Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES NO 67-78RESOLUTION NOL". 67-78. RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PROPOSING PROCEEDINGS FOR ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, IDENTIFIED AS ISLAND ANNEXATION NO. 270 (REAL NO. 3). WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield desires to propose the annexation to such City of the hereinafter described territory under the authority of Section 35224.5 of the Government Code, which territory is an island under the provisions of Subdivision (f) of Section 35150 of the Government Code. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Bakersfield hereby RESOLVES, FINDS AND DETERMINES as follows: 1. That the City of Bakersfield proposed the annexation to such City of the territory described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto, and made a part of this Resolution as though fully set forth herein. 2. That a map of the territory proposed to be so annexed, marked Exhibit "B", is attached hereto, and made a part of this Resolution as though fully set forth herein. 3. That a Plan for providing services within the affected territory of the proposed annexation, in accordance with the pro- visions of Section 35102'of the Government Code is marked as Exhibit "C", attached hereto, and made a part hereof as though fully set forth in this Resolution. 4'. That the territory proposed to be annexed as des- cribed in Exhibit "A" and shown on Exhibit "B", meets the follow- ing criteria as an island under the provisions of Subdivision (f) of Section 35150 of the Government Code: (1) Does not exceed 100 acres in area and such area constitutes the entire island. (2) Is surrounded by the City. of Bakersfield to which annexation is proposed. (3) Is substantially developed. (a) Public utility services are available (b) Public improvements are present (~) Physical improvements are present on the parcels within such area. (4) Is not prime agricultural land as defined in Section 35046 of the Government Code; and (5) Will benefit from such annexation and is receiving benefits from the City of Bakersfield. 5. That this proposal for annexation is made pursuant to the Municipal-Organization Act of 1977, commencing with Section 35000 of the Government Code of the State of California; it is requested that proceedings be taken for annexation in accordance therewith. 6. That the reasons for the proposed annexation are as follows: (a) to remove an island of unincorporated territory so that the City's jurisdiction will be physically uniform in the area; (b) to receive tax revenues for benefits given and to be given to the territory proposed to be annexed. 7. That the City will prezone the area described in Exhibit "A" and that such zone classification will be as stated in .Paragraph VI of the Plan for Providing Services set forth in Exhibit "C" herein. 8. That all public utility services are available and presently in use in some instances in the area proposed to be annexed.. 9. That the area is developed with single-family residences. ___10. That the benefits the area will receive upon annexa- tion include the following: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Police protection Fire protection Sewer service Refuse service Residents' participation in City elections. 11. That the benefits the area is receiv~ing from the City of Bakersfield include the following: (a) Street sweeping in adjacent areas (b) Tree trimming in rights-of-way (c) Disposal of storm water and nuisance drainage (d) Sewer service at residents' expense (e) Street lighting. 12. The names of the officers of the City of Bakersfield who are to be furnished with copies of the executive officer's report and who are to be given mailed notice of hearing are: H. E. Bergen City Manager City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 K. W. Hoagland City Attorney City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (Legal Counsel for. Applicant) 13. That the appropriate City officials shall file ten (10) copies of this Resolution with the Executive Officer of the Local Agency Formation Commission of Kern County at 1110 - 26th Street, Bakersfield, California. o0o I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on the 28th day of June, 1978, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEN BARTON, CHRISTENSEN, MEDDERS, PATTY, ROGERS, SCEALES, STRONG NOES: COUN_CI_I?ME_N_~ 4~ J) J[J ~' ,~sSENT: COUNC,Lt~EN: e ~1 ~' ABSTAINING COUNCILMEN: J~ O/~j" CITY C~a ~fficio Clerk Of the Council of~akersfield CITY XTTORNEY of y of Bakersfield J ANNEXATION NO. 270 REAL NO. 3 A parcel o'f land situate in the County of Kern, State of California, being a portion of the Northeast Quarter of Section 11, Township 30 South, Range 27 East, M.D.M., more particularly described as follows: CommenCing at the northwest corner of the northeast quarter of th~ northeast quarter of.said Section 11; thence S00° 34' 09" W, 520.60 feet; thence S 88° S0' H" E, 30.00 feet to the northwest corner of Lot 8 as. shown on Tract No. 2720, recorded on June 15, 1962, in Map Book 12 at page 196, said corner being a point in the existing exterior Corporate Boundary of the City of Bakersfield and the True Point of Beginning; THENCE, clockwise along said exterior Corporate Boundary, completely circumscribing the parcel of land herein described, to the True Point of Beginning. Said.parcel .also being described as a portion of said Tract No. 2720 and Tract No. 2628 recorded on November 24, 1961, in Map Book 12 at page.10S, as said Tracts are recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of said Kern County. Containing' 17.4 Acres, more or less. EXHIBIT "A" -Existing Exferior Cotporte Bounccry ANNEXATION NO. 270 ANNEXATION OF REAl TO THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD EXHIBIT to, 0 O' 0 a~ E~ 0 0 III. What effects, if any, would annexation of this territory have on existing level of city services (i.e., need for additional emergency service personnel or con- struction of new facilities, etc.)? The annexation will not appreciably affect the city's ability to provid~ this needed service. IV. WOuld city require any upgrading or change in facilities. to serve affected terri- tory (roads, fire hydrants, mains, etc.)? If so, would city o__rresidents be responsible for financing? The city fire department would install 5 or 6 new fire t~ydrants equally sDaced throughout the annexed territory. V. Indicate and exp'lain existing zoning in affected territory. ~o~ attachoH co~,nty zoning map 173-11 VI. Indicate and explain proposed prezoning in area. (List effects on present land use 'that would occuras a result of annexation such as maintenance of livestock on property, etc.) - : There would be no change in zoning upon completion of the annexation. This territory would r~main low-density residential. VII. List city services that area will directly or indirectly benefit from such as decrease in fire insurance rate, shorter emergency response time, use of com- munity facilities, etc. There wou.ld be a mnrh mpre efficient dclivcry of publit safety services, f~r~ 4nc,,r~-~e rates would be lcos cxpcnsive VIII. Please provide the following information relative to city and county taxes: List existing tax rate(s) in area. The tax differential characteristics c~nnnt h~ c81culsted at this time and are subqect to the J~rv~s-~nn nm~ndm~nt considerations. List city tax rate(s). How will the difference in tax rates affect a house with a market value of ~50,000 See VIII above. [& ~4 Ld I li I.. .]