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..
.]