HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES NO 7-78RESOLUTION NO.
7-78
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COmmISSION OF THE
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, DECLARING IT HAS'REVIEWED,
EVALUATED AND CONSIDERED INFORMATION, RECOMMENDING
CERTIFICATION OF FINAL EIR AND MAKING FINDINGS
RE STOCKDALE NO. 10 ANNEXATION, GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT, AND ZONING.
WHEREAS, it is proposed that approximately 3,629 acres
of land lying south of California State College, Bakersfield and
Stockdale Highway, east of Buena Vista Road, north of Pacheco
Road, and west of the present city boundary, be annexed to the
City of Bakersfield, designated as Stockdale No. 10, Annexation
No. 243; also it is proposed that approximately 145 acres in
Section 9 and 300 acres in Section 16 not in agricultural pre-
serves, be prezoned for residential use, including R-l, R-2 and
R-3, as shown on Figure 6 of the Final EIR; also it is proposed
to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to include
Section 18, a part of the project area; and
WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR)
on said project was prepared by the Bakersfield Development
Services Department upon a contract with the City with Lusich-
Patrick-Henderson-Mueller ~nd Associates, Inc. (Engineering,
Architecture, Planning) of 2323 "E" Street, Bakersfield, California
and circulated and distributed in accordance with the requirements
of law (57 copies) and applicable regulations, the distribution
list being included in the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, state review of the environmental documents
was certified on December 14, 1977, as complete by the Director
of the State Clearinghouse, Office of Planning and Research; and
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held and
conducted by and before the City~of Bakersfield Planning Commis-
sion in accordance with the procedures required by City Resolu-
tion No. 24-77, on December 28, 1977, at which hearing any comments
were received; and
WHEREAS, various public entities, both statewide and
local, and other organizations have submitted written comments on
the Draft EIR, a list of which appears on page 2 of the Final EIR;
and
WHEREAS, the City has responded in writing to all sig-
nificant environmental points raised by the public agencies and
private persons commenting in writing and any such points raised
in the consultation, review and public hearing process and the
Final EIR, consisting of the Draft EIR, comments and recommendations
received on the Draft EIR, a list of persons, or organizations and
public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR and the responses of
the City as aforesaid, has been completed by the Development
Services Department and placed on the agenda of the regular meet-
ing of the Planning Commission of March 7, 1978, for evaluation
and consideration by said Commission; and
WHEREAS, at the regular meeting, the Planning Commission
evaluated and considered the Final EIR.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEREBY DETER-
MINES, FINDS AND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
1. That the above recitals are true and correct.
2. That the Final Environmental Impact Report dated
February, 1978, has been reviewed, evaluated and considered by the
Planning Commission.
3. That the Final EIR has been completed in compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR
Guidelines and City of Bakersfield Resolution No. 24-77.
4. That the said Final EIR is an accurate and objective
discussion of the proposed project and adequately discusses and
describes all of the environmental considerations and mitigation
measures which need to be considered prior to the approval of the
proposed project.
5. That urban development in the project area will
occur, probably increasing the number of dwelling units by 11,200.
The approval of the annexation will allow planned growth to occur
in an area which will center around the State College. Annexa-
tion by itself will not increase the population density.
6. County agricultural crop production may decrease
by 0.37%. Approximately 1300 acres will probably eventually be
removed from the Agricultural Preserve. However, the total number
of county harvested acres increases each year by an average of 2.4%.
Development will move westerly across the site, allowing the exist-
ing agriculturally producing land to remain productive in the
interim. The option to succeed or not to succeed to the Williamson
Act Contracts only applies to contracts which have been successfully
protested involving land within one mile of the City .at the time of
protest. Otherwise the City must succeed to the Williamson Act
Contracts on lands which are in excess of the one-mile zone. This
option must be decided by the City Council at time of annexation.
7. The project area could generate as many as 22,550
vehicles and generate 125,635 vehicle trips per day. A portion
of the trips will be reduced ultimately by locating community
shopping centers and schools throughout the area and by locating
professional and commercial offices close to the college.' A high
residential density around the college will allow a reduction in
vehicle miles traveled for those living near the college.
8. Alignment of major arterial roads will need to be
established. The major alignments will be along section lines
per the State College Area General Plan. Alignments of streets
within the communities should be scrutinized for efficiency and
adequacy as subdivisions within the project area are developed.
9. Urban development will increase the type and variety
of air pollution in the southwest Bakersfield area. Planning for
roads and their intersections will help offset a portion of the
vehicle miles traveled thereby reducing air pollution. Other miti-
gation measures such as bicycle and pedestrian paths and the
location of community shopping centers and schools will also tend
to reduce air pollution.
10. An increase in the number of students will require
schools and facilities to be located in the project area. Con-
struction of new schools will take place over a period of years
in coordination with the State College Area General Plan. School
boards will have sufficient time to evaluate their enrollment
needs based upon information given in the Final EIR. Also advan-
tage can be sought by the school districts from provisions of the
Subdivision Map Act relating to required dedication of property
and from the provisions of new Chapter 4.7 (commencing with
Section 65970) of the Government Code relating to required dedi-
cations and fees from developers when a finding of overcrowding
in attendance areas are made and the City is notified by the
school district.
11. That the project area would use less water than
agricultural uses.
12. Based upon the ultimate average density, development
of the complete project area.will exceed the capacity of the Sewage
Disposal Plant No. 3. Planning for improvement and expansion of
existing Plant No. 3 is presently being done in anticipation of
future development. Alignment of future interceptors will be
located in major arterials before construction of the arterials.
13. Solid waste collection for the total project area
could increase the City's annual waste generation by approximately
69%. No immediate adverse impact is foreseen from development
expected to occur. Continuation of present collection and dis-
posal methods will maintain the quality of service for future
residents. Sufficient sanitary landfill capacity .remains to
allow city and county planners time to locate additional landfill
sites in the future.
14. Electrical power and natural gas usage will in-
crease by approximately 7.6% and 1.9% respectively. Insulation
of buildings in accordance with building codes will substantially
reduce heating and cooling requirements. Solar heating of domestic
water and living spaces can be utilized economically at this
time.
15. Development along arterial roads and railroad
tracks will experience increased ambient noise levels. Vehicular
boise will be reduced by requiring developers to construct noise
barriers along all major and secondary arterials, and sound-
proofing buildings and structures within the 60 dBA CNEL contours.
16. The quality of water is not expected to decrease
with development. Operation under California Water Service
Company helps assure proper management and quality of domestic
water.
17. The various alternatives to the project, including
no project, have been considered. The annexation as presently
proposed is recommended after due consideration.
18. That the above findings re mitigation measures
represent some change in the project which avoid the significant
environmental effects thereof as identified in the Final EIR.
19. That there are economic, social and other consid-
erations which make infeasible any other mitigation measures or
project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. Approximately
37,000 persons will be added to the community population when the
total project area is developed in orderly fashion. Housing
within the project area would accommodate the overall growth
trend of the area for a considerable length of time into the future.
It is believed the ultimate plans of the State College and its
relationship to the community would be served by approval of the
project.
Development in the annexed portion of the project area
will have shortterm financial impacts on revenue-supported city
services. The tax base for the quality of improvements anticipated
for the college area will offset costs necessary for community
facilities and services. It is determined that the proposed
project contains social and economic benefits which outweigh any
environmental risks associated with the project.
20. That in consideration of the above statements,
determinations and findings, the Planning Commission recommends
to the City Council that this Final EIR be certified as completed
in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the
State EIR Guidelines and City of Bakersfield Resolution No. 24-77
and recommends approval of the project as proposed subsequent to
certification by the City Council.
o0o
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was
passed and.adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of
Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on the 7th day of
March, 1978, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Banks, Baldwin, Davis, Frederickson,
Haddad, Prewett
None
ABSENT:Vice Chairman Van Horn
Tim Banks, Chairman
Planning Commission
Dewey Sceales, Secretary
Planning Commission
RESOLUTION NO. 24-78
DESIGNATION OF APPLICANTS LOCAL AGENT
RESOLUT. ION
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNC I L
{Governing Body/
THAT H. E. BERGEN
(Name of Inc um ben t}
is hereby authorized to execute for and in beh',df of
THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
_____OF
(Public En aty}
CITY HANAGER
fOf~cial Porition}
THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
, a public entity established under the laws of the State of CALIFORNIA
this application and to file it in the appropriate State office for the purpose of obtaining certain Federal financhl assistance
under the Disaster Relief Act (Public Law 288, 93rd Congress) or otherwise available from the Pre~ident's Disaster Relief
Fund.
THAT THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD , a Public entitY established under the laws of the State of CALIFORNIA
, hereby authorizes its agent to provide to the State and to the Federal Disaster A~stance
Administration (FDAA), Department of Housing and Urban Development (H UD) for all matters pertaining to such Federal
d~ter assistance the sssm'ance~ and agreements printed on the reverse side hereof.
Passed and approved tiffs 15th il,qy of... March ,19 78. by
Ayes: Councilmen Christensen, Medders. Rattv. Rogers,
{Name and Tit/e}
the following vote:
Sceales, Strong'
Noes: None
{Name and Title/
Absent: Councilman
Abstaining: None
Barton
(Name and Title}
CERTIFICATION
!, H.E. BERGEN
BAKERSF I E LD
pas~ed and approved by the COUNC I L
[GoVerning Bodyj
on the 15th March
day of ,19 78.
Date:
, duly appointed and CITY -MANAGER
of...
(Title}
, do hereby certify that the above i~ a true and correct copy of a re.~J!ution
of' THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
M~ ~ f~f Bakersfield
CITY MANAGER
[Oy7~cial Position}
HUD - 490 (9-74) R~places Provioul Edition and OEP Form 231 Which I~ Obsolete