - R ~ $. - - 5 $. 6 e ... ~ o m A $ ~ e ~ .. g } R $ 4 8 5- R F X A 8 ~ n ~~ a a ow ~ k 5 S ~ ~ ~ ~ X ~ .3 N o B & ~ ~oO ~ & ~ ~ F °m i 9 $ ~ .~ ~ m' dg ~ $ a S „ ~ IpP & a S SS X ~ $$ F ~ R R 9-' b ~ EQ q$ ` ' Y ~ g o .ag3 ~ 6 6 ey m .. ~ ~ ~ i ~ hw ~ ^ $ ~ 9~E € e s 8 d ~ 8 $ e & 8 H ~ $ 8 $ Uq3q»a;*~ A~~~; ° ~ ~ a` - ~ $ $ $ 8 $ 8 $ 8, 0 8 8 8e 8a $ ~ o ~ ~a C O ~~ $ ~ $ ~ ggq ~ ~ F F ~ R R ~ m ~ ~ a ~ II II 9 € g Ng ~ ® z_°.~D~S ~ n ~ .. ~ G ~ S 8 8 5$~~~ a ~~t~ ~ `a ? E & F i ~ ~ s R ~ ~ ~ _ $ ~ a 3 $ w ~ z~-„W~el _ .R a ~ ? ~ $ -~ I ~ 5~ ~~~F¢~8 a ~ x ~ `e ~. ~ a a a ~<Go~~E ~ ~ s s K F ~ s o _ °«go° : ~ s~3i~ f po=~ e " ~ m a a c ~ ~ ~ c $ ~ ~ a $ ~as~ w s _t s ~ r g ,~ a ~ s _ ~ ~ 3 s' ~~ ~ x ~ ~ s E § m - ; ~ x s s ~ a $ q c 9 s A "s m ~ ~ 55 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F r ~ ~ 8 8 s 7 ~ > F _ ~~E~' ~~€~~ n qmq ~ $ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ @ E $ a g $ w S ~g; J B r .. s .. e s 8 e O Fn¢{6 T c~~ih pwor. . ~' C. ~ W ~ $ $ $ ~ $ $ ~ 8 ~ ,. ~ _ ~ .. $ .. 'B .. tl ~ ~ E' 8 c' a y., ~a ~ ~ _ E ~ - z _ ~ e c ~ aw~ ~~ $ ~ ~ s a ~ A x. -o°ao p ~ ., ., ~° °~9 . x ,. ~ n ~ s 9 R $ ~+ ~ p°~as v ~ ~ ~, _ ~ ~» ~ t, C q N ~ ~ ~ 3 m ~ ~ _x = o ' 3R ~°oo° - ~~°~=s a ~ ~~~ ~= p zs ~g~s- = Fr ~oo° s ~e .zo ~:~_= ~ a - LL §$:S" ~ 9o s, LL R '4°°:°_ ~ae~Q ' 'a .. ~y E °5 _ S~ gs €m< ~cm" ~ pp ~F~az ~"'po F3z ~ °o f~ ~ d iF s ~ triF~ig z < ~iF4i za n s F °iw¢3` £~ '1 ¢zii$ °iwE_ Fe°C _ 9 C3` ~i i D g ' ° ' ' °~ ~ ° ° ya " 3 °<aa 'oag ~< g~ 'a &8 ` 9a s .~ gg ~$ ~` a_°~ g ` a ~ ~a :i a `~ x a ~ gac.~~ i 3~'9$ ~g ~ a tl a~ ~ 6g a ~~ Aaa ~~ ~~ ja ~a ~: g ~ $~ : o ma ~~ ~~ og ~S ¢g° ~$Y w aa i o$ " ~ °~ gq$ ~ .8 Ft¢ g Fd y3 y3 p ^~ Fg g Fd 9~ C~ C~ ~ ~ q ~ b F9 d 4 '~ i0 ] Fd Fd 5jy ~''~ $1 04 ~ i3 oV o4 o i° iP u^' ¢ S iL1 6 Wa° is B p ~$ gs °1q' z ~ ~ 2~ F Qy. ~° °a E s a i v 1 ~`! t L' °,:i F z ~ VO, i h ~~ o o i ® ~ a EW ~~ ~ ~ '~~ ~~ o woo 9g a.. ~ ~~ o0 ~O o" K V v ¢ n r,; ~ Ls w e f ~6ps w aR~ ~~ ~ s ~ mR B ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ 3 3 ~ g~ 2 2 ~~ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 } i 3. 3 3 3 X3 3 3 3 4-g 8 } C y R ~ 8 8 X Q yV _- y 8 ° 8 .fin ~ ~ 8 - ~ ~ ~ .~°. _ ~ m R v ~ A $ ~ R pp gO~ g ° 3 R p $ g y u'f A{ gg F F g~ C yi s R p ~ d ~ S R - _ R C b' $~ S H f n~ a pp ~g4 5 FF ~ S ~E/ q6 ~ ` S x ° 6 $ 8 ° ° $ $ ~«,~ xis.. R a m ~ ~ '~~s a ~~~ g "g~? sy~~ ~ fl. & j qnE u~ g 3 $ $ 8 8 S °e ~ 8 $ $ ~ 8 8 e; ~ 8 $ $ ~ S$ $$ 8 8 e ~ e ~ 8 8 B e e e $ e $ $ ~3 ~ 6§ ~e~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m. a ~ ~ 6 8 Y ~~b°S$@~ $-i ~'~d A R n ~ p ~~ F€ ~ S ~ A = R 8 R .. ~ S - $ € gg - - -~~' a s a x aFuB~ ~ ~ -°~ ~ a ~ aRC ~ ~ ~ a 9 $2: ~ S 8 ~ ~ zfr; ~ ~ = = e s ° ac ~ s q~o~ a ~ ~~ a aaa s s'a~ F as a ~ $$~ ~m~~~t ° ~ R $ 3 ~% S 8 Ry ~ - A s~ s @ A w a s ~~ 3 S, ~ g ~ E~~ $ ~ ff . a 3 R 77 ~ 33 p 5~ ~~5 $ ddd~ oR~ 3 ~ $ ~ x e ~ ~ S R ° gr ~ ~ R ~ _ ffi P e ° Yi R ~ Y ~ B ~$p° ss a ~~~~ ~ x $ 3S~ R AC $ ~g 3 a sg R R 8 x,. °x ~` xAa 4€'~° s6$$ X o C 8 ~ 0 ~ ~ 55 R C ~ R p ~i ~ a - 3 9_ _ - 5 q p ~ - $ s a- ~ Y q € z~~~$~ § R~ s ~ ~.9 a ~< l ac a ~ g ad ° ~$gg ° - ~" ~~ 7 . ~ 8 A S ~ $ A ~ - R F C ~ - €~_u- AG~ @$^ zuS w & 8 ^ ~ # g m 3 ~ 3 3 3? 3 3 3 i ~ 3 w W 8~ g ~ - R ~ C G t° 9 F R R 6 S o § § $a S q y y ~ k C'~°' g g 4 K Kp ~ a qq y~ 4 ~ ~~_ ~ .~~ ~ ~ g ~ _ ~5~ ~ € a ~~ ~ ~ 5 z '< ~ ~ z <-~ ~ < Y ~ a ° ~o J ~ E ~ ~ w 9 ~ ::, o z 3 3 ~ ~~ ~ 9 ~ 5 ~ g 9 ~F ~ ~ _ ~~ ~ ~ $ ` ~ A g ~ c 8 ~ g a ~ a F 8 gsg ~ ~ W an~ ~~ a< ~ c3~g aa> g ~~ ffi ~z _ R~ - 2 ,. ~ Q R a 8 I I i ~~_ (" ~ '. ~ o o 0 4 Z QO /(~ ]O ro~ =Q 0 ~m ~~ ~' ° „e~ ~; (, ~o<e fl ~z ~~ > F v 0 v F w9~ a a ~ m a $ a m ~ s ® ~ s & e e ~ ~ a ~. R ~ ~ ~' p ~ $ i ~ ~ Q ~ a m R 3 ~ a _ ~ ~ ~ .9 % .5 W < ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ @ ~ a` 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ c F ~ - ~. s, a ~ ~ = s a a " a ~ a. v s ~ a ~ - ~ ~ s ~ P ~ @ e "a A c Fy~`ri ''~ 3 R ~ ~ 0 i rt tt a^ 'hn ° 4i ~ ~i. R a ~s"3 z _ _ ~ _ a Q x _ a % ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ® ~ g g s o ~ e e s ° e ~ gQ ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~` 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y ffi 7 ~ z c ~e~ ~~ s a a a a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $~ e $ 5 d ~ ~ ~ a @ e a 8- $ $ $ ~ 8 e ~ o $ 8 o a ~~~ 6 ~ g Oa~i 5 e R'rv 0 R S S ry 6 N ~ $ t ° ~ ~' q $ °.9 . a =Q$~'~ U YWC d R S $ ~ S '. '^ e ~ a R 8 ~ ~a ~ r E $ ~ ~ ~ ? a E .. °a e o Wy~~'ST 8 E. d $ ~ N ~ rOm J! ~ p k ~ d S d S ~ h` '~ ~ 0 - F ~ ® $ ~ G C $ L 8 p 7 yp ° c 3 x aw~ 3~ a e a m _ s - ~ x s~~~~f €'° aoF~$g a ~ m - ~ a a a q ~ - ~ 5 ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s n s ~ ~ x - ~ 7 - ~ . ~ _ m _ ~ _ ~ sa=~~~ ~~ s ~ a. x 'a s a ~ a ~ s ~ s a s ~ws~ ~ # ~ ~ ~ R ~ S a R A $ x ~ ° g4}g q~~ps lac 55~ ~ ¢~C ~. 3 a d ~ G ~ ~ ~ ~ p ~. P A. i ~ a 8 ~ n S c ~ - ~ e. ~ .$ ~ g A gna~w~{ ~ R A _ '„ AI !5 3 & S .. n X _ S S F4nE K~~ _ . g ~~ 3~ S ~ ~ '~ ~ A ~ yp ~ ~ - 8 $ 9 p 55 ~ ~ ~ S ~ . t=~~~g B ~ s 9 m ~ A :~ a °z oSw ~ n .. G ~ ~ 'g-. ~ F ~ ~ .. P z 3 < R 8 '3 ~ & r~ A B ~ g ~ ~ ~ggQO QQ a =s ~ =E~~o wa8 s ~{ ~_ ~ ~z"~o ~~'~5 go 'g~`s 9~ ~ ~. .~ ~g ~.. ~o 8zs ash - ~' ~°€9s' .. ~" .. t` ( ~g~ 3~F=Z ~ ~S ~ Fg~_x 0 4` x ~ ~L i tCC zGypa2 o ~< z ` ~ g ' cq z~ H zp 9 F~~z ~rq~ab Q D ~ 9 ~ ~ Ri ? °$ a ~ ~ ~9~. ~ ~5~ € ° ~ 'i ~ s3s- -~ c `~ ~° $ F g 3 o3Syw O ¢ ~ g -~ i ~ ~m ° 4 a $~~ W .+ Ge w< ~ 8 ° ~a W 2 ~ o ° oa od ~' oa oa ~$ a ~ ~ $ ~z ~ 3 c z ~ ~~ a ~ g 6 i n S ` ` oc go ~ oo ~ 08 f ~z a~ ~ 4 o. ~ ~ „z ` ~ ° " ' g ~ o : ~a ~g ~o ~ ~ ~ ~ rc S :~ < E~ 59 ~~ ` F~. ~ 5~ 5 $ 00 9 ~ s ~ v ~4 °B ~s ~ ~R ~q gp oA A }~ 04 8° 3 q ~ a~ u'S F ~ ~. g . 5 n° O Vl 0 U ("I! G N ~/- W V o U o K a a Urc JzO F ~ J H = ~.'.:~ N ~ ~oU U ~O a w O ? U ~ W ~ W i rti Gl W ~Wr to W F' ~ U Z = m W W ~ x u i p~ W~ Z a k z N <'JWy Wy W rn0 4d wh ~Z ¢= Od m U Z LL U O O y F U U Oj a Z W h W N N d f w m RLI~ ~. W b t~ tD O 0 N N OO N O N N O M1 - m F A_ O f O O A O Z ~ ° r° a O N T { y OI O O y O O 0 ~ p1 ® ly O N 0 N P N n w ¢wv i o R _ _ ¢ a ~ LL a~ J ~ Z Z aLL O WUW OZ'R 0 0 On l9 b h W N V m O ~ yW~. m- V- m! 0 47 m !'! mr. m b~ O m m P ' ~' N ~ O q WO d W¢ O m 4 < 0 < V 0 !) YI N N N m N m IN m 10 In , ~ VS ~ N y C! h m N ~ N ~ N ~ Z W LL W J aLL 2 O y Y m N S 0 N N p 1 0 ~ Vml 0 A W N W Im. MI q O 2 r rO N W lNn y 0 0 y t7 N y P " 0 ~" ~ j a yy N ~ m IA N H Q n A O O A W A m W ¢NLLr Z OZ U N ~ ~ A ~ . O m 0 ~ q m ~ V P N ~ ~ ~ N m ~ u a .o- ~ ~ m ~ _ O ~ m N 4 q K W h N n ' N ? IF+ N Ia+. !p. N W N (m9 N @ 0 n O z r O m VN1 r N tiff m. yd~ V( q m h o ['! c tNV d N .r O ~ o O `c Y0I of N w ~ ri b n, c O W¢ O Q O1 N M m m •- N t,! !~ Nm !'~ ^ F m C~ O m 0 m W 0 y_ y CI F n ym in _ A ry m f m Z W O < N N O p1 f N N m J O 4 V N r Ypj n O 1.. ry N~ N 1+ q W N O O O ° m Q W O ° ~ N 1D p N ~ 6 A 1~ •- N ~ V d ~ O~ mN m M 0 O m O a7 n O fp tV p O. p' OO p- ~ q D~ n H rn ~ M v ~ m .S u°'i r `8 n a rn E of o N .S v m m m ~ n °r Z VO 'N N vl N b' J ~tt~ maw N a N K' W Noaaw w o of n ai m h w n u1pi v m .r n ui Q m P- of ^ b R m ~ 'v i° a' m d m a ° d n e ,~[ ¢ c > ~JZ wo-.¢ z ''z a W UN~ mW- ~ t~ N F m n N N ~ W b N N W n ~ H gi a yuro ~° ° ° 3 a ~ Q w z z W• ° n W m 0 0 ~ N W O O N p h m r p O ~ wU ~ ~ n fO d ~ r .ems m m n. 'H m a gg 2 < _a a Q¢ z z aNm 2m~ Z Z mn 2 m mn O n 2 r'JO W rfJlo ~~ rN9 ~ O NO Wp N p ' Z ~ WaU, `_ Z- WU" ZW~ WU W WU Z a U" Z WU~ Z C . l r Z R' W~ Um O Z a W~ U•- ZW.-. WUm Z a_ ~- E,Zp ''az ~x0 z a TKO r¢z ~¢O r¢z iy > x0 z ~~O r z . W > U O ~ ~i o mod.- Z W W O ~~ ~ O W m "' z a w O w JWa a~ ma O a¢ mW O a o ¢ as Na Ona O z ao_ Q °'~ < > O az Wa N °'^ > O c ~¢~_ W W d p~p°~ ¢ZJ oo~ NJ ao~ ¢NJ OOoh ¢mJ " ~ a O~ J ~°¢ QN~ J ~ ~ < O~ j N -- oz y ~ ~ OE Z W 002 ¢tl1 e m .. ~ a O U W O~~ W 6U W W Z~U W W ZU Z O W2W ZOU - W2W ZOV O b x N ZW OU Z WOW Z U ~ .. NJ ZW U O iO Za O~ V ~ ~ ~. J W ~V 4' WZ¢ ZOf e' c O d. y O > m W -r Jdx _ ~ F¢ . x Jr,Q Jr~ OU' 27 rx 6 p UW¢ m O Z O ~K a O r KW p_ O°' G ~'~ J~J O~ a p r 2 d ~ ° Oad' 006 z ~~n. z op2 z ~ ~ W FOa ~ Z Z a O z A.. a¢ Z Z tiz pn r w 00o ZD Fz w K LL W z_ pp Ja Ja a U a2 °Z Ua R2 VP O a Z ° ~ 2 mV,O O .Or Ne Zp~ -pJ `- mv ZmpF 'f Q LL'r F~ nP U a0 Nn NQO m ~ Wn O Q Q'Z ¢ Va J W m d' m0 a 2m¢ m4 O ~•- Z W Ol f Z 'W FOZ ~ry ¢ U ~4 OZ QO iAZ Wf/! o Q u5 F~ W2 ~ Q r WZ ~ U tL F~ WZ ~0 ..a a.- F. •- F Z O h DO J OJ Q O O JOQ jO ¢ O JO G Q ~W O a ~ O¢ Op K o O p Z N N J~„ ~J~ ~~ J M 4 LL N ° ~2 21 O ~~ O ~W ` d W~ p p V-W Z z ° 4 ° ° o ~ ° ° oN ? ° ~ 4 S~ 4 ~ oy ~ LL. K O ZW h•' Y N~ O hm V Nm e q NN W 1nV : °° min d yyW VWI N< U NLLNa N ~ WN NN m h o~ NW Q W' > a W W WZ WZ ¢W ¢ Z W ¢. W aaN ¢ LL ¢W LL 9 ¢¢N. ¢ Z W w ¢¢N d U' $ m ZQ Za. ZQ Z4 WG Z ZQ W Zq W Z N W Za Z4 W ~ ~ ¢ r ~ m ~ a ~ ~ g ~ O d O O d O W ~ a O O 6 J a O ~ ¢ O n ~ J d O d. rc O d 4 s F F F F h ~o ~ m V O N m O n O m m O O O F NZ N O N O U 0 N EXHIBIT D ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO: OS-I (CITY IN THE HILLS) DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT SPREAD METHOD INTRODUCTION The City Council appointed the Director of Public Works as the Engineer of Work for AD 0: ~-1 by adoption of Resolution of Intention No. 1384 on May 25, 2005. Also on May 25, the City Cl ~uncil approved Agreement No. OS-187 with Edward J. Wilson, a Registered Civil Engineer, appoi 7tmg him as the Assessment Engineer for AD OS-1. The Assessment Engineer has been retained b, -the City to prepare an Engineer's Report on the proposed assessment that will include, in pare an analysis of the facts in AD OS-1 and the development of a method of apportioning the total ame unt of the costs and expenses of the proposed improvement acquisitions to the parcels and lots locG ted within AD OS-1. The assessments are apportioned pursuant to the provisions of Municipal Cl 'de Section 13.08.070 and according to the Reallocation Method proposed by the District Proponent a nd approved by the City Director of Public Works, as described in this Engineer's Report Exhibit . ~~ Description of Assessment Spread Method. AD OS-1 has been formed pursuant to a petition signed by the District Proponent as the owner c mare than 60% of the AD OS-1 property proposed to be assessed, requesting the City Gouncil tc waive further proceedings under Division 4 of the Streets and Highways Code and to undertake proceedings pursuant to the 1913 Act and to the provisions of Municipal Code Section 13.08.070. The petition is on file with the City Clerk and was accepted on May 25, 2005, when the City Council adopted its Resolu5on No. 110-05, "Resolution Accepting Petition and Determining to Undertake Special Assessment Proceedings." ASSESSMENT DISTRICTPURPOSE AD OS-1 has been formed for the purpose of financing the estimated total cost for City acquisition of certain public improvements within the AD OS-1 City in the Hills community area, which is described in Section I of the AD OS-1 Engineer's Report. A detailed description of the proposed Improvement Acquisitions is presented in Engineer's Report Section II. The AD OS-1 proceedings will confirm an assessment for the estimated total cost of the improvements to be acquired pursuant to the 1913 Act and to the Municipal Code. The City proposes to issue bonds under the 1915 Act, secured by the unpaid assessments, to pay the costs to acquire the improvements and pay all incidental costs and expenses related thereto and authorized for funding by the 1913 Act. 29670PerExitibitD.wpd D-1. 10/25/05 AUTHORIZATION FOR ASSESSMENT REALLOCATIONS As stated- above, the petition filed by the District Proponent requests that the AD OS-1 assessment be spread to the assessed properties in the manner set forth in Municipal Code Section 13.08. ©7ll-Benefit Spread The City Council has approved that request by the adoption of its referenced Resolution No: 110-05, and in accordance with that resolutionthe AD OS-1 assessment will be spread pursuant to the 1913 Act and to the Municipal Code. Under the 1913 Act, parcel assessment shares are allocated among the benefited parcels of land in the assessment district in proportion to the estimated benefit each parcel can be expected to receive from the work and improvements covered by the assessment. Municipal Code Section 13.08.070 authorizes the "reallocation" to alternate properties of assessments initially allocated to parcels im proportion to their estimated benefit (i.e., initial allocation made in accordance with the 1913 Act benefit/cost requirement and that benefit/cost share is reallocated to the other pazcels that may or may not be directly benefited by the improvements funded in the assessment). The AD OS-1 individual parcel assessment amounts shown on Engineer's Report Exhibit A, Assessment Roll, have been calculated ("spread") among the assessed pazcels pursuant to Municipal Code Section 13.08.070. The Alternate Method used by the Assessment Engineer to reallocate the benefit based assessment shazes initially allocated by the Assessment Engineer to each AD OS-1 assessed pazcel has been provided to the Engineer of Work by the District Proponent and is hereafter referred to as the "Reallocation Method." In light of the fact that the AD OS-1 parcel assessments have been spread using the Reallocation Method proposed by the District Proponent, it is the intent of the AD OS-1 Assessment Engineer in preparing this Engineer's Report Exhibit D to present information and data an the Reallocation Method and on the Benefit/Cost Based Method for allocation of assessments. The' objective of this effort is to present a compazative analysis of the Benefit/Cost Based Method to the Reallocation Method of assessment spread that will provide sufficient background information for the City Council to reference in making a determination on whether the proposed Assessment Reallocation Method is in conformance with Municipal Code Section 13.08.070, and for them to further determine whether the Assessment Reallocation Method will be implemented as the confirmed "Assessment Spread Method" for AD OS-1. Accordingly, descriptions and assessment spread calculations are presented in the following sections of this Exhibit D of the Reallocation Method of assessment spread proposed by the District Proponent and of the BenefitlCost Based Assessment Spread Method developed by the Assessment Engineer. Those descriptions and assessment calculation results aze followed by a comparison of the parcel assessments calculated using each method. A statement of findings as to whether the proposed Reallocation Method is in conformance with the criteria set forth in Municipal Code Section 13.08.070 is then presented at the end of Exhibit D to complete the evaluation of that allocation procedure. The text of Municipal Code Section 13.08.070 is presented below for reference to facilitate the description of the proposed Reallocation Method. 29670PerExktibitD.wpd D-2 10/25/05 Municipal Code Section 13.08.070-Beneft Spread A. In special assessment proceedings conducted by the City of Bakersfield pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 {Sections 10000 and following, California Streets and Highways Code), as amended from time to time {the "1913 Act"), and notwithstanding any provision of the 1913 Act to the contrary, the City may deternune and implement an alternate method and rate of assessment reallocating assessments to alternate properties. B. Such reallocation may ,occur even though doing so will result in no assessment being levied upon property whichis, in fact; benefited by improvements for which the assessments aze levied and which is determined differently from a direct costJbenefit ratio. C. Such alternate methods and rates of assessment may only be determined and implemented by the City when so requested by the owner of all property to be assessed,. and upon written and recorded consent of the owner of the property to which assessments are reallocated. D. Additionally, such alternate methods and rates of assessment may only be determined and implemented by the City to pay for improvements that beaz a rational nexus to the property to be assessed. DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT REALLOCATION METHOD In accordance with Subsection C of Municipal Code Section 13,08.070 ("Section 13.08.070 (C}"), the District Proponent has submitted a praposed "AD OS-1 Alternate Method and Rate of Assessment" (the "AD OS-1 Reallocation Method") to the Engineer of Work. Also in accordance with Section 13.08.070 (C}, the District Proponent has submitted a written request to the Engineer of Work asking that the proposed AD OS-1 Reallocation Method be implemented for AD OS-1 and further stating that the District Proponent and four other developerslmerchant builders (listed on Exhibit A, Assessment Roll} are the owners of all of the property proposed to be reallocated a share of the AD OS-1 assessment and that they all consent to the reallocation. The Engineer of Work has accepted the proposed method and directed the Assessment Engineer to use the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method for calculating the AD OS-1 parcel assessments. The AD OS-1 Reallocation Method is generally described as: Subject to certain exceptions described below, the total AD OS-1 Improvement Acquisitions cost is spread among the undeveloped parcels within AD OS-1 indirect proportion to parcel acreage and to each planned single-family residential {R-1} lot within those undeveloped parcels as an equal per R-1 lot cost share. The acreage spread exceptions, if any, are described below. 296'70PerExhibitD.wpd D-3 ioi2s~os Summary of the AD OS-I Reallocation Method: The total cost ofthe City Park Land In-lieu and Development Fees is assessed only to the future R-1 lots in Tract No. 6498 (AD OS-1 Assessments Nos. 5 and 6) as anequal-per-R-l-lot chazge. The total combined cost of all other Improvement Acquisitions (street, water, sewer, storm drain, utility etc.) in City Hills Drive, Panorama Drive, Vineland Road, Masterson Street, Paladino Drive, and Canteria Drive is allocated to the I1 undeveloped parcels in AD OS-1 in direct proportion"to their assessable areas, where the assessable aeeas are calculated as the total tractlunit/subdivision azea less the area of the .off-site street right-of--way (City Hills Drive, Panorama Drive, Vineland Road, Masterson Street, Paladino Drive, and Canteria Drive}, and less the areas of the future storm drain sump located west of Canteria Drive in Assessment No. '7 and the future public parks located in Assessments Nos. 5, 8, and 9. Details of the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method: 1. Future Tract No. 6444 (Assessments Nos. 1 through 4} There are no exceptions to the equal cost share per acre and equal cost per planned R-1 lot AD OS-1 Reallocation Method in the composite area covered by Assessments Nos. 1 through 4. All of the AD OS-1 Improvement Acquisitions costs that aze, as described above, first allocated to Assessments Nos. 1 through 4 (also identified as Lots 1 through 4 of Lot Line Adjustment No. OS-0480 ("LLA OS-0480"), respectively) are fiuther reapportioned to Assessments Nos. 1 through 4, as described below. As stated in Engineer's Report Section I, this portion of the AD OS-1 City in the Hills Area has been approved far subdivision into a combined total of 752 R-1 lots, 1 private lodgetrecreation facility lot, and several private hmdscapetpocket pazk lots, as a future "active adult" gated community, pursuant to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6444 ("Ten. TR 6444"), As confirmed by the District Proponent, no phases of Tract No. 6444 ("TR 6444") are planned for recording with the Kern County Recorder prior to confirmation of the AD OS-1 assessment. The merchant buildertdeveloper of TR 6444 (K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Bakersfield, LLC) is developing three lot product types within TR 6444, described as follows: Product Type 1 comprised of all TR 6444 R- I lots with typical lot dimensions of 60 feet ("ft"} by 105 ft (also identified as the "600 Series"); Product Type 2 comprised of all TR 6444 R-1 lots with typical lot dimensions of SO ft by 100 ft (also identified as the "500 Series"); and Product Type 3 comprised of all TR 6444 R-I lots with typical lot dimensions of 43 ft by 83 ft-(also identified as the "300 Series"). The total combined share of the Improvement Acquisitions estimated total cost for Assessments Nos. 1 through 4 is first allocated to each Product-Type Area in direct proportion to the sum of each Product Type Area's R-1 lot net areas; as provided to the Assessment Engineer by the subdivision engineer for TR 6444 (Pinnacle Engineering, Bakersfield, California). After that, each Product Type Area's total allocated share of the Improvement Acquisitions estimated total cost has been apportioned as an equal shaze per planned R-1 lot within the Product Type Area, as described above. Appendix D attached to this Engineer's Report contains a "Location Map Showing Product Type Lot Designation for Tract No. 6444," prepared by Pinnacle Engineering. 29670PerExhibitD.wpd D-4 10l2i/OS The first gait of the first page and the entire second page in Table C-II in Engineer's Report Exhibit C show the total amounts assessed to Assessments Nas. 1 through 4 (TR 6444) in the "Total Assessment" column, followed by the per acre and per R-1 lot or per Equivalent Dwelling Unit ("EDiJ") assessment amounts. Table GI in Exhibit C shows the assessment calculation details for the total amounts allocated to Assessments Nos. I through 4, as calculated using the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method.. 2. Future Tract No. 6498 (Assessments Nos. 5 and 6) There aze no exceptions to the equal cost shaze per acre and equal cost per planned R-1 lot AD OS-1 Reallocation Method in the composite area covered by Assessments Nos. 5 and 6. All of the AD OS-1 Improvement Acquisitions costs that are, as described above, first allocated to Assessments Nos. S and 6 (also identified as Lots 1 and 2 of Lot Line Adjustment No. 05-0550 ("LLA 05-0550"), respectively) are further reapportioned to Assessments Nos. 5 and 6, as described below. As stated in Engineer's Report Section I, this portion of the AD OS-1 City in the Hills Area has been approved for subdivision into a combined total of 421 R-1 lots, 1 public pazk parcel, 1 public recreation azea, and several landscapelpacketpork lots pursuant to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6498 ("Ten. TR 6498"). As confirmed by the District Proponent, no phases of Tract Na. 6498 ("TR 6498") are planned for recordingwith the Kern County Recorder prior to confirmation of the AD OS-1 assessment. The merchant builder/developer of TR 6498 (K. Hovnanian at Rosemary Lantana, LLG) is developing two lot product types within TR 6498, described as the "4000 Series" and as the "5000 series." However, the developer of TR 6498 wants all R-1 lots in both Product Types of TR 6498 assessed an equal AD OS-1 assessment amount. Therefore, the total combined share of the Improvement Acquisitions estimated total cost for Assessments Nos. Sand- 6 is .allocated as an equal share per planned R-1 lot within the entire TR 6498. The first page in Table C-II in Engineer's Report Exhibit C shows the total amounts assessed to Assessments Nos. 5 and 6 (TR 6498) in the "Total Assessment" column, followed by the per acre and per R-1 lot or per EDU assessment amounts. Table C-I in Exhibit C shows the assessment calculation details for the total amounts allocated to Assessments Nos. 5 and 6, as calculated using the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method. 3. Future Tract No..6452 (Assessment No. 7) There are no exceptions to the equal cost share per acre and equal cost per planned R-1 lot AD OS-1 Reallocation Method in the composite area covered by Assessment No. 7. All of the AD OS-1 Improvement Acquisitions costs that are, as described above, first allocated to Assessment No. 7 (also identified as Lot D of Lot Line Adjustment No. OS-1188 ("LLA 05- 1188"}) are apportioned to Assessment No. 7, as described below. As stated in Engineer's Report Section I, this portion of the AD OS-1 City in the Hills Area has been approved for subdivision into a combined total of 181 R-1 lots and several private landscapelpocketpazk lots pursuant to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6452 ("Ten. TR 6452"). As confirmed by the 29S76PerExhibitD.wpd D-5 10/25/05 District Proponent, no phases of Tract No. 6452 ("TR 6452") are planned for recording with the Kern County Recorder prior to confirmation of the AD OS-1 assessment. The District Proponent is developing two lot product types within TR 6452, described as the "60 ft by 100 ft lots" and as the "70 ft by 100 ft lots." However, the District Proponent (being also the developer of TR 6452) wants all R-1 lots in both Product Types of TR 6452 assessed anequal AD OS-1 assessment amount. Therefore; the total share afthe Improvement Acquisitions estimated total cost for Assessment No. 7 is allocated as an equal share per planned R-1 lot within the entire TR 6452. The first page in Table C-II in Engineer's Report Exhibit C shows the total amount assessed to Assessment No. 7 (TR 6452) in the "Total Assessment" column; followed by the per acre and per R-1 lot or per EDU assessment amounts. Table C-I in Exhibit C shows the assessment calculation details for the total amount allocated to Assessment No. 7, as calculated using the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method. 4. Future Tract No. 6406 (Assessments Nos. 8 and 9) There are no exceptions to the equal cost share per acre and equal cost per planned R-1 lot AD OS-1 Reallocation Method in the composite area covered by Assessments Nos. 8 and 9. All of the AD OS-1 Improvement Acquisitions costs that are, as described above, first allocated to Assessments Nos. 8 and 9 (also identified as Lot A of Lot Line Adjustment No. OS-0427 ("LLA OS-0427") and Parcel 5 of Parcel Map No. 11013 ("PM 11013"), respectively} are further reapportioned to Assessments Nos. 8 and 9, as described below.. As stated in Engineer's Report Section I, this portion of the AD OS-1 City in the Hills Area has been approved for subdivision into a combined total of 396 R-1 lots, 1 public park parcel, and several landscapetpocket park lots pursuant to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6406 ("Ten. TR 6406"). As confirmed by the District Proponent, no phases of Tract No. 6406 ("TR 6406"} are planned for recording with the Kern County Recorder prior to confirmation ofthe AD OS-1 assessment. The merchant builder/developer of TR 6406 (D. R Horton Los Angeles Holding Company, Inc.} is developing two lot product types within TR 6406 (no specifics on the TR 6406 have been provided to the Assessment Engineer). However, the developer of TR 6406 wants all R-I lots in both Product Types of TR 6406 assessed an equal AD OS-1 assessment amount. Therefore, the total combined shaze of the Improvement Acquisitions estimated total cost for Assessments Nos. 8 and 9 is allocated as an equal share per planned R-1 lot within the entire TR 6406. The first page in Table C-II in Engineer's Report Exhibit C shows the total amounts assessed to Assessments Nos. 8 and 9 (TR 6406) in the "Total Assessment" column, followed by the per acre and per R-1 lot or per EDU assessment amounts. Table C-I in Exhibit C shows the assessment calculation details for the total amounts allocated to Assessments Nos. 8 and 9, as calculated using the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method. 29670PerExhi6itD.wpd D-6 10/25/05 5. Future Tract No. 6696 (Assessments Nos. 10 and 1 I) There are no exceptions to the equal cost share per acre and equal cost per planned R-1 lot AD OS-1 Reallocation Method in the composite area covered by Assessments Nos. 10 and 11. All of the AD OS-1 Improvement Acquisitions costs that are, as described above, first allocated to Assessments Nos. 10 and 11 (also identified as Lats A and B of LLA OS-1188, respectively} are further reapportioned to Assessments Nos. 10 and 11, as described below. As stated in Engineer's Report Section I, this portion of the AD OS-1 City in the Hills Area is planned for subdivision into a combined total of approximately 200 R-l lots pursuant to aproposed (pending, not approved yet) Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6696 ("Ten. TR 6696"). As confirmed by the District Proponent, no phases of Tract No. 6696 ("TR 6696") are planned for recording with the Kern County Recorder prior to confirmation of the AD OS-1 assessment. The District Proponent is planning to develop and/or sell the TR 6696 lots to merchant builders. However, as no final development plan for TR 6696 exists at this time, the District Proponent (being also the developer of TR b696) wants all R-1 lots in TR 6646 assessed an equal AD OS-1 assessment amount. Therefore, the total share of the Improvement Acquisitions estimated total cost for Assessments Nos. 10 and I 1 is allocated as an equal share per planned R-1 lot within the entire TR 6696. The first page in Table C-II in Engineer's Report Exhibit C shows the total amounts assessed to Assessments Nos. 10 and 11 (TR 6696) in the "Total Assessment" column, followed by the per acre and per R-1 lot or per EDU assessment amounts. Table G-I in Exhibit C shows the assessment calculation details for the total amounts allocated to Assessments Nos. 10 and 11; as calculated using the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method. CALCULATION OF REALLOCATED ASSESSMENTS Engineer's Report Exhibit C includes a table labeled C-II. The table presents the results of the parcel reallocated assessment calculations for each of the five future subdivision tracts (TR 6444, TR 6498, TR 6452, TR 6406, and TR 6696), as described above. The Table C-II Reallocated Assessment spread data has been calculated in accordance with the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method Description presented in the preceding section of this Exhibit D. The subdivision acreages and the number of existing or planned EDU's or R-1 lots for the five subdivision tracts were obtained by reference to the approved and/or pending subdivision tentative maps, and by reference to the AD OS-I Assessment District studies and data prepared by the AD OS-1 Design Engineer and the subdivision engineers for the three merchant builders/developers of TR 6444, TR 6498, and TR 6406. That subdivision acreage and lot data has been used to calculate the reallocated assessment shazes for the proposed subdivisions within the AD OS-1 City in the Hills community area. The C-II table shows the cost share reallocations for the sepazate improvement systems to be acquired that will be spread to each planned subdivision within the community area. Table C-II also shows the AD OS-1 Assessment Proceeding and Bond Issuance Cast share reallocations under the "Assessment Proceedingllssuance Cost" column, and the total amount proposed to be assessed under 29670PerExltibilD.wpd D-7 10/25!05 the "Total Assessment" column. Following the "Total Assessment" column are two columns: one column listing the amount assessed per assessable acre and one column listing the amount assessed per R-I lot or EDU. The net (assessable) acreages are calculated as the total subdivision phase(s) tract area(s) in acres, less the sum of the acres for all storm drain sump lots, public pazks, and off-site street right-of--way, as provided to the Assessment Engineer by the Design Engineer. Table C-I in Engineer's Report Exhibit C consolidates all of the assessment reallocation data presented in Table C-II and provides the assessment data by existing Kern County Assessor's Tax Number ("ATN"} or by parcel description for every existing parcel in AD OS-1. The improvement acquisition cast reallocations are summarized in a single column on Table C-I, because their details are presented in Table C-TI. However, Table C-I itemizes the assessment proceeding and bond issuance cost reallocation amounts in sepazate columns, while those costs "are shown as a total amount in the "Assessment ProceedinglIssuance Cost" column on Table C-II. Since the per acre and per EDU or per R-1 lot assessment. data is shown on Table C-II for each land use area or ATN and for each proposed subdivision, that data is not repeated on Table C-I. The "Confirm,ed Assessment Amount" shown on Exhibit A, Assessment Roll is the amount proposed to be assessed to each pazcel in AD OS-1 and is also the amount shown under the column entitled "Total Assessment" in Table C-I. DESCRIPTION OF BENEFIT/COST BASED ASSESSMENT ALLOCATION METHOD Municipal Code Section 13 A8.070 sets forth several criteria under which the City may "determine and implement" an alternative method of assessment. This section of Exhibit D will present information and data for reference by the City Council in their- deliberations to make a final determination onwhether the proposed AD OS-1 Assessment Reallocation Method is in conformance with Municipal Code Section 13.08.070 and as to whether the proposed AD OS-l Reallocation Method will be implemented as the confirmed "Assessment Spread Method" for AD OS-l. The intended objective in developing the AD OS-1 BenefitlCost Based Assessment Allocation Method (the "AD 05-1 Allocation Method") is to define a cost allocation method that apportions the AD OS-1 costs to each parcel in conformance with the requirements ofthe 1913 Act, which requires that the financed cost in a special assessment proceeding be allocated among the benefited parcels of land in proportion to the estimated benefit each parcel can be expected to receive from the financed work and improvements. It is further intended that the AD OS-1 Allocafion Method be in general conformance with the benefit/cost methods used to spread costs in existing City assessment districts for which a Notice of Assessment was recorded prior to the April 1995 Council adoption of Ordinance No. 3643 adding Section 13.08.070 to the Municipal Code. In accordance with these intended objectives, the AD OS-1 Allocation Method is based on the following: The Categories of Benefit each improvement system provides to the assessment district properties; The Method of Apportioning the improvement system work items and. cost to the various benefit categories; 29670PerExhibitD.wpd D-8 IOl25/05 o The Criteria for Determining which parcels are benefited by the improvements assigned to each benefit category; and o The Method ofAllocating the apportioned improvement system casts for each benefit category to the parcels benefited by that category of improvements, in proportion to the estimated level of benefit the parcels will receive from those improvements. I. The Categories of Benefit that provide the foundation for the AD 05-1 Allocation Method are as follows: A. Development Entitlement/Arterial Class Improvement Benefit Category: ,This is the primary category of improvement benefit supporting the AD 05-1 Allocation Method developed for the AD OS-1 City in the Hills community area. As stated in Engineer's Report Section I, the AD OS-I improvements are improvements that are either already required to be constructed, or are expected by the District Proponent to be required to be constructed, as conditions of development entitlement approval for the properties in AD OS-l. Therefore, planning approval records have been researched to determine the scope of improvements that must be, or are expected to be required to be constructed as a condition of entitlement approval for the AD OS-1 properties. The Development Entitlement Benefit Category includes those improvement systems, or their component parts, that are required to be installed as a condition of development entitlement approval and which will provide a regional benefit to AD OS-1 pazcels and to a much larger community area not included in AD OS-1. Arterial streets, transmission grid water mains; and certain sanitary sewer and storm drain pipelines are examples of improvements that maybe assigned to this benefit category. B. Direct BenefatlFronting Improvement Benefit Category: All of the AD OS-1 improvements that provide a localized. level of benefit are included in this benefit category. The general scope of improvements assigned to this benefit category includes the outside traffic and parking lane portions of arterial and major collector streets, all sidewalk, and certain water, sanitary sewer, and storm drain pipelines. C. Non-benefited and Non-Assessed Parcels: All ofthe following described parcels in AD OS-1 are defined for the purpose of this AD OS-1 Allocation Method as not being benefited by the AD OS-1 improvements and, accordingly, they are not apportioned a share ofthe AD OS-I assessment by the AD OS-1 Allocation Method or by the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method: 1. All City-owned property; all landscape lots in existing and future subdivisions; street right-of--way; public parks; and 2. A.ll existing and designated storm drain sump sites. 29610PerExhibitD.wpd D-9 10/25/05 II. The Method or Criteria Devised for Apportioning the improvement system work items and cost to the two primary improvement benefit categories are described below. A. Assignment of improvement system work items and cost to benefit categories: I. Development EntitlementfArterial Class Improvements a. Arterial and Major Collector Street Improvements: City Hills Drive, Panorama Drive, Vineland Road, Masterson Street, and Paladino Drive are the AD OS-1 streets with improvements including component parts assigned to this category. For the purpose of the AD OS-1 Allocation Method, the center traffic lanes, median, and traffic signals in the above-listed streets are the specific portions of those streets classified as "Arterial Street" Improvements. b. Transmission Grid Water Mains: For the purpose of the AD OS-1 Allocation Method, this improvement category would include water mains that are classified as "Grid Mains" needed to serve an azea outside the boundaries of AD OS-I. According to the AD OS-I Design Engineer, there are no such "Transmission Grid Water Mains" improvements in AD 05-1. c. Sanitary Sewer Main Collector Pipelines: For the purpose of the AD OS-1 Allocation Method, this improvement category would include sewer pipelines needed to be installed as conditions of development entitlement approval that have been designed to serve an area outside the boundaries of the AD OS-1 community. According to the AD OS-1 Design Engineer, there are no such "Sanitary Sewer Main Collector Pipelines" improvements in AD 05-1. d. Storm Water Drainage Main Collector Pipelines: For the purpose ofthe AD OS-1 Allocation Method, this improvement category would include storm water drainage pipelines and appurtenances being installed as conditions of development entitlement approval that have been designed to serve an azea outside the boundaries of the AD OS-1 community in which they are being installed. According to the AD OS-1 Design Engineer, there are no such "Storm Water Drainage Main Collector Pipelines" improvements in AD OS-l. 2. Direct BenefitlFronting Improvements: a. StreetslLandscaping/Street Lights/T'raffic Signals: The outside traffic lane, bicycle lane, and parking lane, curb and gutter, deceleration lane and busboy portion of all streets, including arterial and major collector level streets, provide direct and localized benefit to the fronting property areas. In the case of a new subdivision development, all fronting streets, sidewalks, street lights, and landscaping improvements along its perimeter are generally required to be installed as a .condition of the tract development entitlement approval. Accordingly, in the AD OS-I Allocation Method street frontage improvements are 29690PerExltibi6D.wpd D-I O 10/25/05 assessed back to the fronting subdivision area. In the case of AD OS-1, the fronting area may encompass a block of property that the District Proponent has identified as an area planned for subdivision in phases or as a single, master development, such as Ten. TR 6444, Ten. TR 6498, Ten. TR 6452, Ten. TR 6406, and Ten. TR 6696. b: Local Service Pipeline: 8- and 12-inch diameter water lines, 6-, 8- and 10-inch diameter sewer mains, and 18-, 24-, 36-, and 42-inch diameter storm drain pipelines are classified as fronting benefit improvements and .their cost is allocated back to the fronting property azeas that will be served by these pipelines. Short sections of pipeline stub-outs into future subdivision development areas and 4-inch diarnetei sewer laterals aze also allocated as direct benefit improvements. B. Apportionment of improvement system cost shares to the benefit categories: 1. Apportionment of Street Costs: a. For the arterial and major collector streets that have portions assigned to both the Development Entitlement Benefit and FrontingtDirect Benefit Categories, the improvement item quantities and costs for street construction work are apportioned to these categories in direct proportion to street surface area for the portion of the street. assigned to each benefit category. The Frantuig Street cost is estimated based on a 15-foot pavement width, with the balance of the street surface area classified as the "Arterial" Street Section. Ifboth ofthe center traffic lanes of a four lane arterial street are included in the scope of financed improvements, the parcels fronting on each side of the street right-of--way aze each apportioned the cost of one center (arterial} traffic lane. This Arterial Street Section cost represents each fronting parcel's Development Entitlement Benefit Cost, based on the requirement to construct one-half of the Arterial Street as a condition of entitlement approval for each parcel. For Arterial Street improvements constructed along the boundary of an AD 05-1 community azea, any improvements to the half of the street adjacent to the AD OS-L assessed property are classified as the Development EntitlementfFronting Street Improvements benefiting the AD OS-1 property, while the opposite side traffic lane improvements are classified as the Arterial Street Improvements benefiting property not in AD OS-I . The composite street area totals for the Development EntitlementlFronting Street Improvement and Non AD OS-1 Arterial Street Improvement Categories were used to calculate improvement system work item quantity and cost percentage factors, and those area-based factors were used to allocate project work item cost shares to these two benefit categories. b. The non-street work items of curb and gutter, sidewallc, and subdivision block wall were assigned a 100% Fronting Benefit factor to allocate their costs to the "Direct BenefitiFronting Improvement Category." 29670PerExhibitD.wpd D-11 10/25/05 2. Apportionment of Water Mains: a. There are no Water Mains in AD OS-1 that have been classified as "Fronting Benefit." b. There are no Local Service Water Main costs in AD OS-1. 3. Apportionment of Sanitary Sewer Mains: Sanitary Sewer Mains in AD OS-1 have all been classified as "Fronting Benefit" improvements, and these work items and costs are allocated accordingly. Those pipeline costs are spread to their benefited service-area properties as described in the following Paragraphs III and iV. 4. Apportionment of Storm Drain Pipelines: Storm Drain Pipelines in AD OS-1 have all been classified as "Fronting Benefit" improvements, and these work items and costs are allocated accordingly. Those pipeline costs are spread to their benefited service area properties as described in the following Paragraphs III and IV. III. The Criteria for Determining which parcels are benefited by the improvements allocated to each benefit category are as follows: City in the Hills Area (entire AD OS-1): The City in the Fells Area Lmprovements are generally shown and described on the map in Exhibit E. The improvements to be installed in and along City Hills Drive, Panorama Drive, Vineland Road, Masterson Street, and Paladino Drive include both Development EntitlementlArterial Class Improvement Benefit Category and Direct Benefit/Fronting Improvement Benefit Category improvements required for the development of the City in the Hills Area. Accordingly, their cost is allocated to the City in the Hills Area pazcels (Assessments Nos. 1 through 11) as Development Entitlement and Direct BenefitlFronting Improvements. All other City in the Hills Area Improvements are classified as Direct Benefit/Fronting Improvements and their total costs (other than for the exceptions described below) are allocated to the City in the Fulls Area parcels (Assessments Nos. 1 through 11), as described below. City Hills Drive, Panorama Drive, Vineland Road, Masterson Street, and Paladino Drive arterial street improvements along the frontages of the City in the Fulls Area parcels include the construction of either a halfwidth or the full width of the street consisting of, respectively, two or four traffic lanes. In accordance with the preceding paragraph ILB. l .a, if both of the center traffic lanes for a four lane arterial street are included in the scope of financed improvements, the pazcels fronting on each side of the street right-of- way aze each apportioned the cost of one center (arterial) traffic lane. This Arterial Street 29670PerExbibi[D.wpd D-lZ 10l25J05 Section cost represents each fronting pazcel's Entitlement Benefit Cost, based on the requirement to construct one-half of the Arterial Street as a condition of entitlement. approval for each parcel. The 14-foot wide center {arterial) traffic lanes in the above- listed streets will be installed in and along the City in the Hills Area parcels, and the total cost of those portions of the center traffic lanes fronting along the City in the Hills Area parcels is apportioned to the City in the Hills Area as a Development Entitlement Benefit Improvement. For the purpose of the AD OS-1 Allocation Method, the entire City in the Hills Area (the entire AD OS-1) is treated as a single "development area" directly benefiting from the center traffic lane improvements to be installed along its frontages in City Hills Drive, Panorama Drive, Vineland Road, Masterson Street, and Paladino Drive. Therefore, the total combined cost of those portions of the center traffic lanes fronting along the City in the Hills Area parcels is apportioned in direct proportion to assessable azeas (where assessable area is defined above) far the 11 parcels in AD OS-1. As stated above, other than for the exceptions described below, all other City Hills Drive, Panorama Drive, Vineland Road, Masterson Street, Paladino Drive, and Canteria Drive improvements fronting along the City in the Hills Area are assessed as Direct BenefitlFronting Improvements to the 11 City in the Hills Area parcels in the manner as described above: in direct proportion to their assessable areas and then equal per planned R-1 lot within each existing or planned residential area (Ten. TR 6444, Ten. TR 6498, Ten. TR 6452, Ten. TR 6406, and Ten. TR 6696) andtor Product Type within such residential area (in case of TR 6444). The above-referenced exceptions aze: (a) the Ciry Pazk Land In-lieu and Development Fee for TR 6498, which is classified as a Direct BenefittFronting ImprovementBenefitCategory Improvementthatprovidesbenefits only to TR 6498, and as such is allocated only to the two parcels (Assessments Nos. 5 and 6) planned for development as TR 6498 as. an equal-per-planned-R-l-lot assessment amount; (b) the Vineland Road improvements located in the east half of the street south of City Hills Drive, the City Hills Drive improvements located in the south half of the street along the frontage of a Non AD OS-1 property labeled as Lot C of LLA OS-1188 an the AD OS-1 Assessment Diagram, and the Masterson Street improvements located south of the AD OS-I easterly boundaries along Masterson Street (south of the easterly boundary of Assessment No. 6), which will benefit the Non AD OS-1 properties fronting on those streets, and as such are apportioned as benefitting said Non AD OS-1 properties. IV The Method of Allocating the apportioned system costs far each benefit category to the benefited parcels within AD OS-1, in proportion to the estimated level of benefit the parcels will receive from the various improvements included in each benefit category is described below: City in the Hills Area Assessment Allocation Method Table C-III in Exhibit C, "Details of City in the Hills Estimated Benefit Assessment Allocations for Proposed Development," shows how the City in the Hills Area Improvement Acquisitions costs have been spread in accordance with the AD OS-1 Allocation Method. Reference to Table C-III shows the total City in the Hills Area 29670PerExhibitD.wpd D-I3. 10/25/OS benefitlcost share apportioned to the City in the Hills Area and the Benefited/Non- Assessed (Non AD OS-1) shaze allocated to benefited properties outside of AD OS-I. Table C-III also shows that there is no City in the Hills Area benefit(cost share apportioned as the Benefited/Non-Assessed AD OS-1 shaze allocated to benefited, but non-assessed properties in AD OS-I : All of the City in the FIills Area improvements are required to be installed as conditions of approval for Ten. TR 6444, Ten. TR 6498, Ten. TR 6452, Ten. TR 6406, and Ten. TR 6696. COMPARISON OF REALLOCATION METHOD AND BENEFIT/COST BASED ASSESSMENT ALLOCATION METHOD; ASSESSMENT SPREAD RESULTS ' Table C-IV in Engineer's Report Exhibit C presents a comparison of the cost assessed to individual parcels or land use areas when the AD OS-1 cost is spread in accordance with the AD 05-1 Reallocation Method proposed by the District Proponent, to the parcel cost shares assessed when the spread is calculated in accordance with the benefitlcost based AD 05-1 Allocation Method developed by the AD OS-1 Assessment Engineer. In each case, the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method results aze shown in the "Reallocation Per City Code Section 13.08.070" column and the AD 05-1 Allocation Method results in the "Benefit Allocation" column of Table C-IV. The "Reallocation" amount minus the "Benefit Allocation" amount is shown in the "Reallocation Minus Benefit Allocation" column. That table shows that, as permitted by Municipal Code Section 13.08.070, the AD OS-I Reallocation Method does not apportion an assessment amount to the Non AD OS-1 parcels that aze shown in the "Benefit Allocation" column to have a beneficial cost. share for certairi improvements. In accordance with the District Proponent's AD OS-1 Reallocation Method and as shown on Table C-IV, the total cost of the improvements in the City in the Hills Area are assessed by the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method to the City in the Hills Area, including the costs for those portions ofthe improvements that are required, or are expected to be required, to be installed as a development entitlement approval condition for properties located outside AD OS-I . Further review of Table C-IV will show that improvement costs far work within or adjacent to the City in the Hills Area have been assessed only to properties in that area, and in its last two columns adjacent to the right margin, it shows, respectively, the per acre and per EDU differences between the parcel assessments calculated using the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method and the AD OS-1 Allocation Method. ASSESSMENT ENGINEER'S STATEMENT OF FINDINGS ON THE ASSESSMENT SPREAD METHOD Based on the descriptions and data presented above and further illustrated in the referenced Exhibit C tables on the proposed AD 05-1 Reallocation Method, the following findings on the AD OS-1 Assessment Spread Method are presented: A. The improvement acquisitions proposed to be financed by AD OS-1 aze improvements that aze either already required to be constructed, or aze expected by the District Proponent to be required to be constructed, as conditions of development entitlement approval for the properties 29670PerEx}ubRD.wpd D-14 10/25/05 in AD OS-1 and, accordingly, the AD OS-1 Improvement Acquisitions bear a rational nexus to the properties proposed to be assessed a share of their cost; and B. The District Proponent has submitted a written request to the Engineer of Work that the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method of assessment spread be implemented, and it has further represented that said request was approved by all AD OS-l property owners at the time it was filed. Therefore, it is the finding of the Assessment Envineer that the proposed AD OS-1 Reallocation Method is in conformance with the requirements of Municipal Code Section 13.08:070. ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING INCIDENTAL AND BOND ISSUANCE COST ALLOCATION The total AD OS-1 assessment proceeding and bond issuance costs are spread in direct proportion to the total improvement cost reallocated to each parcel. ASSESSMENT APPORTIONMENTS TO FUTURE SUBDIVISIONS When a parcel with an AD OS-1 confirmed assessment is subdivided inthe future by the recording of a subdivision or pazcel map,. a certificate of compliance for lot line adjustment, parcel map waiver, or pazcel merger, or upon the sale of all or a portion of an assessed parcel to a public agency, the 1915 Act requires that the amount remaining unpaid on the original, bond-funded assessment principal be apportioned to each of the new lots and parcels created by the parcel division. In the case of AD OS-I, the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method has spread the AD OS-I cost within each future .residential subdivision tract (Ten. TR 6444, Ten. TR 6498, Ten. TR 6452, Ten. TR 6406, and Ten. TR 6696) indirect proportion to the net acreage for each Product Type Area (if any) and within each Product Type Area as an equal cost share to each planned R-1 lot. Therefore, as AD OS-1 assessed pazcels aze subdivided, the remaining principal amount ofthe original bond funded parcel assessment will be apportioned to the new lots and pazcels as follows: Future Tract No..6444 (Assessments Nos. 1 through 4): This portion of AD OS-1 has been approved for subdivision inta a combined total of 752 R-1 lots, 1 private ladge/reeteation facility lot, and severalprivate landscape/pocket park lots, as a future "active adult" gated community, pursuant to Ten. TR 6444. As previously stated, no phases of TR 6444 are planned for recording with the Kern County Recorder prior to confirmation of the AD OS-1 assessment. The merchant builderJdeveloper of TR 6444 (K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Bakersfield, LLC) is developing three lot product types within TR 6444, described as follows: Product Type 1 comprised of all TR 6444 R-1 lots with typical lot dimensions of 60 ft by 105 ft (also identified as the "600 Series"); Product Type 2 comprised of all TR 6444 R-1 lots with typical lot dimensions of 50 ft by 100 ft (also identified as the "500 Series"); and Product Type 3 comprised of all T'R 6444 R-1 lots with typical lot dimensions of 43 ft by 83 ft (also identified as the "300 Series"). The total combined shaze of the Improvement Acquisitions estimated total cost for Assessments Nos. 1 through 4 is first allocated to each Product Type Area in direct proportion to the sum of each Product Type Area's R-1 lot net areas, as provided to the Assessment Engineer by the subdivision engineer for TR 6444 (Pinnacle Engineering, Bakersfield, California). After that, 29670PerExhibitD.wpd D-15. 10/25/05 each Product Type Area's total allocated shaze of the Improvement Acquisitions estimated total cost has been apportioned as an equal share per planned R-1 lot within the Product Type Area, as described above.. Appendix D attached to this Engineer's Report contains a "Location Map Showing Product Type Lot Designation" for TR 6444, prepared by Pinnacle Engineering. The original Assessments Nos. I through 4 total confirmed assessment amounts will be apportioned as an equal per R-1 lot assessment for each Product Type in accordance with the above-described proposed development and if the development proceeds as described by the merchant builder/developer of TR 6444. Accordingly, the first tract phase recorded by the merchant buildertdeveloper of TR 6444 to subdivide all or a portion of Assessments Nos. 1 through 4 will be allocated a total assessment share equal to the number of R-1 lots in each Product Type in that recorded phase multiplied by the calculated equal per R-1 lot cost shaze factor for Assessments Nos. 1 through 4 for each Product Type. The remaining balance will be apportioned to the unsubdivided remainder of Assessments Nos. 1 through 4, if any, for apportionments to future subdivision phases in accordance with the process described above. Exhibit C, Table C-II provides detailed information on the number ofR-1 lots per Product Type in each of the four parcels planned for subdivision as TR 6444 (Assessments Nos. 1 through 4). However, ifthe development plan for Assessments Nos. 1 through 4 is revised, then the plan for segregation of the original assessments will be revised to apportion a cost shaze to the first subdivision or subdivision phase and its remainder parcel in direct progortion to the total net acreages of all R-I. lots in each Product Type, in the same manner the original assessment was calculated. The total assessment shaze apportioned to each Product Type would then be reapportioned to its R-1 lots as an equal assessment share per R-1 lot in the recorded subdivision phase and in the remainder pazcel, if any. This may result in reapportioned Product Type Area R-1 lot assessment amounts that aze different from the assessment amounts for the same Product Type lots shown in Table C-II. 2. Future Tract No. 6448 (Assessments Nos. 5 and 6): This portion of AD 05-1 has been approved for subdivision into a combined total of 421 R-1 lots, 1 public park parcel, 1 public recreation azea, and several landscapelpocket pazklots pursuant to Ten. TR 6498. As previously stated, no phases of TR 6498 aze planned for recording with the Kern County Recorder prior to confirmation of the AD OS-1 assessment. The merchant builder/developer of TR 6498 (K. Hovnanian at Rosemary Lantana, LLC) is developing two lot product types within TR 6498, described as the "4000 Series" and as the "5000 series." However, the developer of TR 6498 wants all R-I lots in both Product Types of TR 6498 assessed an equal AD 05-1 assessment amount. Therefore, the total combined share of the Improvement Acquisitions estimated total cost for Assessments Nos. 5 and 6 is allocated as an equal share per planned R-1 lot within the entire TR 6448. The original Assessments Nos. S and 6 total confirmed assessment amounts will be apportioned as an equal per R-1 lot assessment in accordance with the above-described proposed development and if the development proceeds as described by the merchant builder/developer of TR 6498. Accordingly, the first tract phase recorded by the merchant builder/developer of TR 6498 to subdivide all or a portion of Assessments Nos. S and 6 will be allocated a total assessment share equal to the number of R-1 lots in that recorded phase muhiplied by the 29670PerExhibitn.wpd D-16 10!25105 calculated equal per R-1 lot cost share factor forAssessments Nos. 5 and 6: The remaining balance will be apportioned to the unsubdivided remainder of Assessments Nos. 5 and 6, if any, -for apportionments to future subdivision phases in accordance with the process descnbed above. Exhibit C, Table C-ILprovides detailed information on the number ofR-1 lots in each ofthe two paicels planned for subdivision as TR 6498 (Assessments Nos. 5 and 6). However, if She development plan for Assessments Nos. 5 and 6 is revised, then the plan for segregation of the original assessments will be revised to apportion a cost share to the first subdivision or subdivision phase and its remainder parcel in direct proportion to their total revised number of R-1 lots. The total assessment shaze apportioned to the recorded subdivision or subdivision phase would then be reapportioned to its lots as an equal assessment share per R-1 lot. 3. Future Tract No. 6452 (Assessment No. 7): This portion of AD OS-1 has been approved for subdivision into a combined total of 181 R-l lots and several private landscapelpocket pazk lots pursuant to Ten. TR 6452. As previously stated, no phases of TR 6452 are planned for recording. with the Kern County Recorder prior to confirmation of the AD 05-1 assessment. The District Proponent is developing two lot product types within TR 6452, described as the "60 ft by 100 ft lots" and as the "10 ft by 100 ft lots." However, the District Proponent (being also the developer of TR b452) wants all R-1 lots in both Product Types of TR 6452 assessed an equal AD 05-1 assessment amount. Therefore, the total share of the Improvement Acquisitions estimated total cost for Assessment No. 7 is allocated as an equal share per planned R-1 lot within the entire TR 6452. The original Assessment No. 7 total confirmed assessment amount will be apportioned as an equal per R-blot assessment in accordance with the above-described proposed development and ifthe development proceeds as described by the District Proponent. Accordingly, the first tract phase recorded by the District Proponent to subdivide all or a portion of Assessment No. 7 will be allocated a total assessment share equal to the number of R-1 lots in that recorded phase multiplied by the calculated equal per R-1 lot cost share factor for Assessment No. 7. The remaining balance wi116e apportioned to the unsubdivided remainder of Assessment No. 7; if any, for apportionments to future subdivision phases in accordance with the process described above. Exhibit C, Table C-II provides detailed information on the number ofR-1 lots planned for subdivision as TR 6452 {Assessment No. 7). However; if the development plan for Assessment No. 7 is revised, then the plan for segregation of the original assessment will be revised to apportion a cost shaze to the first subdivision or subdivision phase and its remainder parcel in direct proportion to the their total revised number of R-1 lots. The total assessment share apportioned to the recorded subdivision or subdivision phase would then be reapportioned to its lots as an equal assessment shaze per R-1 lot. 4. Future Tract No. 6406 (Assessments Nos. 8 and 9): This portion of AD 05-1 has been approved f'or subdivision into a combined total of 396 R-1 lots, 1 public park parcel, and several landscapelpocket park lots pursuant to Ten. TR 6406. As previously stated, no phases of TR 6406 are planned for recording with the Kern County Recorder prior to confirmation of the AD OS-1 assessment. The merchant builder/developer of TR 6406 {D. R. Horton Los Angeles Holding Company, Inc.) is developing two lot product types within TR 6406 (no specifics on the TR 6406 have been provided to the Assessment Engineer). However, the developer of'I'R 6406 29670PerExhibitD.wpd D-17 10/25/05 wants all R-1 lots in both Product Types of TR 6406 assessed an equal AD OS-1 assessment amount. Therefore, the total combined share of the Improvement Acquisitions estimated total cost for Assessments Nos. 8 and 9 is allocated as an equal share per planned R-1 lot within the entire TR 6406. The original Assessments Nos. 8 and 9 total confirmed assessment amounts will be apportioned as an equal per R-1 lot assessment in accordance with the above-described proposed development and if the development proceeds as described by the merchant builderldeveloper of TR 6406: Accordingly, the first tract. phase recorded by the merchant builder/developer of TR 6406 to subdivide all or a portion of Assessments. Nos. 8 and 9 will be allocated a total assessment share equal to the number of R-1 lots in that recorded phase multiplied by the calculated equal per R-1 lot cost share factor for. Assessments Nos. 8 and 9. The remaining balance will be apportioned to the unsubdivided remainder of Assessments Nos. 8 and 9, if any, for apportionments to future subdivision phases in accordance with the process described above. Exhibit C, Table C-H provides detailed information on the number ofR-1 lots in each ofthe two parcels planned for subdivision as TR 6406 (Assessments Nos. 8 and 9). However, if the development plan for Assessments Nos. 8 and 9 is revised, then the plan. for segregation of the original assessments will be revised to apportion a cost share to the first subdivision or subdivision phase and its remainder parcel in direct proportion to their total revised number of R-1 lots. The total assessment share apportioned to the recorded subdivision or subdivision phase would then be reapportioned to its lots as an equal assessment shaze per R-1 lot. 5. Future Tract No. 6696 (Assessments Nos. 10 and 11): This portion of AD OS-1 has been approved for subdivision into a combined total of approximately 200 R-1 lots pursuant,to a proposed (pending, not approved yet) Ten. TR 6696. As previously stated, no phases of TR 6696 are planned for recording with the Kern County Recorder prior to confirmation ofthe AD OS-1 assessment. The District Proponent is planning to develop andlor sell to merchant builders TR 6696. However, as no final development plan for TR 6696 exists at this time, the District Proponent (being also the developer of TR 6696) wants all R-1 lots in TR 6696 assessed an equal AD 05-1 assessment amount. Therefore, the total combined share of the Improvement Acquisitions estimated total costfor Assessments Nos. 10 and 11 is allocated as an equal shaze per planned R-I lot within the entire TR 6696. The original Assessments Nos. 10 and 11 total confirmed assessment amounts will be apportioned as an equal per R-I lot assessment in accordance with the above-described proposed development and if the development proceeds as described by the District Proponent. Accordingly, the first tract phase recorded by the District Proponent antor merchant builderldeveloper of TR 6696 to subdivide all or a portion of Assessments Nos. 10 and 11 will be allocated a total assessment shaze equal to the number of R-1 lots in that recorded phase multiplied by the calculated equal per R-1 lot cost shaze factor for Assessments Nos. 10 and 11. The remaining balance will be apportioned to the unsubdivided remainder of Assessments Nos. 10 and 11, if any, for apportionments to future subdivision phases in accordance with the process described above. Exhibit C, Table C-II provides detailed information on thenumber of R-1 lots in each of the two parcels planned for subdivision as TR 6696 (Assessments Nos. 10 and 11). However, if the development plan for Assessments Nos. 10 and 11 is revised, then the plan for 29b70P~E~diibitD.wpd D-18 - 10l2i/04 segregation of the original assessments will be revised to apportion a cast share to the first subdivision or subdivision phase and its remainder parcel in direct proportion to their total revised number of R-1 Tats. The total assessment share apportioned to the recorded subdivision or subdivision phase would then be reapportioned to its lots as an equal assessment share per R-1 lot.. [Remainder of the page intentionally left blank] 29670PerEldubitD.wpd D-19 10/25/05 ASSESSMENT ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION OF THE ASSESSMENT SPREAD METHOD This Engineer's Report has been prepared to present the following: 1. An estimate of the total cast of the improvements to be acquired and the incidental costs proposed to be funded pursuant to this assessment proceeding; and 2. An analysis and description of the AD OS-1 Reallocation Method proposed by the District Proponent as the method used to spread the estimated improvement acquisition costs and incidental expenses to the AD OS-1 properties. However, this Engineer's Report makes no recommendation as to the economic feasibility for the assessment of the estimated cost of the proposed improvement acquisition and incidental costs on the AD OS-1 properties, nor on the financial feasibility for the issuance of 1915 Act. Bonds to represent any unpaid amount ofthe AD OS-1 Assessment. The AD OS-1 assessment may exceed the amount for which bonds can. be issued pursuant to recommendation of the City's financial advisor, as to the minimum acceptable property value to assessment lien ratio for bonds issued and secured by the AD OS-1 unpaid assessments. Additional property value in excess of the estimated current value of the assessed property with the improvements completed and installed may need to be confirmed by MAI appraisal, before the City can issue 1915 Act Bonds in the full amount of the AD OS-1 Assessment. In conclusion, it is my opinion that the Estimated Total Cost of the proposed improvement acquisitions, including all incidental costs, has been spread in conformance with the requirements of Municipal Code Section 13.08.070. Submitted to the Engineer of Work on September 29, 2005, for "preliminar}~' approval by the City Council on October 12, 2005, and submitted on October 27, 2045, in this "Final" Engineer's Report form by: L~ ~ . ~~- Edwazd J. Wilson R.C.E. 23269 (Expires 12131105) Assessment Engineer City ofBakersfield Assessment District No. OS-1 29670PerExhibitn.wpd D-20 10!25/OS ENGINEER'S REPORT - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.OS-I _ {CITY IN T~iE :HILLS), .EXHIBIT E LOCATION MAP SHOWING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. OS-1 IMPROVEMENTS o W e . ¢ oo i ~ °~~ o.s °g ~_c goo"oe ~~~°g mac" 3~~a ~_ ~e o ro ~ s~e a ~~w=° ~xg~ ~a~o"ap ~"spa m~ys~ ~$;~ ~° °~y 4'~ F ~m z ~~~a~m~ ~~£~~ ~~€~5 o~~~eg o~~~~~ ~~'~:~a ee~o a& 5€ ~ A-'q _ U "c cEi ~•",-~9~~~ ~sa<e~ 8s~°n ~~°~e~e ~~~~~s v~~~~~o ~~g~ os ~` g w~w~ a~" !:>~rn ~€=~g~ og~~oo ~€~s"e °w~a,8g ~ °€§vo ~~~~~~'„ 3~~~ ~o =~ ~ H ~ ~ m- ~aE"E" $'g~° ~$ o~ #$~~"°' ~~~ £~~ aka"~e eo; ~~s ~~ ~ ~° ~s ~ 0.~1~w~~'- w oE^W ~~n~~~a ~~n~€° ~~~~g~ ~300~~~ ~~y~~c ~~~¢€g ~c~~ °£ a e ~ W w ~ ~ x axe~~'o ~g~~g~ ~~g~'~ x3~sa~ ~~~€S~" ~~~a= ~°~~~~~ ~~g ~_~~ = a ~ Zw o~ ~ ~ ~s d ¢ s ~~~ ~~ €38~~E me~~~ ~~~eg~= ~~~~~E ~Qma'~ ~e~~a ~~~ a~3 ~ o U ~ ~ s~~~s~ ~°a~~ s°~~~~ aa<~o s s~x~ ~a~~a = ~~~~ a~ ~~' N~~~m ~m ~ asaaas .vosuvcsvx ~g\ --~ 3° ® ~`'h ~» ~ ` ~ w. ~ ~ ,' o Fo~ qua ° °~'~. ~~` wo c Ir~~.- ~@ tt§ ~ , \ - v ~o off: © _ ~ ,. U: I' ~ ~ ~ " w1' 4a: ~ ~~ o ~ o g ~ ~ 4 ~~ ~ ~~~ ~w w ~ a ~~~ No `otJ~~ ~ ~ ~ - Om a ~ 1. ~ I ~ ¢ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ _ !yj qry G' ~ ~ ~ ' .p} "+ N p d ~ hM Ip ~ o o I ~. p ¢ ~ ~ c qN oO O 40. R _. ~I ~`i _ J ® o ® ® &' N g' ~ S y~ °~~° o~0~a qog ~. s& ~ 8 F N~ ~ '. e e gs I m a ... ...... ........ _..:. _ _ _ ~C. GCE ~ _ QYp}7QNYI3HIA ~hI ~' ~ "W E 6 Y $ F~ '" o. m e ~ ~~w x e h 3 ~ ' .C i ~ X' _ m l av I I ~ :~ N~ II ~ i~l ,~-,, --, APPENDIX A MAP OF PROPOSED BOUNDARIES (On file with the City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield;. reduced,. not to scale copy attached) ~, ~ ~ ~ x €~ ~ o , O~ o~~~ j o o ~ ~o ~9 i ~ i~om ~ ~~ p o w o z z W E- `~ o UV< ~ g ~ z< i ~~~ WO ~~o~ a s~ ~ U N N ~~~ _ =mo ~€3 o`Sa~ w~ m V Ca . ~ I °s °~ ~ ~~ q t " ~~ < I ~~"' I xW ~~ ~~~E o _ ~ z ~ n m c~ o s~~ E ~S ~Vp <~~W Q~~ Ca ~ Z w :; o z U m m ~ &~og m a m S ~ a X88 ,~ .~- ~ w m w 2 w ~ x zg_Y ~z~" ' W ~ l in '~ O at ~ a ~ m a( w ~s~~ ~°e ¢~~-~ O w ~ ~ w ( ~ ~~~~ ~~~ W ~ ~ x ~ ~ f~ d X ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~~ } ~ ~ o a > ,. „ ~ ~ = T ~ W Q x .~ ~ W i ~~~_ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~o o x ~, ~ Y O ~ _~ wao~~ ~_~~ ~ ~ w U ~~ _~~<~ ~a ~ i<~ o n R ~ ,J ~{ O O o~~ ~F~° ( ,~T ~ 3 ~ E' ~ ~ r g V ~~`u` _ ~. ~~~ ~ ; 6 -E ~ r ~ 3 #$ S go $ ° 8 ~~9 3 c ~ R ~ % Z I~ o£~ S $ n` S E~ `y~ a 4 6 $~ o .~ 2 ` 30 $ ° q F ~ im ~z a ° 0 o a ~G o' ~ _ r n s hhw y LD ~~ ~ ~ 1SIN(5 NOS ~ O amn aNSUNU ~ S ~ € ~ ~ O o ~ oz ~ N, ~ 6 a ^ ~ [~ O 3w(5 Q ~ ~. q z H ~ o r~ ^v °t ~" o ~ H E R, v a z '" v ~ U Z ~ ~ ° ~ z ~ .~ ~ ~ ~~ M a y ~~ ~ bp H WW ^ ~O" a°z 0 0 =W ~~ z w z ~aV o ~n &~o C=, o m rn ~ ~. ~ "~~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ o z W ~ ~ mac ~ . °u~ ~~a V o ti. ° o ~owVOS. "kW o^.t~t.°~, - ~WW W H .ro. Q I(') ~ ~ a Q~i Vpi oS °z b: i~o ~ Q. U ~ E, m No. ~ o 3~~~~VO'~ °~LLS ~~o Q w ~ Q ~ ~o°z +~' »I ~ W - z N =- goo is»wr ~ «"w~ °a: ~ m ~ m x 3LL= Q ~ W ~ ~ = o= ~~u s~ow~°~a~` $ C~aS ~°ng O rn 7a N h _~~ ~ o ~,.~ m ~d>o w d w ~ o = °~ Woa ~g-~ Q ~. o ~ w ~ ~ m w ~'~ ~ o~~ n4 ~~~~ ~~ ~ m=qx _ ~ zn N o " o;~ ~ € ~ to w~~z W gw v j U] Q ~ z duo<~~ ~oo :~~ ~~~o ."°. ~~ I, ~, u] Z - - ~ mW= o ¢ <c `~FWa. a y O 3~~a~ y I~ ' ~ iI e-~ ~ l `---- -- ' Ir ~ c 1 °su ¢a~ 133aL5 A31T/A m ~ ~~_ _: ~~ I ~ Yd fb 1 ~~ ~ _~ i y~ i ~, z .u3a~s Nosa3ism . s ~ -~ - --- --- w, ao >i .~ ffiI z d of p z <I xqa ~st$ maJ H ~pti ~~~ e,4Q 0 ~w~W -l ~o~ W _~~ 1 ~~~ i _ _ _ NJOa oMfl3Nin ' 1 1 1 3 i 0 s F -. ~ I w ~I ~ I 1 3nia4 ~NINaoVi 1, >i . X >:~ ,o otl ~ ~~ ~ _ o =a a ~~ d $ rv i U w g ~ a~ ~ ~- o ~ m @o of ~ ~ ~ g W F _ ~ a6 ^z ~ W ° ° ° ° fri ~W d. ~ ° ~. i o ~ q O ~ ~ ~ oo z~~;~dl n -$ s ~ a°' ° o~o~ ~W WwW °~ o z n d o o viz °I _ o o i o ~ z z z z z z z- u~ °z a # w o w rG Yi , ~3 Z z m~ ~s ~~ u j o w~ w w w w w m g~ ~3 s- G ~ G ~~~ f/] O w ~ ~ ~ a° S ~ ~ ~ w ~° 8 ~ ~ ~ w w ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ „~ m ~ a a 3 W 6 a ~, ~ I ° I W n.oo - w°g oo 'o09a° LL ~~ ci uj w E y o ¢ 0 0 0 ~e W ~~LL++^ w~ wS w ~ E O I j l D o~ ~~ q o~ ~~ V H F o' o 0 0 o n - ~~ ~ 38 ~~ ~o ~ ca I _- e o= oW °~ o= ~ ~~_ F ~~ s ~° w w~ ~~ ws $ ~F„m~ ° 8 a ~m ~ ~~ ~o ~~ sx z ~ a F N r z =' _ w °~ w `~ ° .~ {£} {{.} rn .t3.~IS NOSN9.ISV/P 'fi_ \ cn ~ tno t. \'. ~''€ ~ "I .FO €: \t o gi7) ~ h~ 1~~8m '?°y~sg O I ~03 Nv> Q~~: ~sJ \'~ ~ Oya I• M~ ~~v~ ~ \ ~ ~'. c y i \ a ~ o ~ i I1 ~~ \ _ I: t199r o~ I: O~-~O6yo ~i Enb 4ae~ ~\'~ ^m~ ~ v M ~ A2 O 'a 00 & 9 5,~ W° a ~ J Q ~ F\\. 40. /v W ~ :i O ~--_..-_.. r_. O [qua F~ z,:~ ~~•. oo .o lvi c ~ w r-~..v~ wo a q p0 o_°p 'a.,. ~ boa '~ \~.~ ~ A2 d U a ~ '~ 0..4 F \~ `\9~ - _ - ~~ Qc~. q ~~~ 't ~~ N ~ ~t ~ ~ J - J v ` ' O ~ 1 n Cut '^ o F~cI. i -- ~ SN 7. ~° $o I iJ On`z '^ .. www w.n nc N ~ I O~. S ^ "^ ~ ooo'" l..__-.-__-...--_..-_.-J t___-.. _.-___--_-.J C'-_ (9Z}-_-. _.-- cZ :,3,88. (££)-__-QV`oY aNMM$gNld~ ter.-..... _.-_ -- _. ~-d a. ° o i E. a e' "1 rc v - m ro. ~ ILL 2 o W cFi ~ n.. ~o ~ °°^ b ~ h; w U ~ 4gRq Vey. ~„ y0 ~p He}+ y .-11 ~ w O ~ ~aC) ~ a~ a ~&~ ~o ~ ~`°~ N ~~3~~ o ~~ "<w~ ~~ d~ ww~~o ~~ ~~ P~° ~~ o~ ^^~~~ ~ S~S~o o° ~~ „~ ~w W8 ~s .a i 0 is !z ~e e LL~ N m w N ~ - h $~ s',z ~` ~~ ~ sew ~w ~~ '- n- `" ~ „~ p ~ y s E°y °i w~°~~ a o8~ N ~= wm.°~ °"~ ~"~ iw G<E pw 8 ag it "NZ¢~ rc~ °G'"' a8 3s °"' ~ ~'~ =~o ~o °" 'S'~.n=" m ~~ w~ ~" Gi W" F6~` om z~ ° "~ °~N<S~`" uw &t,. ooN°`°'~ n m~ °m~~w°m ~ a~ ~ uw `w'~ °w ~m~~~N ~. ~° N~"'m Os ° ~~ ~g ~° uo _p~~o ~w mw i~ i~ in €W_~~mm ~~ q ~d °z Ewa. « 3m ~ ~o~wi"&o •o~~ 'z o~ o~ 7:.. ~dmow^i z~ '_-'§ oo~~~Npz ~~ @ ~~ :.~w Ww°~ 3 &a Ja ~~ a ~ °Y ma GG'°wNab~ ~s~ ~z ~~~4 oLLe m~® ~~ c° ~~ E~~3°3~~< € - W~LL~m~`w s~ €"e ~` °s gC~~~°~«~ n~~8~g.- ~LL~?~~'" ~~mmNOw„~~~ w~ ~o °~~ a's~os `~ ~ =>sa „~s "yaw"~" ~~ aa~~°oxs ~~eoassm4°~ ~° ~a a~^3~=~<37 ~~ sum °a'~~wm~v~'a ~w~~~w~ ~~ ~~rr^ss~'G~~~~et°~. °.s§ am sww°~o °`x.W° mgr oQa ~-m cs°^~om~}o°~~ ~w ...~o~~~sP ~aw~m ;, n~N W°o ns W m _ Ws w=~~sw= °~p~~~w~ =o r ~- a.°am =~ c~ n. 3 ;N " 's~ s~ ~." ~w }y~ 4~s~"s=~~~°~e~~~ m~a~5u~~~a~' mSog"zmgo zm ~W~. nO~~°~°s~o~ Y~w NOaa°n¢Sa6¢mOZx2 pa~ ys a4 naaen4041 ~-.°2~nN ~(°i~2 yr-~~.j 3eanx2 mfaZ O...a ~..w L#~N ; h ~ 8 NN ~g~ ~~~ F a h Q F z W 6 w c ~z 0 Fa O P. O a a. w 0 z 0 F a a v m w Q ~~~"°~ ~~ o°=aa~~~ w z~sN o ~~ ~~~o~ s~ o - ok~ry_a 5_ b~~zs~ o° ~`T°a ~o~`~ 8'~ o~ ~oNa~w ~° a~~ea~~ o0 m~m3" ~ So~o~ffia z3 zg~"~°z~ ii u a~= o w6 ~u~x°i~~ ma o p ~ w ~ c ~ ~~ °~ am ~ ~~o `g ~<~~ ~=gym _~~o e~ ~~a ~"W~Wa~~ ~asN"~ €~~s=m ~so~`--,~ w E ~~: ~~ - ° °o ~w ~^ ~ .°_" 3xo ~<° =porno- o~`°'=< _~ ~ ~eW zr~c a ~LLPOOi `d °`Z `ipi w_ ~'u» r~ .-°N's pa o7aa° ~crcm ~r m~~g oaJN~~¢~= of PNm a~w_w'Ewrr~i '3'~^o~3 m~~~o, ~N~N _ -wo$ooo o~ui~o "'.., ~~~~~u ~Lf'w mz~i zo~n~So~ „~s SOW w;,s~o So°$no„ m °'aop i~s4„~~A3 s~ m~~sw~~~o' 's,a~ Go= ~°~ooNs~Na,. GAP a °~~~s<:°o~~l s:, r~rp p~w~ r4~~w~ =~~W~~asz=e~o~r~~"~o ~5am ° ~m°zaz°¢ $° 3o NaNm~~o&oNNm~°„aNN~°~~o~ sNN8°8=~°~.a mN.~° Jew 6cwr o '~z w~°zo°. ez a~ ~ ~ wg °o i ar.u aY ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM {On file with the City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield; reduced, not to scale copy: attached) ~ g O o o ~ ~~ 9~~~~~°~ °~o~ Ws `o~W s ~;z z ,~ ~ ~°o ~ ~~ ~rNno~~ ~z~ ~sos ~' 9~~0 ~o o ~ o ~ E ~ ~xw ~ o W Ww Qxg =~o ~~x ~°°€ ~~x a A ~ U7 ~8 ~ tw ~' ~~" u~ `o`. ~s~~ ~°.{`o o'3z~p Ed'p ~rz ~ O Q U o~ a~~ ~ ~~~ r''2 0. 0~ s~W o~ww C~~ ~y4p Yei~. 6 ~ ~ y hi ~ o ~ ~~~ m ~sm ~8S <~" m~~° Ca ~ m z ~" O w az° i~ N~~s m €5s8 W ~ ++ Q~ x~ ~ ~°~zooo~ ~oa $"off ~ a s G a ~ ~~° ~< ~~ ~sa~~ TWO -~~$ w ~ ~ w m ~ I~w ELLS ~=s o~w ~ w -- x ~ ~i ~I ° ~ ' 7 o'G' ~a W p u ~ ~~ ~ e~o~~~~~w ~ ~~ ~ 4~ ~ o~ ~ o ~ ~o ~ a x ~~ ~n oW~~~a > ° m °~~~ ~ ~ o ~ w w y °p 30 ~ ~w= ~o~€~ I off= v 1 ~ ~ OQ. ~F~=Ft K~Kq~~ ayf ~3J H ~-6Y0~ ~ ) W W U ~C~ ¢~n 6°~~°u ~q'1/i ~3~~ G~I40 a Gl 00~4~0 o b VI ~ w ~,~_ ~ ° `~hwms m a ° ~I ~' o~~s° ash .,"L U ~ ti~<~R e°~ ~~~ ~IW sgss$~ ~ aE ~y~ ~s~ ~ °E. FE ~ 9 ~ ~„ _~ s`~ '- m; xE o ds h ~E .. i ~"dY m o~ ~ ~ € Eaz e~ Q Wzo b o°EOa ~YS _==? ~ W~Eo o'=0g a~~. a =~Ea $TOaeY ~ e s NO °°a o$~~ _ mrw ¢vrcixx y ~ §$~~ O gs5-°~°- ~ 5 G„z zI LL-ass o~.q O NI 53lJIIM ~ Qi N w ~ H y, < z E. ~ o Q yy n ~ o F o v z .~ E ~ ~ .w, ~ CJ v U W o ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ E~ a ~ ~ z= "~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ «, a ~ ~ ~ J~ ~~ s ~~ ~~ 20 fig 1 i - .n cW - o ~~ z~ n ~ o OF C G w ~ ~ a Fw ~ ~ ~I Oj ~ _ ~ f/J C. ~ g a E ~°° Y a° s w o ~~ Q ~m ~ ~ ~~~ min ~>>~~ ~ ~ ~~x= o~ ~ - ~ - c o Q ~+'~ H ° o w w ~ ~~ ~~~ a~ a 8 E~ S F G ~ ~ ~ W = a s~ g N ~ ~ $ ~ o 0 0 'o o zo a ~ $ ° z f Z ¢ ~ „off g zhRm ~so~zoz~~~~ ~*' ~w~~ Wo~~ w.~~d~~ ~zw g~~p'~'~o w~ww 3ww ~g .- ~ ~ ~ ~ U~7w `c j ~~~~~ ~ww~s~~~W~W~~~~~ w a ~.as's n~~ ~ 4 ~ w a y ~ ~ ~i s ~ ~ ~ z 3 'n 5 ~ 0 0 0 ~~ ~ - 'o ga ~° ~ W ~ F r ° wy "' ~a ~Nlg ~'Ic U]0.l C j I ~~ -. w . v ~ v h ~ w .S« ~~ 4a g ~ 'Y' w C: ~ o a'wrc s No `5o i o o ggs w^m W~ w i O. I j ~ °omCYtQv-~•~^0000 °~`W" p., ~~~o ~o~ o _ ,. W w n x =m x ~= w~ wF w~ °W g_ c~ ~ ~~ ~ w~ ~~ ~g ~x ~x ~ ~'~~s$ d ~ eg ~m g ~_ ~ a~ ~~ Ax ~~ ~~ x ~~~~~ a F I \~ e ~ _ ~ ~~~ _ - `gam s ~ O O ~ .L'~LS NOSL9JSYX ~ \ ~'',x Sy $ z z- -\-- --~--- '4 w -~ rm---o~,~ r--- -- -----~---~----~- ----- ~w I ~ h ~ o ~q o~ a\p~ \' , a is "-4 Q I ~ yy F ~ & i C ~~. Fp nF ~W « O W I~ o ~ ~tt \\. I 9~g~« M. 'C V] oN gnd e. ui ~~iS ~'~ N Q C 4 00 0 w., < 3 ~ z z' I ~ ~ n~ r~Z, aa~ W i~ I: \ ~ r_.__.._ -~ _ ~t o i x o0 o g~ ~.. y ~^ ~a i o ~I ~; m _ ~L I F k wxw ~' ~ O~~ oN_ ~` Qoq~ ~ I I i 00~ I u~~rn 3 n it ~.__.____.__.... _..._.J ~.___.__... _.. 6'-.J ~___..._.. _. QY08 QNt'YfiNIA ~_..__.~r......._.._ ._ _ o ~ O w ~~ .,;_ii ~I h m o w ~ ~' zr O" ~ Fp~~ z_ ~O~Io~ F. Z ..y Fh p° ~~~ O y o ,:.'"~ APPENDIX C ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 05-1 COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF PROPERTY OWNERS ASSESSOR'S TAX ASSESSMENT NUMBER (ATN) t - PROPERTY OWNER'S NUMBER PROPERTY DESCRIPTION. NAME AND ADDRESS PORTIONS OF 531A90-40 AND 41 1 LOT 1 IN Regent Land Investment, LLG, 450 N. Roxbury Ddve, Suite 600, Beverly Hills, CA 90210 - LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO.O5-0480 P 1 OdO, 41, 2 LOT 21N K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Bakersfield, LLC, 2525 Campus Ddve, Irvine, CA 92612 LOT UNE ADJUSTMENT NO.OS-0480 37-010-42A 043 - 3 LOT 31N Regent Land Investment, LLC, 450 N. Roxbury Drive, Suite 800, Bevery Hills, CA 90210 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. OS-0480 - 531-010-42 AND 43 4 - LOT 4 IN Regent Land Investment, LLC, 450 N. Roxbury Drive; Suite 800, Beverly Hills, CA 90210 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO.05-0480 - 10.35, 4 5 LOT 1 IN - Regent Land Investment, LLC, 450 N. Roxbury Drive, Sude 600, Bevedy.Hills, CA 90210 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 05-0550 31- 1 -4 46 6 LOT 21N K. Hovnanian ai Rosemary Lantana, LLG 2525 Campus Ddve Irvine CA 92612 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. OS-0550 , , 531-010-45, 46, AND 47 7 LOT D IN Mountain Yew Bravo, LLC, 1544 S. Sepulveda Blvd., Sufte 204, Los Angeles, CA 90025 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. OS-1188 P T 1-01 -39 - 8 LOT AtN D. R. Horton Los Angeles Holding Company, Inc. 28009 Smyth Ddve, Valencia, CA 91355 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 05-0427 PARCEL 5 IN - D. R. Horton Los Angeles Holding Company, Inc, 28009 Smyth Ddve, Valencia, CA 91355 rvn, v~ro yr a -v ru-se raven o~ 10 LOTA IN Mountain View Bravo, LLC, 1544 S. Sepulveda Blvd., Suile 204, Los Angeles, CA 90025 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 1188 - 0.29 34 11 LOT B IN Mountain Yew Bravo, LLC, 1544 S. Sepulveda Blvd., Sude 204, Los Angeles, CA 90025 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 1188 MAP AND DOCUMENT REFERENCES: 1. PARCEL MAP NO. 11013 RECORDED SEPTEMBER i6, 2004, IN BOOK 53 OF PARCEL MAPS, AT PAGES 130 THROUGH 146, KC.R. 2. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT N0.05-0427 REGORGED SEPTEMBER 9, 2005, AS DOCUMENT N0.0205246719, O.R. 3. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT N0.05-0480 RECORDED SEPTEMBER 28, 2005, AS DOCUMENT NO. 0205265792, O.R. 4. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR LOT LINE AD.IUSTMENT NO.05-0550 RECORDED OCTOBER 24, 2005, AS DOCUMENT NO: 020529-0020, O.R. 5. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 05-1188 RECORDED , 2005, AS DOCUMENT NO. , O.R. 29670APC 1 10125!2005 u ~ ~ o4d G090-BZ£ l99 :sod 4810-69@ {199 :e ~/~Q~f{~y y y y.-/pusxd8 'w~ ~ ~ LO£F6 tl0 'PIa!1%~aNoB 'tOl e!!n5 'tem{S 4t6A ZILt '. .,a '„ 'yw 'p{(1p(~ ~O Spry.wnl~ nelmiWq/ x ~ g . q 6uuaaui6u3 3T96'NXId ® ~~~F ~ ~~^~ ~ ° avr 1~ ~ ~ oa ~ ~ ~ ~ z w $ q ~ 9 F ~ s ~~o ~ zwz ~ o~~e~ k~ UVF ~" OQC ~~ a W $¢ (~'! ~ a ~g 5 ~~ 9~ ~ ~~~ rOr~ ~1 O C~ .~ "d .--{ Z1~-I-I '~ e c/~ Q ~ ~ ~ z ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ a F ~ H H O ~ ~' w RESOLUTION NO. 2 ~ ~ ~ d ~ RESOLUTION PRELIMINARILY APPROVING ENGINEER'S REPORT, SETTING DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING OF PROTESTS CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.OS-1 (CTI'Y IN THE HILLS} WHEREAS, at the direction of this City Council, Wilson & Associates, as Assessment Engineer for improvement proceedings in Assessment District No. OS-1 (City in the Hills}, City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, State of California, has filed with the City Clerk the report described in Section 10204 of the Streets and Highways Code (Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, hereafter in this resolution referred to as "the Act"}, and containing the matters required by Article XIIID of the Califomia Constitution ("Article X)~"), and it is appropriate for this Council to preliminarily approve said report and to schedule the public hearing of protests respecting said report. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY FINDS, DETERMINES AND RESOLVES as follows: 1. This Council preliminarily approves the report without modification, for the purpose of conducting a public hearing of protests as provided in the Act, Article XIIID, and Section 53753 of the California Government Code. Said report shall stand as the report for the purpose of all subsequent proceedings under the Act and Section 53753, except that it may be confirmed, modified, or corrected as provided in the Act. DOCSSF1:819488.1 40213-36 S54 G` ~ m r v o GRIG!hAL 2. This Council hereby sets 6:30 o'clock P.M. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on November 9, 2005, in the Council Chambers at 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, Califomia, as the time and place for a public hearing of protests to the proposed public improvements, the proposed levy of assessments, the amounts of individual assessments, and related matters as set forth in said report, and any interested person may appear and object to said public improvements, or to the extent of said assessment district or to said proposed assessment. 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of said public hearing to be given by mailing notices thereof, together with assessment ballots, in the time, form and manrier provided by Section 53753, and upon the completion of the mailing of said notices and assessment ballots, the City Clerk is hereby directed to file with the Council an affidavit setting forth the time and manner of the compliance with the requirements of law for mailing said notices and assessment ballots. 4. Wilson & Associates, 7600 North Ingram Avenue, Suite 202, Fresno, California 43711, telephone {554) 436-6644, is hereby designated to answer inquiries regarding the protest proceedings. DOCSSF1:819988.1 40213-36 SS4 2 o< $aKF9 ~ ~, '" m v r- Of~,~>>.n,~q o 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 October 12, 2005, by the following vote: CARSON, BENHAM, MAGGARD, COUCH, HANSON, SULLNAN, SCRNNER AYES COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER SEN COUNCILMEMBER '1J~,.,~ J City Clerk and Ex Officio ~------ Clerk of the Council of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED thi_ 12th day of October, 2005 HARVEY L. HALL, MAYOR APPROVED AS TO FORM: ORRICK HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP STATE OF CALIFORNWj County of Kem) i, P(~FAELA A McCARTHY, City Ciedc of the City of Bakersfield, Stale of Califomla, hereby ~d+4'the fomgoingand annexed m ba af~u.Nc, hue and correct copyafiheadginal)~,_~~~ 7 W file in this office arw mat i have compared ttie same wNi the anginal. ~ WITNESSmyhaMandsealihiso2p n~ deyol~~_p~ PAMELA A. McCARTHY, CMC, City Clerk VIRGINIA. GENNARO City Attorney By ~~~jf~f~il.~ /`'y, i~i/S~ DOCSSF7:819488.1 40213-36 SS4 By BY' I1 XY(2O cY 6 ~'~``9 ?- ~ 1- r 'v p OR;GINA~ APPROVED AS TO FORM: 1 City of Bakersfield Assessment District No. OS-1 (City in the Hills) Certificate of Mailing The undersigned, Samuel A. Sperry, hereby certifies the,following: On October 19, 2005, I sent the following items by Federal Express, Priority Overnight: a. a copy of the three-page Notice of Public Hearing and Ballot Procedure, to . which is attached the twenty-page "Description of Assessment Spread Method," which comprises Exhibit D of the Engineer's Report for this assessment district and which is referenced in the notice; and b. the Official Property Owner Assessment Ballot, with the one-page Assessment Roll attached thereto, setting forth the specific parcel information, including the amount of the proposed assessment for each of the eleven assessment parcels. 2. Attached hereto as Exhibit A are: a. A copy of the Notice of Hearing and Ballot Procedure; and b. A copy of the property owner assessment ballot. 3. The items listed in Item 1 above were sent by Federal Express to: Douglas Praw, Esq. Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP MGM Tower 10250 Constellation Boulevard, 21st Floor Los Angeles, CA 90067 4. The items listed in Item 1 above were accompanied by a transmittal letter to Mr. Praw, who serves as special legal counsel to Mountain View Bravo, LLC, the real party in interest with respect to theNovember 9 hearing and levy of assessments. A copy of the transmittal letter is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Executed at San Francisco, California, on October 19, 2005. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoi g is true and correct. L' Samuel A. Spe DOCSSFI :842543.1 40213-36 SS4