HomeMy WebLinkAboutAD 01-1 Memo RE Ballot Procedure Sam Sperry• ORRICK, NERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE ~~P
OLD FEDERAL RESERVE BANK BUILDING
400 SANSOME STREET
SAN FRANCISCO, cA 94111-3143
te( 415-392-1122
O R R I C K fax 415-773-5759
WWW.ORRICK.COM
MEMORANDUM
To: TonyHogg/Brian Alexander
Don Jul
From: Sam Sperry (415 773-5467
Date: May 14, 2001. .
Re: Notice of Hearing and Ballot Procedure; Assessment Ballot;
Waiver and Consent; Proposed Assessment District No. 01-1
(Nhn~ at Allen/Mountain Vista Drive/Hampton Place), City of Bakersfield
Transmitted to each of u lease find the followin
yo p g
1. Qne copy of the Notice of Hearing and Ballot Procedure, with the 18-page
"Description of Assessment Spread Method" attached;
,:gin:.
2. Three copies of the property owner assessment ballots (with Assessment Roll
attached), as f ollows:
a. to Tonyand Brian, the two ballots for Campus Park, LLCti and Communities
at River Oaks, LLC, respectively; and
b. to Don, the ballot f or Hampton Place LLC; and
3. Three copies of a property owner waiver and consent, waiving the 45-day mailed
notice re uirement and consentin to the le of assessments as set f orth in the
q g ~'
Assessment Roll.
You are requested to complete two copies of the respective ballots and two copies of
the waiver and consent f orms enclosed to you, ' ' .gone set of ballots and waiver and consent
form to Pam McC~~rthy, City C1erk,1501 Tru~~tun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301, and ~ ~ g the
second set to me in the enclosed return envelope. Please complete your execution and rr.~ailing no
later-than Friday, June 1, -to assure timely receipt by both Pam and me. In the event you have any
questions, don't hesitate to call me at the above direct-dial number.
cc (with Certificate of ' ' g): Pam McCarthy
John Stinson
DOCSSF1:~3252~.1
40213-25 SS4
City of Bakersfield
Assessment District No. 01-1
(Ming at Allen/Mountain Vista ~Drive/Hampton Place)
Certificate of Mailing
.The undersigned, Samuel A. Sperry, hereby certifies the following:
1. On May 15, 2001, the undersigned completed mailing the following items by first
class mail, postage prepaid:.
a. a copy of the three-page Notice of Public Hearing and Ballot Procedure, to
which is attached the 18-page "Description of Assessment Spread
Method,y' which attachment is referenced in the notice;
b. the Official Property Owner Assessment Ballot, with the name of the
applicable property owner set, forth therein and with .the Assessment Roll
attached, as referred to therein; and
c. a return envelope addressed to the City Clerk, City of Bakersfield,1501
Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93302, for the discretionary use of the
addressee to return the completed assessment ballot to the City Clerk.
2. Attached hereto as Exhibit A are:
a. A copy of the Notice of Hearing and Ballot Procedure;
b. a copy of the 18-page "Description of Assessment Spread Method" which
was attached to the notice;
c. copies of each of the. three separate property owner assessment ballots, and
d. a copy of the Assessment Roll which was attached to each of the three
ballots.
3. Individual envelopes containing the items listed in Paragraph 1 above were
mailed to each of the property owners at the mailing addresses set forth in the
mailing list attached hereto as Exhibit B. The mailing. labels for the individual
envelopes were matched to the corresponding individual assessment ballots.
r
Executed at San Francisco, California, on May 15, 2001.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the fore ng is true correct.
S amuel A. Sp e
DOCSSF 1:532575.1
40213-25 SS4
City of Bakersfield
Assessment District No. 01-1
(Ming at Allen/Mountain Vista Drive/Hampton Place}
.Notice of Public Hearing and Ballot Procedure
Pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913. (Sections
10000 and following, California Streets and Highways Code; hereafter referred to as the "1913
Act"} and California Government Code Section 53753, the City of Bakersfield ~ the
(
"City") hereby gives notice as follows:
1. At 7.00 p.m. (or as soon thereafter as circumstances permit) ~on June 13,
2001, in the Council Chambers of the City Council at 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield,
California, ,the City Council will hold the public protest hearing respecting the proposed
Assessment District No. 01-1 (the "Assessment District").
2. The public improvements and incidental costs .and expenses of the project
design and implementation, legal proceedings, .and bond financing which are the subject of the
proposed Assessment District, .,together with a detailed statement of the method of determinen
g
the .proposed allocation of costs and expenses among the benefited parcels in proportion to the
special benefit, are described in detail in the Engineer's Report (the "Engineer's Report") for the
proposed Assessment District, which report is~ now on file with the .City Clerk .(thee "Clerk"} at
1501 Truxtun Avenue., Bakersfield, California, where said Engineer's .Report is available for
examination by \any interested person.
3. The present best estimate of the total .assessment to be levied is $2.5
Million. Please see the 3-page Assessment ;Roll (which constitutes Exhibit A of the Engineer's
Report} attached to the enclosed Official Property .Owner Assessment Ballot for the amount of
the .assessment proposed for the individual parcels. The .reason that an assessment is proposed
for your parcels is than the Engineer's Report recommends and the City Council has determined,
preliminarily, that such. property is specially benefited by the proposed public improvements.
The -basis upon which the amount of the proposed assessments were calculated is set forth in
Exhibit D of the Engineer's Report, a copy of which Exhibit. D is attached to this notice.
4. The City Cfluncil intends, pursuant to subparagraph (f) of Section 10204
of the 1913 Act, to authorize an annual assessment upon each of the parcels of land in the
proposed Assessment District to pay various costs and expenses incurred from .time to time by
the City and, not otherwise reimbursed to the City which result from the .administration and
collection of assessment installments or ~frorn the ~ administration or registration of the
improvement bonds and the various funds and accounts pertaining thereto, in an amount per year
not to exceed $50 per parcel. This annual assessment shall be in addition to any fee charged
pursuant to Section 8682 and 8682.1 of the Streets and Highways Code.
5. Assuming the City Council levies assessments. as intended, property
owners will be provided an opportunity to pay all or any part of such assessments in cash,
without interest, prior to issuance of bonds, unless this entitlement is waived in writing by 100%
of such property owners or their authorized- representatives. p'ollowing the termination of the
DOCSSF1:532557.1 ~ ~'
40213-25 SS4
~s~
cash payment period (whether by passage of time or by waiver}, the City Council intends to
provide for issuance of the improvement bonds in the amount of the unpaid assessments. The
period of repayment for the bonds will establish the duration of annual installments on account
of unpaid assessments, provided that the duration of annual installments will not exceed 30
years.
6. For further particulars, you may refer to the Engineer's Report, which is
on file with the Clerk. Inquiries about the assessment proceedings will be answered by John
Stinson, City Public works engineer, at (661) 326-3592.
7. Pursuant to Section 53753 of the California Government Code, the
following procedure., will be followed by the City Council to determine whether a "majority _.
protest" exists at the close of the .public hearing of protests. An "Official Property Owner
Assessment Ballot (the ``Assessment Ballot") has been enclosed with this notice.
NOTE: This Official Property Owner Assessment
Ballot is THE official assessment ballot! It is not a sample
ballot. You will not receive any other or~ additional assessment
ballot. In order to make this assessment ballot count in
determining whether a ~ "majority protest" exists, -you must
mark it ["Yes" or "No"], date it, sign it, and submit it to the
Clerk no ~ later than the close of the public .hearing of protests.
If for any reason an assessment ballot has. not been .received by
the Clerk prior, tQ the close of the public hearing of protests, it
will not be considered.
After the Assessment Ballot has been marked "Yes" or "No", dated and signed, ~it may returned
to -the Clerk in the enclosed, self addressed return envelope. This Assessment Ballot may be
used by the. owner or owners of any parcel to express either. support for or opposition to the
proposed assessment. Please see the Assessment Ballot for instructions respecting the alternative
methods fir submitting the Assessment Ballot either by mail ~ (which may be done using the
enclosed envelope but requires the user to provide the required postage!) or by personal delivery,
either prior to ~ or at the time of the public hearing of protests. See the enclosed Assessment
Ballot'for further instructions. .
8. In accordance with Section 53753 of the California Government Code,
each property owner who submits a ballot is requested to fold the ballot in half and to staple it
shut at the top so ~as to conceal the contents of the ballot. In the event that any ballot is submitted
without being sealed, the Clerk will seal it, using the procedure set forth in the foregoing
sentence. Once sealed, the ballot is to remain sealed until the public hearing is closed and the
ballots are opened to be tallied. _
9. Immediately following. the close of the public hearing of protests, whether
on June 14 or on such date as the hearing maybe continued to, the returned Assessment Ballots
will be tabulated, both in support of and in opposition to the assessment, with the ballots being
weighted in accordance with the amount of the proposed assessment, land the results will be
announced;. provided that, in the event the Clerk requires opportunity to determine whether any
2
DOCSSF1:532557.1
40213.25 SS4
r
Assessment Ballot has been properly signed by an owner or authorized representative of an
owner; the City Council reserves entitlement to continue the matter of .announcing results to
provide the Clerk with such opportunity.
In the event that Assessment Ballots in opposition exceed those in support, there
will be a "majority protest", and the City Council will be precluded from proceeding with the
proposed assessment.
10. Property owners wishing to preserve the ,opportunity to file a lawsuit
challenging the assessment, if levied, are required by the 1913 Act to file, a written protest and to
state.. therein the -specific grounds of protest. Any grounds of protest not stated in a written
protest filed prior to the- close of the public hearing of protests are deemed waived in any
subse uent lawsuit and may not be raised in such lawsuit.
q
DATED: April 2b, 2001
Pamela McCarthy, CMC
=City Clerk
City of Bakersfield ,
Attachment: Exhibit D - Description of Assessment Spread Method
Enclosures: Return Envelope (postage must .be added by user)
Official Property Owner Assessment Ballot, v~ith Assessment Roll attached
3
DOCSSF1:532557.1
X0213.25 SS4
EXHIBIT D
ENGINEER'S REPORT
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.Ol-1
- (MING AT ALLEN/MOUNTAIN VISTA DRIVE/HAMPTON PLACE)
DESCRIPTION OF ASSESSMENT SPREAD METHOD
INTRODUCTION
The City Council appointed the Director of Public Works as the En ineer of Wor
g k for AD 01-1 by
adoption of Resolution of Intention No.123 6 on Febru 14 2001. On Jan '
~' uary 31, 2001, the. City
Council approved Agreement No. 01-027 with Edward J. Wilson a Re istere ' ' '
g d Civil Engineer,
appointing him as the Assessment Engineer for AD O 1- l . The Assessment En inee
g r has been
retained by the City to prepare an Engineer's Report on the ro osed assessment
. p p that will include,
in part, an analysis of the facts in~AD O l -1 and the development of a method of a ortioni
pp ng the total
amount of the costs and expenses of the proposed improvement ac uisitions to the ar
. q p cell and lots
located,within A.D 01- l .The assessments are a ortioned accordin to the s '
Pp g pedal benefits received
by the lots, pieces and parcels of land within AD 01- l . The ro ortional s ec' '
p p p ial benefit denved by
each parcel is determined in relationship to the entire of the ca ital cost of the '
~' p improvements. No
assessment has been apportioned on any parcel that exceeds the reasonable cost of the r '
p oporti oval
special benefit conferred\on that parcel. Only special benefits. are assessed and an
y general benefits
have- been separated` from special benefits for u oses of this re ort.
p~ p
r
AD O1-l has been formed pursuant to etitions si ned b the Di
P g y strict Proponents as the. owners of
all of the ADO 1~-1 property proposed to be assessed re uestin the Cit '
., , ~ q . g y Council to waive further
proceedings under Division 4 of the Streets and. Hi hwa s Code and to unde '
$ y make proceedings
pursuant to the 1913 Act and to the provisions of Munici al Code Section 13.08.070. T ' '
p he petitions
are on file with the City Clerk and were acce ted on Febru 14 2001 wh '
. p , ~ en the City Council
adopted .its. Resolution No. 013-O1, "Acce tin Petition and. Determi ' '
p g ping to Undertake Special
Assessment Proceedings (AD 01-1)."
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PURPOSE
ADO 1-1. has been formed for the purpose of financin the estimated t ' - ` ' '
g otal cost for City acquisition
of certain public improvements within three AD 01-1 communit •
y areas which are described in
.Section I ofthe AD O l - l Engineer's Re ort. A detailed
P description of the .proposed. Improvement
Acquisitions is presented in En ineer's Re ort
g p Section II. The AD O l -1 proceedings will confirm
an assessment for the estimated total cost of the im rovements to be ac wire
. , P q d pursuant to the 19I 3
Act and to the Municipal Code. The City pro ores to issue bonds under the
. P 1915 Act, secured by
the unpaid assessments, to pay the cost to ac wire the im rovements and a. '
q p p y all incidental costs and
.expenses related thereto and authorized far fundin b the 1,913 Act.
gY
294b0ExhibitD D-1
4/10!01
AUTHORIZATIQN FQR ASSESSMENT REALLQCATIONS
As~ stated above, the petitions filed by the District Proponents request that the AD O 1-1 assessment
be spread to the assessed properties in the manner set forth in Municipal Code Section
13.08.070-Benefit Sprear~ The City .Council has approved .that request by the adoption of its
referenced Resolution No.013-01, and in accordance with that Resolution the AD 01-1 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 improvement covered by the. assessment. Municipal Code Section 13:08.070
authorizes the "reallocation" to alternate properties of assessments initially allocated to parcels in
proportion. to their estimated benefit (i.e., initial allocation made in accordance with the 1913 Act
benefitlcost requirement and that benefitlcast share is reallocated to the other parcels that may or
may not be directly benefited by the improvements funded in the assessment):
The AD O l -1 individual parcel assessment amounts shown on Engineer's Report Exhibit A,
Assessment Roll, have been calculated ("spread"}among the assessed parcels pursuant to Municipal
Code Section 13.08.070. The Alternate Method used by the Assessment Engineer to reallocate the
benefit based assessment shares initially allocated by the, Assessment Engineer to each AD 0l -1
assessed parcel has been provided to the Engineer of Work by the District Proponents and is
hereafter referred to as the "Reallocation Method." In light of the fact that the ADO 1-1 parcel
assessments have been spread using a Reallocation Method proposed by the District Proponents, it
is the intent of the AD ~ 1-1 Assessment Engineer in preparing this Engineer's Report Exhibit D to
present information and data on the Reallocation Method and on the BenefctlCost Based Method
for allocation of assessments. The objective of this effort is to present a comparative analysis of the
Benef~tlCost 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 beimplemented as the confirmed "Assessment Spread Method" for AD O 1-1.
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
Proponents and of the BenefitlCost. Assessment Spread, Method developed by the .Assessment
Engineer. Those descriptions and assessment calculation, results are followed by a comparison of
the parcel assessments calculated using each method. A statement of .findings as to whether the
ro osed Reallocation Method is in conformance with the criteria set forth in Munici al Code
pp p
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.
29460ExhibitD D-2 4110101
1~unicipal Code Section 13.08.070-,~ene~t Spread
A. In s ecial assessment proceedings conducted by the City of Bakersf eld
P
pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of l 913 (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 determine and implement an alternate method and rate of assessment
reallocating assessments to alternate properties.
B. Such reallocation may Qccur even though doing so will result in no
assessment bein levied u on property which is, in fact, benefited by improvements
g p
for which the assessments are levied and which is determined differently from a
direct costlbenefit 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 u on written and recorded consent of the owner of the property to
p
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 bear 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 Pro onents have submitted a roposed "AD O 1-1 Alternate Method and Rate of
p p
Assessment" (the "AD 01-1 Reallocation Method"~) to the Engineer of Work. Also in accordance
with Section 13.080.070 C ,the District Pro onents have submitted written requeststo the Engineer
O p
of work askin that the proposed AD 01-1 Reallocation Method be implemented for AD 01-1 and
g
further stating that they are the owners of all of the property proposed to be reallocated a share of
the AD O l -1 Assessment and that the consent to the reallocation.. The Engineer of Work has
Y .
acce ted the \ ro osed method and .directed the Assessment Engineer to~ use the AD 01-1
p pp .
Reallocation Method for calculating the~AD 01-1 parcel ~ssessm.ents.
The AD 01-1 Reallocation Method is generally described as:
Subject to certain exceptions described below, thetotal improvement acquisition.cost within
each of the three 3 communit .areas Min at Allen Area, Mountain Vista Drive Area, and
(} Y ( g
Ham ton Flace .Area) is spread annong the developed and undeveloped parcels within each
p
area in direct proportion to parcel acreage and to each planned or existing lot within those
undevelo ed~ arcels as ~ an a ual er lot cost share. The acreage spread exceptions within
. p p q p
each community area are as follows:
29460EahibitD D-3 4!10101
, 1, Ming at Allen Area
There are no exceptions in the Ming at Allen Area to the equal cost share per acre and equal
cost per existing or .planned lot Reallocation Spread Method. All Ming at Allen Area
improvement acquisition costs are apportioned to Assessment Nos. 1 through 5 8, as
described below. As stated in Engineer's Report Section II, the Ming at Allen Area is
planned for subdivision into a school site, a storm drain sump, and a combined total of 259
R-1 lots as follows: (i} 8 R-1 lots pursuant to a portion of Unit One of Vesting Tentative
-Tract No. 5957 ("Ten, TR 5957"); (ii) 49 R-1 lots pursuant to Unit Two of Ten. TR 5957;
(iii)108 R-1 lots pursuant to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6032 ("Ten.. TR 6032"); and (iv)
94 R-~1 lots ursuant to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6034 ("Ten. TR 6034"}. On February 9,
p
2001, Tract No. 5957 Unit One,("TR 5957-1"} was recorded with the County Recorder of
the Coun of Kern creating several R-1 lots, of which eight (8) are in AD O 1- l . One of the
District Proponents (Communities at River Oaks, LLC}has informed the Engineer of Work
and the Assessment Engineer for AD O 1-1 of its intent to record Tract No. 595 7 Unit Two
("TR 5957-2"} with 49 R-1 lots prior to confirmation of the ADO 1-1 assessment.
Each existing and proposed R-1 lot is apportioned an equal share of each Product Type
Area's share (Product Type Areas are described below) of the total cost assessed to the Ming
at Allen Area in the amounts shown on Engineer's ,Report Exhibit A, Assessment Roll.
The Min at Allen Development Area has an existing AD 96-2 assessment (identified as AD
g
96-2 Assessment No. l 8},and the cost to pay off that existing assessment is shown- in Exhibit
B, Table B-III. Table B-III in Exhibit B is a statement of the cost to pay off the principal
' balance remaining unpaid after the affected parcel's share of the 2000/2001 tax year principal
and interest for the existing parcel assessment confirmed pursuant to AD 96-2 (AD 96-2
Assessment No.18}has been paid, including related bond call.expenses. The City Finance
Department confirmed that both installments of the 200012001. tax year billing for said AD
96-2 assessment have been paid to the County.. In addition, prior to filing this Engineer's
Report for AD 01- 1, the City Finance Department informed the Engineer of Work for AD
O l -1 that the total amount of the AD O 1-~1 existing assessment payoff costs (see Engineer's
Report Exhibit B, Table B-III) was paid on January 16, 2001, and that the :City Finance
Director released the AD 96-2 lien for the affected parcel on February 27, 2001.
-~- 'The ortion of the Ming at Allen Area located within the existing AD 99-1 boundaries does
p
not have an existing AD 99-1 assessment. Pursuant to AD 99-1 Assessment and Diagram
Amendment No.14, this portion of LLA P00-0690 Parcel B was not allocated a share. of the
AD 99- l assessment amount.
Table C-II-A in Engineer's Report Exhibit C shows the total amount assessed to this area in
the "Total Assessment" column, followed by the per acre and per R-1 lot or per Equivalent
Dwelling'Unit ("EDUv') assessment amounts. Table C-I in Exhibit C shows the assessment
calculation details for the total amounts allocated to Assessment Nos. 1 through 58, as
29460ExhibitD D-4 4110101
C
calculated using the Reallocation Method. The school site and storm drain sump land uses
are classified by the Reallocation Spread Method as non~benefited and are, accordingly, not
allocated a share of the Total Assessment.
2. Mountain Vista Drive Area
- There are no exceptions in the Mountain Vista Drive Area to the equal cost share per acre
and equal cost per planned lot Reallocation Spread Method. All Mountain Vista Drive Area
improvement acquisition costs are apportioned to Assessment Nos. 59 through 127, as
described below. As stated in Engineer's Report Section II, the Mountain-Vista Drive Area
is planned for subdivision -into a combined total of 123 R-1 lots as follows: (i} 68 R-1 lots
in Phase 1 of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6008 ("Ten. TR. 600$"); and (ii} 55 R-1 lots
pursuant to Phase 2 of Ten. TR 6008. One of the District Proponents (Campus Park, LLC)
has informed the Engineer- of work ,and the Assessment Engineer for AD O l -1 of its intent
to record Tract No. 6008 "Phase 1 "("TR 6008-1 "} with 68 R-1 lots prior to confirmation of
the AD O 1-1 assessment.. As Ten. TR 6008. future, phases are recorded, each new R-1 lot will
be apportioned an equal share of the total cost assessed to Assessment No. 127 in the
amounts shown on Engineer's Report Exhibit A, Assessment Roll, so that all R-1 lots in the
Mountain Vista Drive Area (including the 68 R-1 lots in TR 6008-1 identified as Assessment
Nos. 59 through 126} will end up with the same AD Ol-1 assessment amount.
Table C-II-B in Engineer's Report Exhibit C shows the total amount assessed to this area 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 Assessment Nos. 59 through 127, as calculated using the
Reallocation Method.
3. Hampton Place Area
There are no exceptions in the Hampton Place,Area to the equal cost share per acre~and equal
cost per planned lot Reallocation Spread Method. All Hampton Place Area improvement,
acquisition costs are apportioned to Assessment Nos.128 through 185, as described below.
As stated in Engineer's. Report Section II, the Hampton Place Area is planned for subdivision
.into a water well site, a storm drain sump, and a combined total. of 154 R-1 lots as follows:
(1)116 R-1 lots pursuant to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6007 (``Ten. TR 6007"}; and (ii) 38
R-1 lots pursuant to Vesting Tentative Tract No. 6033 ("Ten. TR 6033"}, ane of the District
Proponents (Hampton Place, LLC} has informed the Engineer of work and the Assessment
Engineer for AD 01-1 of its intent, to record Tract, No. 6007 Unit one ("TR 6007-1'.') with
51 R-1 lots prior toconfirmation ofthe AD O l -1 assessment. As those tentative tracts' future
phases are recorded, each new R-1 lot will be apportioned. an equal share of the total cost
assessed to Assessment Nos.128,129, l 83, and 184 in the amounts shown on Engineer's
Report Exhibit A, Assessment Roll, so that all R-1 lots~in the Hampton Place Area (including
29~6aExhibitD - D-5 ail ova i
the 51 R-1 lots in TR 6007-1 identified as Assessment Nos. 130 through 169 and 171
through 181 }will end up with the -same AD ~ O l -1 assessment amount.
.Table C-iI-C in Engineer's Report Exhibit C shows the total amount assessed to this area in
the "Total Assessment"~ column, followed by the per acre and per R-1 Iot or per EDU
assessment amounts. Table C-I in Exhibit C shows the assessment calculation details for the
total amounts allocated to Assessment ~ Nos. 128 through 185, as calculated usin the
g
Reallocation Method. The water well site and storm drain sump are classified by the
Reallocation Spread Method asnon-benefited land uses and are, accordingly, not allocated
a share of the Total Assessment.
CALCULATION ~F REALLOCATED ASSESSMENTS
Engineer's Report Exhibit C includes a "C-II" group of three tables labeled C-II-A through C-II-C.
Each table presents the results of the parcel reallocated assessment calculations for one of the three
AD 41-1 communi areas. The Tables C-II Reallocated Assessment spread data has been calculated
~'
in accordance with the Assessment Reallocation Method Description presented in the preceding
section of this Exhibit D. The assessment reallocation data for the unsubdivided parcels ,presented
in the three C-II Tables has been calculated based on the development planning, land use, and EDU
information for each community area provided by the District Proponents and the AD O 1-1 Design
Engineer. The subdivision acreages and proposed EDU's or lots for the three community areas were
obtained by reference to the recorded subdivision maps and approved or proposed subdivision
tentative maps, and by reference to the ADO 1-1 Assessment District studies and data prepared by
the AD O 1-1 Design Engineer. That subdivision acreage and lot data has been used to calculate the
reallocated assessment shares for the existing and proposed subdivisions within the three AD 01-1
community areas.
There is a separate C-II table for each community area, and each table shows. the cost share
reallocations for the separate improvement systems to be acquired that will be~spread to each planned
subdivision within a community area. Each C-II Table also, shows the AD 01-1 Assessment .
Proceeding and Bond Issuance Cost share reallocations under the"Proceeding/Issue Cost" column,
and the total amount proposed to be assessed under the "Total Assessment" column. Following the
Total Assessment column are two columns listing the amount assessed per assessable acre and the
amount assessed per EDU.
Table C-I in Engineer's Report Exhibit C consolidates all of the assessment reallocation data
presented in the C-II group of tables and provides the assessment data by existing Kern County
Assessor's Tax Number ("ATN") or by parcel description for every existing and proposed
subdivision lot and/or parcel in AD ~ O1-l . The improvement acquisition cost reallocations are
summarized in a single column onTable C-I, because their details are presented inthe C-II tables.
However, Table C-I itemizes the improvement incidental, assessment proceeding, and bond issuance
cost reallocation amounts in separate columns, while those costs are shown as a total amount in the
"Proceeding/Issue Costs" column on the C-II Tables. Since the per acre and per EDU or per lot
29460ExhibitD D-6 4110101
assessment data is shown onthe C-II Tables for each land use area or ATN and for each proposed
subdivision that data is not re Bated on Table C-I. The "Preliminary Assessment Amount" shown
P
on Exhibit. A, Assessment Roll is the amount proposed to be assessed to each .lot and parcel in AD
O 1-1 and is also the amount shown under the column entitled "Total Assessment" in Table C-I.
DESCRIPTION OF BENEFITICOST BASED ASSESSMCENT ALLOCATION METFIOD
Municipal Code Section 13.08.010 sets forth several criteria under which the City may "determine
and im lenient" an alternative method of assessment.: This section of Exhibit D will present
P
information and data for reference by the City Council in their deliberations to make a final
determination on whether the ro osed AD O 1-1 Assessment Reallocation Method is in conformance
pp
with Municipal Code Section 13.08.070: and as to whether the proposed Assessment Reallocation.,
Method will be im lemented as the conf rmed "Assessment S read Method" for AD O1-1.
p P
The intended ob'ective in develo in the AD O1-1 Benefit/Cost Based Assessment Allocation
J pg
Method (the "AD O l • 1 Allocation Method") is to define a cost allocation method that apportions the
AD 01-1 costs to each arcel in conformance with the requirements of the 1913 Act, which requires
p
that the financed cost in a special assessment proceeding be allocated among the benefited parcels
of land in ro ortion to the estimated benefit each parcel. can be expected to receive from the
pP
financed work and improvements. It is fi;urther intended that the AD O l - l Allocation Method be in
eneral conformance with the benefitlcast methods used to spread costs in existing City assessment
g
districts for- which aNotice afAssessment-was recorded prior to the April 1995 Council adoption
of Ordinance No. 3643 addin Section 13.0.80.070 to the Municipal Code. In accordance with these
g
intended obj ectives, the AD 01-1 Allocation Method is based on the following:
o The Cate o~ries of Benefit each im rovement s stem rovides ~to the. assessment district
g p ~' p
properties;
o The Method of A ortionin the improvement system work items and cost to the various
PP g
benefit categories; ,
o The Criteria for Determinin which arcels are benefited by the improvements assigned to
g p
each benefit category; and -~
o The Method of Allocating the apportioned improvement system costs for each benefit category
to the arcels benefited b that category of improvements, in proportion to the estimated level
p Y
of benefit the parcels will receive from those improvements.
I. The Cate ories of Benefit that ravide the foundation for the ADO 1-1 Allocation Method
g p
-are as follows:
A. Development EntitlementlArterial Class Improvement Benefit Category: This is the
rim sate o of im rovement benefit supporting the AD 01-1 Allocation Method
P ~ g rY p
294b0ExhibitD ~ D-7 ~ 4110101
developed for each of the three AD 01-1 community areas. As stated in Engineer's
Report Section I, the AD O 1-1 improvements are improvements that are either already
..required, or are expected by the District Proponents to be required, to be installed as
conditions of development entitlement approval for .the properties in AD Ol -1.
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 01-1 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 01-1 parcels and to a much larger
community area not included. in AD O 1-1. Arterial streets and .transmission grid water
mains, certain sanitary sewer and storm drain pipelines are examples of .improvements
that maybe assigned to this benefit category.
B. Direct Bene~tlFronting Improvement Benef t Category: All of the AD O l -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, certain water, sanitary sewer, and storm drain pipelines.
C. Non-benef tedand.Non-assessed Parcels:. All of the following described parcels in AD
01-1 are defined for the purpose of this Allocation Method as not being benefited by the
ADO 1-1 Improvements and, accordingly, they are not apportioned a share of the AD
01-1 assessment by the Allocation Method or by the Reallocation Method:
1. All City-owned property; all landscape lots in existing and future subdivisions; street
right-of-way; parks; water well or sewer lift station parcels; and
2. All existing and designated storm drain sump sites.
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 benef it categories:
1. Development Entitlement/Arterial Class Improvements
a. Arterial and Major Collector Street Improvements:.River Run Boulevard (Ming
at Allen Area Mountain Vista Drive Mountain Vista Drive Area and Allen
)~ . ( ~~
Road and Palm Avenue (Hampton .Place -Area) are .the AD O 1-1 street
improvements with component parts assigned to this category. For the purpose
of the Allocation Method, the center traffic lanes. for. River Run Boulevard in the
Ming at Allen Area, the center traffic lanes for Mountain Vista Drive. in the
29460ExhibitD D-$ 4110101
in Vista Drive Area, and center traffic lanes in Allen Road and Palm
Mounts .
venue in the Ham ton Place Area are the specific portions of these streets
A p
classified as "Arterial" Improvements.
smission Grid Water Mains: For the purpose of the AD 01-1 Allocation
b. Tran
ethod this im rovement category would include 16-inch diameter water mains
M , p .
ssified as "Grid Mains" needed to serve an area outside the boundaries
that are cla
D O 1-1. Accordin to the AD 01-1 Design Engineer, there are no such
of A g
Transmission, Grid Water Mains funded in ADO 1-1.
Sani Sewer Main Collector Pipelines: For the purpose of the AD 01-1
c. Lary
llocation Method this im rovement category would include sewer pipelines
A ~ , p _.
needed to be installed ,as conditions of development entitlement approval that
' ed to serve an area outside the boundaries of the AD O 1-1
have been design
uni .Accordin to the AD 01-1 Design Engineer, there are no such
comet ty g
Sanit Sewer Main Collector. Pipelines funded in AD 01-1.
ary
' Main Collector Pi elines: For the purpose of the AD
d. Storm Water Drainage p
- llocation Method this im rovement category would include Storm Water
O1 lA ~ p ,.
Drains a Pi elines 'bein , installed. as ,conditions of development entitlement
g p g
a royal that have been designed to serve an area outside the boundaries of the
pp ~ t the AD
AD 01-1.communit in which they are being installed. According o
y
01-1 Desi n En ineer, there are no such Storm Water Drainage pipelines funded
g g
in AD 01-1:.
2. Direct BenefitlFronting Improvements:
' / treet Li hts/Traffic Si nals: ~ The outside traffic lane,
a. Streets/Landscaping S g g
bic cle lane and arkin lane, curb and gutter, ,deceleration lane and busbay
~' ~ p g
onion of all streets, including arterial and major collector level streets, provide
p
direct and localized benefit to the fronting .property areas. In the case of a new
' ' ' velo ment -all fr~ntin street, sidewalks, street lights,- and
subdivision de p g .
a in irn. rovements alon its perimeter are generally required to be
landsc p g p g , ,
~~~ installed as a condition of ~ the tract development entitlement approval.
' in the Allocation Method street frontage improvements are assessed
Accordingly,
back to the frontin subdivision area. In the case of ADO 1-1, the fronting area
g
ma encom ass a~ block of roperty that the District Proponent has identified as
y p p
an area lanned for subdivision in phases, such as Ten. TR 5957, Ten. TR 6032,
p ~ . TR
and Ten. TR 6034 in the Ming at Allen Area, and Ten. TR 6007 and Ten
6033 in the Hampton Place Area..
' -and 12-inch diameter water and 8- and 10-inch
b. Local Service Pipeline. 8
' eter sewer mains and 3 6-, 3 0-, 24-, .and 18-inch diameter storm drain
dram
?9460ExhibitD D-9 4110101
' classified as frontn benefit improvements and their cost is
pipelines are g
allocated back to the fronting property areas that will be served by these
' Short sections of i eline stubouts into future subdivision
pipelines. p p
develo ment areas are also allocated as direct benefit improvements. -
p
B. A ortionment of im rovement system cost shares to the benefit categories:
pp p
1. Apportionment of Street Costs:
a. For the arterial and major collector streets that have portions assigned to both the
' ent Benefit ,and Frontin Benefit Categories, the improvement item
Entitlem g
uantities and costs for street construction work are apportioned to these
q
cafe ories in direct proportion to street surface,. area for the portion of the street
g
assi ned to each benefit category. The Fronting Street cost. rs estimated based on
g
.a 1 S-foot avement width, with the balance of the street surface area classified
p
as the "Arterial" Street section. If both of the. center traffic lanes of a four lane
' et are included in the sco a of financed improvements, the parcels
arterial stre p
rontin on each .side of the street right-of-way are each apportioned the cost of
f g _ .
one~center arterial) traffic lane. This Arterial Street Section cost represents each
fronting arcel's Entitlement Benefit Cost, based on the requirement to construct
p
one-half of the Arterial Street as a condition of entitlement approval for each
erial Street im rovements constructed along the boundary of an
,parcel. For Art p .
AD 0 I - l cornmuni area, an im rovements to the half of the street adj acent to
tY y p
the ADO 1-1 assessed property are classified as the Entitlement/Fronting Street
im rovements benefitingthe AD OI -1 property, while die opposite side traffic
p
lane im rovements are classified as the Arterial Street Improvements benefiting
p
roe not in AD 01-1, The composite street area totals for the
p p ~'
Entitlement/Frontingnnd Non AD O l -1 Arterial Improvement Categories were
used to calculate im rovements stern work item quantity and cost percentage
p y
factors and thosearea-based factors were used to allocate project work item cost
shares to these two benefit categories. .
- treet work items of curb and utter and sidewalk wereassigned a 100%
b. The non s g
Frontin ..Benefit factor to allocate their costs to the "Direct Benefit/Fronting
g
,Improvement Category."
2. Apportionment of Water Mains:
' in AD 01-1 have all been classified as "Fronting Benefit"
Water Mains
~im rovements and these work items and costs are allocated accordingly. Those
p
' is are s read to their benefited service area properties as described in .the
pipeline cos p .
following Paragraph III. ,
29460ExhibitD D- I O 4! 10101
3. Apportionment of Storm Drain Pipelines:
Storm Drain Pipelines in AD 01- l have all been classified as "Fronting Benefit"
improvements, and these work items and costs ire allocated accordingly. Those
pipeline costs are spread to their benef ted service area properties as described in the
following Paragraph IIL.
III. The Criteria for Determining which .parcels are benefited by the improvements allocated
to each. benefit category are as follows:
A. Mini at Allen Area: The Ming at Allen Area Improvements are generally shown and
described on Map No. l in Exhibit E in note A. The improvements to be installed on and
.along River Run Boulevard include both Development EntitlementlArterial Class
Improvement Benefit Category and Direct BenefitlFronting Improvement Benefit
Category improvements required. for the. development of the Ming at Allen Area.
.Accordingly, their cost is allocated to Ming at Allen Area parcels (Assessment Nos. l
through 58) as Development Entitlement and Direct BenefitlFronting Improvements.
The River Run Boulevard arterial street improvements include the construction of the
entire street to its full width adjacent to Unit Two of Ten. TR 5957, Ten. TR 6032, and,
Ten. TR d034 and , to the proposed storm: drain sump ,parcel, the proposed school site
parcel,. and a portion of Tentative Tract No. 5999 (located outside AD 01-1). 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 (as is the
case for River Run Boulevard), the parcels fronting on each side of the street right-of-
wayare each apportioned the cost. of one center. (arterial} traff c lane: This Arterial Street
Section cost represents each fronting parcel'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 westbound center (arterial}traffic lane will
be -installed along the south/southeast boundary of Ten. TR 5957, Ten. TR b032, and
. ~ Ten. TR b034, and the cost of that portion of the westbound traffic lane is apportioned
to said vesting tentative tracts' portion of the Ming at Allen Area as a Development
Entitlement~Benefit Improvement. The westernlsouthwestern 1270 feet of the 2000-foot
long by 14-foot wide eastbound center (arterial) traffic lane will be installed .along the
westerly/northwesterly boundary, of the, proposed storm drain sump parcel .and the
proposed school site parcel and the cost of that portion of the eastbound traffic lane is
apportioned to said portion of the Mirig at Allen Area covered by the proposed .storm
drain sump site and the proposed school site. The cost of the remaining 730 feet of the
. eastbound River Run Boulevard .center traff c lane .will provide a Development
;Entitlement Benefit to the Non AD 01-1 property fronting on the southeasterly boundary
of the Ming at Allen Area (Tentative Tract No. 5999). and, accordingly, the cost of that
eastern portion of the eastbound traffic lane isapportioned as aNon AD Ol -1 beneficial
29460ExhibitD D-11 4110101
cost. All other Ming at Allen Area Improvements are allocated to the fronting (AD 01~-1
and Non AD O l -1 } parcels as Direct BenefitlFronting Improvements.
B. Mountain Vista Drive Area: The Mountain Vista Drive Area Improvements are
generally shown and described on Map No. 2 in Exhibit E in notes A through D. The
improvements to be installed op and along Mountain Vista Drive .include both
Development EntitlementlArterial Class Improvement Benefit Category and Direct
Benef t/Fronting Improvement Benefit Category improvements required .for .the
development of the Mountain Vista Drive Area. Accordingly, their cost is allocated to
Mountain Vista Drive Area parcels (Assessment Nos. 59 through 127) as Development
Entitlement and Direct Benefit/Fronting Improvements.
The Mountain Vista Drive arterial street improvements include the construction of the
vest half of the street (southbound side of the street} to its full width adj acent to Ten. TR
600$. In accordance with the preceding paragraph ILB. ~ .a, if both of the center traffic
lanes for a four lane arterial street are included in the scope of financed improvements,
. the parcels fronting on each side of the streetright-of-way are each apportioned the cost.
of one center (arterial} traffic lane. This Arterial Street Section cost represents each
fronting parcel's Entitlement Benefit. Cost, based on there uirement to construct one- ~ ,
q
half of the Arterial Street as a condition of .entitlement approval for each parcel. The
14-foot wide southbound center (arterial} traffic lane will be .installed along the east
boundary of Ten. TR 6008 and the cost of that portion of the southbound traffic lane is
apportioned to the Mountain Vista Drive Area as a Development Entitlement Benefit
~. Improvement. All other Mountain Vista Drive Area Improvements (block wall, sanitary
sewer, and water lines) are on-site ~ (in-tract) improvements that are assessed as Direct
Benefit Improvements to Assessment Nos. 5 9 through 127. There are no Mountain Vista
~- Drive Area Improvements apportioned as a Non AD 01-1 beneficial cost.
C. 'Hampton Place Area:. The Hampton Place Area Improvements are generally shown and
described on Map No. 3 in Exhibit E in notes A through C. The improvements to be
.installed on and along Allen Road and Palm Avenue (Ten. TR 6007 frontage) include
both Development EntitlementlArterial Class Improvement Benefit Category and Direct
Benef~tlFronting lmprovement Benefit Category improvements required for the
development of the Hampton Place Area. Accordingly, their cost is allocated to
Hampton Place Area parcels (Assessment, Nos. 128 through 185} as Development
Entitlement and Direct BenefitlFroriting Improvements,
The Allen Road and Palm Avenue (Ten. TR 6007 frontage) arterial street improvements
inc ude the construction, respectively, of the southbound and eastbound, half of each
street to its full width adjacent to Ten. TR 6007. In accordance with the preceding
paragraph II.B. l .a, if both of the center traffic lanes .for a four lane -arterial street are
included in the scope of financed improvements, the parcels fronting on each side of the
streetright-of-wa}~ are each apportioned the cost of one center (arterial) traffic lane. This
29460EahibitD ~ D-12 ~ ~ 4110101
Arterial Street Section cost represents each fronting parcel's Entitlement Benefit .Cost,
based on the re uirement to .construct one-half of the. Arterial Street as a condition of
q
entitlement approval for each parcel. The 14-foot wide southbound center (arterial)
traffic lane in Allen Road and the 14-foot wide eastbound center (arterial}traffic lane in
Palm Avenue will be installed along the boundaries of Ten. TR 6007, and the cost of
,.
those. onions of the traffic lanes ~ is apportioned to of the Hampton Place Area as a
P
Development Entitlement Benefit Improvement. All other Hampton Place Area
Irn rovements are assessed to the entire Hampton Place Area (to be developed as one
P
subdivision pursuant to Ten. TR 6007 .and Ten. TR'6033} as Direct BenefitlFronting
Im rovements. There are no Hampton Place Area improvements apportioned as Non AD
p
01-1 beneficial cost. ~ ~ -
IV. The Method of Allocatin the a ortioned s stem costs for each benefit category to the
g pP Y
benefited arcels within each of the three AD 01-1 community areas, in proportion to the
p
estimated level of benefit :the parcels in each area will receive from the various
im rovements included in each benefit category is described below:.
.p
A. Ming at Allen Development Area Assessment Allocation Method
..
Table C-III-A "Details of Min at Allen Area Estimated Benefit Assessment Allocations.
g
for Pro osed Development," in Engineer's Report Exhibit C (hereafter "Exhibit C")
p
_ shows how the Ming at Allen Area Improvement Acquisitions costs have been allocated
based on the aforesaid benefitlcost criteria. Reference to Table C-III-A shows the total
Min at Allen Area benefitlcost share apportioned to the residential portion of the Ming
g
at Allen Area (Ten. TR 5957, Ten. TR 6032, and Ten. TR 6034}, the Benefited/Non-
assessed AD 01-1 (the roposed storm drain sump and the proposed school site parcel)
p
share, and the BenefitedlNon-assessed (Non AD 01-1) share allocated to_ benefited
property outside AD O 1- l . All of the Ming at Al len Area improvements are required to
be installed as conditions of approval for the referencedtentative tract maps, and they are
not subj ect to oversize reimbursement.
B. Mountain Vista Drive Area Assessment Allocation Method
Table C-III-B in. Exhibit C "Details of Mountain- Vista Drive Area Estimated Benefit
Assessment Allocations for Proposed Development," shows how, the Mountain Vista
Drive Area Im rovement Acquisitions costs have been spread in accordance with the AD
p _
Ol-1 Allocation Method. Reference to Table C-III-B shows how ,the assessment
allocation data for the Mountain Vista Drive Area has been apportioned to the recorded
TR 6008-1 and the remainder parcel covered by Ten. TR 6008 (AD 01-1 Assessment No.
127). Table C-III-B also shows that.there is no Non AD 01-1 share allocated to benefited
- roperty outside ADO 1-1. All of the Mountain Vista Drive Area improvements are
p
required or are, expected to be required to be installed as conditions of approval for Ten.
TR 6008, and the}~ are not subject to oversize reimbursement.
,- -
29460ExhibitD D-13 4110101
C. Hampton Place Area Assessment Allocation Method
Table C-III-C in Exhibit C "Details of Hampton .Place Area Estimated Benefit
Assessment Allocations for Proposed Development," shows how the Hampton Place
Area Improvement Acquisitions costs have been spread in accordance with the AD 01-1
Allocation Method. Reference to Table C-III-C shows how the assessment allocation
data for the Hampton Place Area has been apportioned to the recorded TR 6007-1 and
the four unsubdivided parcels covered by Ten. TR 6007 and Ten. TR b03 3 SAD 01-1
AssessmentNos.128,129,183, and 184). Table C-III-C also shows thatthere is no Non
ADO 1-1 share allocated to benefited ,property outside AD 01-1. All of the Hampton
Place Area improvements are required or are expected to be required to be installed as
conditions of approval for Ten. TR 6007 and Ten TR b033, and they ,are not subject to,
oversize reimbursement.
D. Contingency .and Improvement Incidental Costs for each improvement system within
..each community area are included in the total allocated cost share in the C-III group of
tables. These costs are allocated within each community area in direct proportion to the
beneficial improvement cost share allocations.
COMPARISON .OF REALLOCATION METHOD .AND B~ENEFITICOST BA_ SED
ASSESSMENT ALLOCATION METHOD; ASSESSMENT SPREAD RESULTS
The three. "C-IV" tables in Engineer's Report Exhibit C (Tables C-IV-A through C-IV-C}present
separate comparisons by community area of the cost assessed to individual parcels or land use areas
when the AD 01-1 cost is spread in accordance with the Reallocation Method proposed by the
District Proponents, to the parcel cost shares when the spread is calculated.in accordance with the
BenefitlCost Based Assessment Allocation Method developed by the AD 01-1 Assessment Engineer.
In each .case, .the Reallocation Method results are shown in the "Reallocation Per City Code
13..08.070" column and the Allocation Method results in the "Estimatedd Benefit Allocation" column
of the C-IV tables group. The Reallocation Amount minus the Allocation Amount is shown in the
"Reallocation Minus Benefit Allocation" column.
These tables show that, as permitted by Municipal Code Section 13.08.070, the Reallocation Method
does not apportion an assessment amount to the Nan AD Ol-l parcels that are shown in the Benefit
Allocation column to have a beneficial cost share for certain improvements. In accordance with the
District Proponents' Reallocation .Method and as shown on the C-IV group of tables, the full. cost
of the River Run Boulevard improvements is assessed by the Reallocation Method to the Ming at
Allen Area properties, including the portion of those improve~rnents that~is required. to be installed
as a development entitlement approval condition for Tentative Tract No. 5999 tParcel C of Lot Line
Adjustment No. P00-0690} located outside AD 01-1. Further review ofthe C-I~ group of tables will
show that improvement costs for work within or adjacent to a community area have been assessed
only to properties in that area, and in their last two columns adjacent to the right margin, they show,
294b0~xhibitD D-14 4110101.
re~s ectivel the er acre and er EDU differences between the parcel assessments calculated using
p Y~ p p
the AD 01-1 Reallocation Method and the AD 01-1 Allocation Method.
ASSESSMENT ENGINEER'S STATEMENT OF FINDINGS ON THE ASSESSMENT
-SPREAD METHOD
Based on the descri tions and data presented above and fi;u~Yier~illustrated in the referenced Exhibit C
p
Tables on the ro osed AD O 1- l Reallocation Method, the following findings on the AD O 1-1
pp
Assessment Spread Method are presented:
A. The im rovement ac ~ uisitions roposed to be financed by AD 01-1 are improvements that will
p q p
be installed within or ad'acent to :the community area that is assessed the cost of those
J _ ...
im rovement ac uisitions and, accordingly, the AD - 0l -1 Improvement Acquisitions bear a
p q
rational nexus to the properties proposed to be assessed a share of their. cost; and
B. The District Pro orients have submitted written requests. to the Engineer of Work -that the
p
Reallocation Method of assessment spread be implemented, and they have further represented
that said re nests were a roved b all AD 01-1 property owners at the time they were filed.
q pp Y
Therefore it is the findin of the Assessment Engineer that the proposed Reallocation Method is in
g
conformance with the requirements of Municipal Code Section 13.08.070.
T PROCEEDING INCIDENTAL AND BOND ISSUANCE COST
ASSESSMEN
ALLOCATION ~ ..
The. AD 01-1 assessment roceeding and bond issuance costs are spread indirect. proportion to the
p
total im rovement cost reallocated to each parcel.
p
ASSESSMENT APPORTIONMENTS TO FUTURE SUBDIVISIONS
when a arcel with an AD 01-1 confirmed assessment is subdivided in the future by the recording
p ~. .
of a subdivision or arcel map, a certificate of compliance for lot line- adjustment or parcel map
P
waiver or u on the sale of all or a portion of an assessed parcel to a public agency, the 191 S Act
p
re wires that the amount remaining unpaid on the original, bond-funded assessment principal be .
q ...
a~ ortioned to each of the new lots and parcels created by the parcel division. ~ In the case of AD
Pp
O1-1, the Reallocation Method .has spread the AD 01-1 cost within each community area indirect
ro onion to arcel acrea e. Therefore, as AD 01-1 assessed parcels are subdivided, the remaining
p p p g
rinci al ari~ount of the .original bond funded parcel assessment will be apportioned to the new lots
P p
and parcels as follows:
1. Min at Allen Area: This onion ~of. AD 01-1 is lanned for development into a school site, a
g P p
storm drain sump and combined total of 2591ots pursuant to Ten. TR 5957, Ten. TR 6032, and
294b0ExhibitD D-1 S 4110101
Ten. TR 6034. Tract No. 5957 Unit One containing 8 R-1;lots in AD 01-1 has been recorded
with the Kern Coun Recorder. Tract No. 5957 Unit Two containing 49 R-1 lots is scheduled
for City Council approval prior to the ADO 1-1 hearing on June 13, 2001, and is planned for
recordin with the Kern Coon Recorder prior to recordation of the AD O 1-1 Notice of
g tY
Assessment. In accordance with the above-described proposed development and if the
development proceeds as proposed, the original Assessment No. l total confirmed assessment
amount will be a ortioned first an a net area basis between the two Product Type Areas {Ten.
pp
TR 6032 and Ten. TR 6034) within the Ming at Allen Area and then each area's assessment
share will b~e a ortioned as an a ual er lot assessment. Accordingly, the first tract phase
Pp q p
recorded b .the District Proponent will be allocated a total assessment share equal to the number
Y
of R-1 Lots in the base multi lied b the calculated equal per R-1 lot cost share factor for the
p p Y
Product Ty e Area of Assessment No.. l in which the first tract phase is.located. The remaining
P
balance -will be apportioned to the unsubdivided remainder for apportionments to future
subdivision, bases in accordance with the process described above. However, if the
. p
develo merit Ian for Assessment No. l is revised, then the plan for segregation of the original
p p .
assessment will be revised to apportion a cost share to the first subdivision or subdivision phase
and its remainder arcel indirect proportion to their total acreages. The total assessment share
p
apportioned to the recorded subdivision or subdivision phase would then be reapportioned to its
~lbts as an equal assessment share per R-~l lot. Storm water retention sumps, water well sites,
arks and school site arcels will be excluded from the tract acreage and the calculated net
P ~ P
acreages used to apportion the original total assessment. Landscape lots and in-tract street areas
will not be excluded from the tract acreage totals.
2. Mountain vista Drive Area: This portion of AD 01-1 is planned for development into 123 R=1
lots ursuant to Ten. TR 6008. Tract No. 6008 "Phase 1"containing 68 R-1 Tots is scheduled
p
for Ci Council a roval prior to the AD 01-1 hearing on June 13, 2001, and is planned for
tY pP
recording with the Kern. County Recorder prior to recordation of the AD Ol-1 Notice of
Assessment: The total assessment principal for the Mountain vista Drive Area is apportioned
between the to be recorded TR 6008-1 phase of Tract No. 6008 and the remainder.parcel in such
manner that all R-1 lots in the Mountain Vista Drive Area will end up with ~an equal assessment
amount once all phases of .Ten. TR 6008 are recorded. Accordingly, the next tract phase
recorded by the District Proponent will be allocated a total assessment share equal to the number
of R-1 lots in the phase multiplied by the calculated equal. per R-11ot cost share factor for the
Mountain Vista Drive'Area. The remaining balance will be apportioned to the unsubdivided
remainder fora . ortionments to future subdivision phases in accordance with the process
Pp .
described above. However, if the development plan for Assessment No.127 is revised, then the
lan for se re ation of the original, assessment will be revised to apportionea cost.share to the
p gg
first subdivision or subdivision phase and its remainder parcel in direct proportion to their total
acres es. ~ The total assessment share apportioned to the recorded subdivision or subdivision
g
phase would then b;, reapportioned to its lots as an equal assessment share per R-1 lot. Storm
water retention sumps, water well sites, and parks will be excluded from the tract acreage and
the calculated net acreages used to apportion the original total assessment. Landscape lots and
in=tract street areas will nOt be excluded from the tract acreage totals.
29460ExhibitD D-16 ~ 4110101
3 . Ham ton Place Area: This portion of AD 01-1 is planned ,for development- in 116 R-1 lots, a
p
storm drain sump, and a water sell -site pursuant to Ten. TR 6007 and an additional 3 S R-1 lots
ursuant to Ten. TR 603 3. Tract No. 6007 Unit One containing 51 R-1 lots, a storm drain sump,
p
and a water well site is schedule for City Council approval .prior to the AD 0l -1 hearing on June
13 2001, and is lanned for recording. with the Kern County Recorder prior to recordation o.f the
p
AD 01-1.Notice of Assessment. The total assessment principal for the Hampton Place Area is
a ortioned among the recorded phase of Tract No. 6008 and four unsubdivided parcels in such
pP
manner that all R-1 lots in the Hampton Place Area (a total 154 according to Ten. TR 6007 and
Ten. TR ~ 603 3 will end u with an equal assessment amount once all phases of Ten. TR ~ 6007
p
and Ten. TR 6033 are. recorded. Accordingly, the next tract phase recorded by the District
Pro onent will be allocated atotal assessment share equal,to thenumber of R-l lots in the phase
p
multiplied by the calculated equal per R-1 lot cost share factor for the Hampton Place Area. The
remainin balance will be a portioned to the unsubdivided remainders for apportionments to
g p
future subdivision .phases in accordance .with the process described above.. However, if the
develo ment plan for Assessment Nos. 128, 129,183, and 184 is revised, then the .plan for
p
segregation of the original assessment will be revised to apportion a cost share to the f rst
subdivision or subdivision phase and its remainder. parcel in direct proportion to their total
acrea es. ~ The total assessment share apportioned to the recorded subdivision or subdivision
g
phase would then~be reapportioned to its lots. as an equal assessment share per R-l lot. Storm
water retention sumps, water well sites, and parks ,will be excluded from' the tract acreage and
the,calculated net acreages used to apportion the original total assessment. Landscape lots and
in-tract street areas will not be excluded from the tract acreage totals..
_ [Remainder of page intentionally left blank]
29460ExhibitD D-17 ~ 4I10/U 1
A ENT ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATI®N OF THE ASSESSII~ENT SPREAD
SSESSNI
NIET~OD
This En ineer's Re ort has been prepared to present the following:
g .p
' total cost of the im rovements to be acquired and the incidental costs
1. An estimate of the p
ro osed to be funded ursuant to this assessment proceeding; and
pp p
' descri tion of the Reallocation Method ~ ro osed by the District Proponent as
2. An analysis and p p P
the method used to s read the estimated improvement acquisition costs and incidental expenses
p
to the AD 01- l properties.
However this En ineer's Re ort makes no recommendation a~s to the economic feasibility for the
g p ... .
assessment of the estimated cost of the proposed improvement acquisition and incidental pasts on
the AD 01-1 ro ernes nor on the financial feasibility for the issuance of 1915. Act Bonds to
p p
represent any unpaid arnount of the AD 01-1 Assessment.
AD 01-1 Assessment ma exceed the amount for Which bonds can ~be issued pursuant to
The y
recommendation of ~ the Ci 's financial advisor, as to the minimum acceptable .property. value to
~'
assessment lien ratio for bonds issued and secured by AD Ol-1 unpaid assessments. Additional
roe value in excess of the estimated current value of the assessed property with the
p p rtY
im rovements com leted and installed may need to be confirmed by MAI appraisal, before the City
p p
can issue 1915 Act Bonds in the full amount of the AD 01-1 Assessment.
' m / o inion that the Estimated Total Cost of the ,proposed improvement
In conclusion, ~t is y p
ac uisitions includin all incidental costs, has been, s read in conformance with 'the requirements
q ~ g p
of Municipal Code Section 13.08.070. .
Submitted to the En ineer of V~ork on A ril 12, 2001, for "preliminary" approval by the. City
g p
Council on April 25,, 2001, by: ~ -
F~, .
.,
.:,
I
J
~.~~ ~'~
,~~ 'RpFtSSIpN
COQ ~w ~~F
~~ P~~ ~ QCs ~~
~~ O~ ~~ 2
c~ ~ ~ Np, 23269 m
a .12I31J01 ~
EXP
* Q
- s~ CI~11. ~~~
~TF OF CAti~FO
29460ExhibitD
Edward J. Wilson
R.C.E. 23269 (Expires 12131 /01)
Assessment .Engineer ~ .
Cit of Bakersfield Assessment District No. 01-1
Y -
D- l 8
4110/01
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.O1-1
(MING AT ALLEN/MOUNTAIN VISTA DRIVE/HAMPTON PLACE)
IMPORTANT -OFFICIAL PROPERTY OV~VNER ASSESSMENT BALLOT
This ballot is for the use of the property owner of the parcel(s) identified below, which parcel(s) is/are
located within the proposed City of Bakersfield Assessment District No. Ol-1 (Ming at Allen/Mountain
Vista Drive/Hampton Place). Please advise Ed Wilson of Wilson & Associates, the Assessment Engineer
for the assessment district, at (559) 275-5445 if the name set forth below is incorrect or if you are no
longer the owner or authorized representative of the owner of any one or more of the parcel(s).
This ballot may be used to express either support for or opposition to the proposed assessment district. In
order to be counted, this ballot must be signed below by an owner or, if the owner is not an individual, by
an authorized representative of the owner. The ballot must then be delivered to the Bakersfield City
Clerk, either by mail or in person, as follows:
Mail Delivery: If by mail, place in the return envelope provided, provide stamps for first class
postage, and place in the mail not later than one calendar week prior to June 13, 2001. Mailing
later than this deadline creates the risk that the ballot may not be received in time to be counted.
Personal Delivery: If in person, to the City Clerk at any time up to 12:00 Noon on June 13, 2001, at
the City Clerk's office at 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA or at the protest hearing itself at
7:00 p.m, on that date at the City Council Chambers at the same address.
However delivered, the ballot must be received by the City Clerk prior to the close of the public hearing
(whether on June 13 or a later continuation date) to be counted.
TO CAST THIS BALLOT, MARK EITHER "YES" OR "NO"BELOW, WHERE INDICATED,
FILL IN THE DATE, SIGN YOUR SIGNATURE, AND THEN
PLEASE FOLD THIS PAGE IN HALF TO CONCEAL ITS CONTENTS
AND STAPLE IT SHUT BEFORE SUBMITTING IT TO THE CITY CLERK
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BALLOT
Tax Parcel Number: See Attached Assessment Roll
Owner Name: Campus Park, LLC
Assessment Amount: See Attached Assessment Roll
ASSESSMENT BALLOT MEASURE
Shall the City Council of the City of Bakersfield establish the Yes
proposed Assessment District No. 01- 1, levy an assessment not to
exceed the amount set forth on the attached Assessment Roll on
the parcel(s) identified, issue bonds in the amount of unpaid No
assessments, and proceed with the proposed public improvement
project?
Date: , 2000
Owner Signature:
DOCSSF1:53256?.1
40?13-25 SSA
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.O1-1
(MING AT ALLEN/MOUNTAIN VISTA DRIVE/HAMI'TON PLACE)
IMPORTANT -OFFICIAL PROPERTY OV~VNER ASSESSMENT BALLOT
This ballot is for the use of the property owner of the parcel(s) identified below, which parcel(s) is/are
located within the proposed City of Bakersfield Assessment District No. 01-1 (Ming at Allen/Mountain
Vista Drive/Hampton Place). Please advise Ed Wilson of Wilson & Associates, the Assessment Engineer
for the assessment district, at (559) 275-5445 if the name set forth below is incorrect or if you are no
longer the owner or authorized representative of the owner of any one or more of the parcel(s).
This ballot may be used to express either support for or opposition to the proposed assessment district. In
order to be counted, this ballot must be signed below by an owner or, if the owner is not an individual, by
an authorized representative of the owner. The ballot must then be delivered to the Bakersfield City
Clerk, either by mail or in person, as follows:
Mail Delivery: If by mail, place in the return envelope provided, provide stamps for first class
postage, and place in the mail not later than one calendar week prior to June 13, .2001. Mailing
later than this deadline creates the risk that the ballot may not be received in time to be counted.
Personal Delivery:. If in person, to the City Clerk at any time up to 12:00 Noon on June 13, 2001, at
the City Clerk's office at 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA or at the .protest hearing itself at
7:00 p.m. on that date at the City Council Chambers at the same address.
However delivered, the ballot must be received by the City Clerk prior to the close of the public hearing
(whether on June 13 or a later continuation date) to be counted. .
TO CAST THIS BALLOT, MARK EITHER "YES" OR "NO"BELOW, WHERE INDICATED,
FILL IN THE DATE, SIGN YOUR SIGNATURE, AND THEN
PLEASE FOLD THIS PAGE IN HALF TO CONCEAL ITS CONTENTS
AND STAPLE IT SHUT BEFORE SUBMITTING IT TO THE CITY CLERK
BALLOT
Tax Parcel Number: See Attached Assessment Roll
Owner Name: Communities at River Oaks, LLC
Assessment Amount: See Attached Assessment Roll
ASSESSMENT BALLOT MEASURE
Shall the City Council of the City of Bakersfield establish the Yes
proposed Assessment District No. 01- 1, levy an assessment not to
exceed the amount .set forth on the attached Assessment Roll on
the parcel(s) identified, issue bonds in the amount of unpaid No
assessments, and proceed with the proposed public improvement
project?
Date: , 2000
Owner Signature:
DOCSSF1:532573.1
40213-25 SS4
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO.O1-l
(MING AT ALLEN/MOUNTAIN VISTA DRIVE/HAMPTON PLACE)
IMPORTANT -OFFICIAL PROPERTY OV~VNER ASSESSMENT BALLOT
This ballot is for the use of the property owner of the parcel(s) identified below, which parcel(s) islare
located within the proposed City of Bakersfield .Assessment District No. O 1-1 (Ming at Allen/Mountain
Vista Drive/Hampton Place). Please advise Ed Wilson of Wilson & Associates, the Assessment Engineer
for the assessment district, at (559) 275-5445 if the name set forth below is incorrect or if you are no
longer the owner or authorized representative of the owner of any one or more of the parcel(s).
This ballot may be used to express either support for or opposition to the proposed assessment district. In
order to be counted, this ballot must be signed below by an owner or, if the owner is not an individual, by
an authorized representative .of the owner. The ballot must then be delivered to the Bakersfield City
Clerk, either. by mail or in person,, as follows:
Mail Delivery: If by mail, place in the return envelope provided, provide stamps for first class
postage, and place in the mail not later than one calendar week prior to June 13, 2001. Mailing
later than this deadline creates the risk that the ballot may not be received in time to be counted.
Personal Delivery: If in person, to the City Clerk at any time up to 12:00 Noon on June 13, 2001, at
the City Clerk's office at 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA or at the protest hearing itself at
7:00 p.m. on that date at the City Council Chambers at the same address:
However delivered, the ballot must be received by the City Clerk prior to the close of the public hearing
(whether on June 13 or a later continuation date) to be counted.
TO CAST THIS BALLOT, MARK EITHER "YES" OR "NO"BELOW, WHERE INDICATED,
FILL IN THE DATE, SIGN YOUR SIGNATURE, AND THEN
PLEASE FOLD THIS PAGE IN HALF TO CONCEAL ITS CONTENTS
AND STAPLE IT SHUT BEFORE SUBMITTING IT TO THE CITY CLERK
BALLOT ----------------
TaxParcel Number: See Attached Assessment Roll
Owner Name: Hampton Place LLC
Assessment Amount: See Attached Assessment Roll
ASSESSMENT BALLOT MEASURE
Shall the City Council of the City of Bakersfield establish the . Yes
proposed Assessment District No. Ol-1, levy an assessment not to
exceed the amount set forth on the attached Assessment Roll on
the parcel(s) identified, issue bonds in the amount of unpaid No
assessments, and proceed with the proposed public improvement
project?
Date: , 2000
Owner Signature:
DUCSS~1:532572.1
4Q213-25 SS4
EXHIBIT A
ENGINEER'S REPORT
CITY OF SAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.01.1
COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ASSESSMENT ROLL
ASSESSOR'S TAX ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ _ ! PRELIMINARY j CONFIRMED
ASSESSMENT NUMBER(ATN~1 ~ ASSESSMENT ~ ASSESSMENT ;
NUMBER ;___ PROPERTY DESCRIPTION __ _ _~_ ___ ____, PROPERTY OWNER AMOUNT AMOUNT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
46
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
REMAINDER OF PCL B OF LLA P00.0690
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT ONE; LOT 1
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT ONE; LOT 2
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT ONE; LOT 3
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT ONE; LOT 4
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT ONE; LOT 5
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT ONE; LOT 6
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT ONE; LOT 7
TRACT N0.5957 UNiT ONE; LOT 8
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 1
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 2
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 3
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 4.
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 5
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 6
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 7
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 8
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 9
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 10
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 11
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 12
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 13
TRACT NQ. 5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 14
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 15
TRACT N0, 5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 16
TRACT. N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 17
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 18
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 19
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 20
TRACT N0.5951 UNIT TWO; LOT 21
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 22
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 23
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 24
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 25
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 26
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 27
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 28
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 29
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 30
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 31
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 32
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 33
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 34
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 35
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 36
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 37
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 38
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 39
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 40
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 41
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 42
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 43
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 44
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 45
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT46
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 47
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 48
TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO; LOT 49
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 1
TRACT N0.6Q08 "PHASE 1'; LOT 2
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 3
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 4
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 5
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 6
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 7
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 8
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 9
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 10
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 11
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LQT 12
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 13
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 14
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 15
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 16
TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 17
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER QAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, i.LC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
GOMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES. AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
,COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS,-LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
COMMUNITIES AT RIVER OAKS, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
CAMPUS PARK, LLC
$883,401.93
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,871.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.63
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,a77.s2
$a,s77s2
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,677.62
.$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,s77.62
$4,877.62
$4.,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,877.62
$a,alls2
$a,all.s2
$4,877.62
$x,877.62
$4,877.62
$4,sll.s2
$4,877.69
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
$3,354.30
29x60EXA A-1 0411012001
EXHIBIT A
ENGINEER'S REPORT '
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.01-1
COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ASSESSMENT ROLL
~~~ASBESSOR'S TAX ~ ~ ~ ~-~ ~ _ ~ ~ • - - _..._ . _. _____ ... ._.___.. _ .~ ~-__ - ~ PRELIMINARY ~ CONF{RMEO
ASSESSMENT NUMBER (ATN)1 ;ASSESSMENT ' ASSESSMENT
NUMBER ______ __TPROPERTY DESCRIPTION PROPERTY OWNER ! AMOUNT AMOUNT
76 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1 "; LOT 18 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
77 TRACT N0.6008''PHASE 1"; LOT 19 .CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
78 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1 "; LOT 20 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
79 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 21 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
80 TRACT N0. fi008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 22 CAMPUS PARK, LlC $3,354.30
81 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 23 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
82 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 24 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
83 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 25 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
84 TRACT N0.6005 "PHASE 1"; LOT 26 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
85 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 21 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
86 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 28 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
87 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 29 CAMPUS PARK, LLC ~ $3,354.30
88 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT30, ~ CAMPUS PARK, LLC _ ~ $3;354.30
89 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1 "; LOT 31 ~ CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
90 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 32 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
91 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 33 CAMPUS PARK, LLG $3,354.30
92 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1 "; LOT 34 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
93 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 35 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
94 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 36 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
95 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 37 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
96 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 38 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30 .
97 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 39 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
98 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 40 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
99 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 41 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
100 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 42 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
101 .TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1 "; LOT 43 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
102 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 44 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
103 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 45 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
104 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 46 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
105 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 47 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
106 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 48 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
107 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1 "; LOT 49 CAMPUS PARK, LLC _ $3,354.30
108 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 50 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
109 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1' ;LOT 51 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
110 ~ TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 52 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
111 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 53 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
112 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 54 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
113 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 55 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
114 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 56 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
1,15 TRACT. N0.6008 "PHASE 1 "; LOT 57 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
116 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 58 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
117 TRACT NO.6008"PHASE 1"; LOT 59 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
118 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT fi0 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
119 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 61 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
12D TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 62 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
121 TRACT N0. fi008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 63 CAMPUS PARK„LLC $3,354.30
122 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 64 CAMPUS-PARK, LLC $3,354,30
123 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 65 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
124. TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 66 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
125 TRACT N0, 6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 67 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.30
126 ~ TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 68 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $3,354.00
127 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"; LOT 69 CAMPUS PARK, LLC $184,486.24
128 PARCEL MAP N0.8392; PARCEL 1 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $72;155.47
129 PARCELMAP N0.8392; PARCEL 2 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $72,155.47
130 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 1 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
131 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 2 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
132. TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 3 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
133 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 4 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
134 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 5 HAMPTON. PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
135 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 6 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
136 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 7 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
137 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 8 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
138 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 9 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
139 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 10 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
140 TRACT N0.6007 UNiT ONE; LOT 11 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012,96
141 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT-ONE; LOT 12 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
142 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 13 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96 -
143 ~ TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 14 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
144 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 15 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
145 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 16 HAMPTON PLACE, lLC $6,012.96
146 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 17 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
147 ~ TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 18 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
148 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 19 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
149 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 20 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC - $6,012.96
150 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 21 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
29460EXA A-2 0411012001
EXHIBIT A
ENGINEER'S REPORT
CITY OF BAKERSFIELO ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.01.1
COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ASSESSMENT ROLL ,
~
_--
~~ ~~ ~ __.._ . ~~ ~ ~
--,-.------ 7-
.
PRELIMINARY CONFIRMED
ASSESSOR'S TAX '
l ASSESSMENT ~ ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
~
MBE
R
NU NUMBER (ATN) I
_._ _PROPERTY DESCRIPTION_____."__.__y_
PROPERTY OWNER ~ AMOUNT
~ AMOUNT
.
.
_
_
151 ~ ___
TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 22 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC
LLC
HAMPTON PLACE $6,012.96
~ $6,012.96
152
153 TRACT N0.6001 UNIT ONE; LOT 23
6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 24
TRACT N0 ,
HAMPTON PLACE, ,LLC $6,012.96
154 .
TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 25 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC
LLC
HAMPTON PLACE $6,012.96
$6,012.96
155
156 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 26
6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 27
TRACT N0 ,
HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
157 .
TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 28 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC
LLC
HAMPTON PLACE $6,012.96
$6,012.96
158
159 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 29
6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 30
TRACT N0 ,
.HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
160 .
TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ON.E; LOT 31 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC
LLC
HAMPTON PLACE $6,012.96
$6,012.96
161
162 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 32
6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 33
TRACT N0 ,
HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
. 163 .
TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 34
~ HAMPTON PLACE, LLC
LLC --
HAMPTON PLACE $6,012.96
$6,012.96
164
165 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 35
TRACT N0:6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 36 ,
HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
166 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 37 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC
C $6,012.96
96
012
$6
167 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 38 HAMPTON PLACE, LL
LLC
HAMPTON PLACE ,
.
$6,012.96
1 gg
169 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 39
6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 40
TRACT N0 ,
HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,0$2
O
170 .
TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 42 LLC
HAMPTON PLACE 0
$6,012.96
171
172 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE, LOT
6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 43
TRACT N0 ,
HAMPTON PLACE, LLC
$6,012.96
173 .
TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 44 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC
LLC
HAMPTON PLACE $6,012.96
$6,012.96
174
175 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 45
6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 46
TRACT N0 ,
HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6'
176 .
TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 47
.HAMPTON PLACE, LLC
LLC
HAMPTON PLACE .
012.96
$6,
$6,012.96
177 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 48
6001 UNIT ONE; LOT 49
TRACT N0 ,
HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,012.96
178
179 :
TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 50 HAMPTON PLACE, LLC
LLC
HAMPTON PLACE $6,012.96
$6,012.96
180
` TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 51
6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 52
TRACT N0 ,
HAMPTON PLACE, LLC $6,0$2
.
1g1
182 .
TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 53 LLC
HAMPTON PLACE 0
$168,362.81
183
4 TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 54
6007 UNIT ONE; LOT 55
TRACT N0 ,
HAMPTON PLACE,
$306,6
18
.
185 .
TRACT N0.6007 UNIT_ONE• LOT A LLC
HAMPTON PLACE $0.00
MING AT ALLEN AREA T07AL (Assessment Nos.1 through 58):
~ $1,161,426.35
578.34
$412
MOUNTAIN VISTA DRIVE AREA TOTAL (Assessment Nos. 59 through 127): ,
$925995.31
HAMPTON PLACE AREA TOTAL Assessment Nos. 128 throw h 185
:2,500,000.00
TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED:
NOTES:
1, PARCEL MAP N0. 8392 WAS FILED FEBRUARY 27, 1989, IN BOOK 37 OF PARCEL MAPS, AT PAGES 189 AND 190,
IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF KERN (K.C.R.).
ERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR LOT. LINE ADJUSTMENT N0. P00.0690 (LLA P00-0690) WAS RECORNTM
2. A C
FEBRUARY 2, 2001, AS DOCUMENT N0. 0201014494 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, iN THE OFFICE OF THE COU
RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF KERN.
3 ~ TRACT N0.5957 UNIT ONE WAS RECORDED FEBRUARY. 9, 2001, IN BOOK 46,0E MAPS, AT PAGES 149 AND 150, K.C.R.
OF MAPS, AT PAGES ,_,_ AND ,_„_, K•C.R.
4. TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO WAS RECORDED , 2001; IN BOOK ~ ,
5. TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE WAS RECORDED , 2001, IN BOOK _ OF MAPS, AT PAGES _,,,, THROUGH ~, K.C.R.
6• TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1"WAS RECORDED , 2001, IN BOOK _ OF MAPS, AT PAGES _ THROUGH _,__; K.C.R.
7, ALL ABOVE-LISTED PARCEL SUBDIVISIONS WERE RECORDED AFTER DECEMBERONSI, ~~~ NOT APPEAR OON
THE PARCELILOT CONFIGURATIONS CREATEO BY HEREFORE, THE ASS SSMENT DI5TRICT~ N0.01.1 ASSESSMENT
THE ASSESSOR'S ROLL FOR THE 200112002 TAX YEAR. T
INSTALLMENT AMOUNTS FOR THE 200.112002 TAX YEAR WILL BE BILLED ON THE EXISTINGTAL COMBRNEO 200N 2002 TAX YEAR
COVERING ASSESSMENT NUMBERS 1 THROUGH 18'5 IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER. THE TO
AMOUNT FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0.01-1 ASSESSMENT NOS.1 THROUGH 58 WILL BN081LOLED ASSESSMENT NOSO. 69
THE TOTAL COMBINED TAX YEAR 200112002 AMOUNT FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
THROUGH 121 WILL BE BILLED TO ATN 394-010-68.00-3, ANO THE TOTAL COMBINED TAX YEAR 200112002 AMOUNT FOR
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT N0. 01-1 ASSESSMENT NOS. 128 THROUGH 185 WILL BE BILLED ON THE$ KERN1 COUN~TY~
495-010-21-00-2, AND 495-010.23.00.8 !N DIRECT PROPORTION TO THEIR AREAS, SHOWN
ASSESSOR'S MAP FILED IN BOOK 495 AT PAGE 01. ~~~_
PREPARED BY:
WILSON & ASSOCIATES
FRESNO, CALIFORNIA `A I
~YV __
APPROVED BY: ___ ~ __,__.. ___ - -01
EDWARD J. WILSON, R,C.E. 23269 (EXPIRES 12 31 )
29460EXA A-3
Q~p~ESSIp~,~
~4 p J. W j ~F
~~ APR ~s~ y~ • ~-~o-ol
~ ~ if, ~ DATE.
c~ N0, 23269 rn
W ~
~ .EXP. 12/31/Ol
* * - 04/1012001
s~ C(Vll. ~~~
~TF ~~~~
OF CAI.
NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF PROPERTY OWNERS
~~ ASSESSOR'S TAX
ASSESSMENT ~ NUMBER (ATN)1 j PROPERTY OWNER'S
NUMBER ~ PROPERTY DESCRIPTION NAME AND ADDRESS ~
Communities at River Oaks, LLC
1 REMAINDER OF PARCEL B OF LLA P00-0690 5251 Office Park Drive, Suite 200
Bakersfield, CA 93309
Communities at River Oaks, LLC
2 through 9 TRACT N0.5951 UNIT ONE 52510ffice Park Drive, Suite 200 .
Bakersfield, CA 93309
Communities at River Oaks, LLC
10 through 58 TRACT N0.5957 UNIT TWO 5251 Office Park Drive, Suite 200
Bakersfield, CA 93309 .
Campus Park, LLC
59 through 127 TRACT N0.6008 "PHASE 1" ~ 52510ffice Park Dave, Suite 200
Bakersfield, CA 93309
Hampton Place, LLC
128 PARCEL .MAP N0.8392; PARCEL 1 6851 McDivitt Drive
Bakersfield, CA 93313
Hampton Place, LLC
129 PARCEL MAP N0.8392; PARCEL 2 6851 McDivitt Drive
Bakersfield, CA 93313
Hampton Place, LLC
130 through 185. , TRACT N0.6007 UNIT ONE 6851 McDivitt Drive
Bakersfield, CA 93313
EXHIBIT ~