Minutes, regular meeting, second session — Bakersfield City Council, October 22, 2025 (part 2 of 3)

Figure 5-5. Proposed Monthly Readiness-To-Serve Water Charges (Outside City) Figure 5-

6. Proposed Monthly Private Fireline Water Charges (Outside City)

5.4 Financial Plan
The ﬁnancial plan assesses whether the future revenue associated with the proposed rate increases is sufficient to cover all of the domestic water system expenses, including operating, capital improvement, debt service, and reserve funding. This analysis is shown below in Figure 5-7.

The performance of the Domestic Water Fund Balance with the proposed rate increase is shown below in Figure 5-8 that illustrates the fund’s performance and compliance with the reserve target as previously deﬁned.

As part of this analysis, the Department compared the proposed rates with other water purveyors that service residents in the City of Bakersﬁeld. T his analysis is shown in Figure 5-9.

Monthly Readiness-To-
Serve Charge (Outside City)
July 1,
2025
July 1,
2026
July 1,
2027
July 1,
2028
July 1,
2029
5/8" x 3/4" 22.04$ 23.36$ 24.76$ 25.35$ 25.96$ 1" 34.86$ 36.95$ 39.17$ 40.11$ 41.07$

1.5" 66.87$ 70.88$ 75.13$ 76.93$ 78.78$ 2" 105.32$ 111.64$ 118.34$ 121.18$ 124.09$ 3" 207.83$ 220.30$ 233.52$ 239.12$ 244.86$ 4" 323.16$ 342.55$ 363.10$ 371.81$ 380.73$ 6" 643.48$ 682.09$ 723.02$ 740.37$ 758.14$ 8" 1,027.89 $ 1,089.56 $ 1,154.93 $ 1,182.65 $ 1,211.03 $ 10" 2,033.60 $ 2,155.62 $ 2,284.96 $ 2,339.80 $ 2,395.96 $

City of Bakersﬁeld 2025 Supplemental Report

Page 20 ends

Figure 5-7 Domes�c Water Financial Plan with Proposed Rate Revenues *Supply expense items include debt service related to KCWA Bond.

Line FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30
1 Rate Revenue from Existing Rates without Adjustment
2 Fixed 13,256,692$ 14,299,284$ 15,424,037$ 16,166,964$ 16,939,759$ 3 Variab le 26,
451,523$ 27,688,132$ 29,478,879$ 29,983,704$ 31,385,443$ 4 Total Revenues 39,708,216$ 41,987,416$ 44,902,915$ 46,150,668$ 48,325,201$ 5 6 Revenue Adjustments 34.0% 6.0% 6.0% 2.4% 2.4%
7 Total Additional Revenue 10,487,491$ 11,085,283$ 10,821,629$ 10,771,395$ 11,160,133$ 8 Total Rate Revenues w/ Rate Adjustments 50,195,706$ 53,072,699$ 55,724,544$ 56,922,062$ 59,485,335$ 9 10 Other Revenues 6,384,424$ 420,000$ 450,000$ 450,000$ 450,000$ 11 Total Municipal Revenues 56,580,130$ 53,492,699$ 56,174,544$ 57,372,062$ 59,935,335$ 12 13 Operation & Maintenance
14 Supply* 16,389,417$ 16,509,172$ 16,972,733$ 17,422,124$ 17,886,056$ 15 Treatment 5,881,062$ 6,451,983$ 6,457,977$ 6,856,860$ 7,253,339$ 16 C al Water 12,005,010$ 13,124,710$ 13,761,181$ 14,515,093$ 15,187,142$ 17 Repair & Maintenance 5,517,500$ 7,140,613$ 6,213,696$ 6,981,176$ 6,600,028$ 18 Hydra nts 100,000$ 103,500$ 107,123$ 110,872$ 114,752$ 19 General 2,917,287$ 2,876,769$ 2,938,242$ 3,176,886$ 2,017,785$ 20 Salaries 1,955,405$ 2,346,890$ 2,440,766$ 2,538,397$ 2,640,869$ 21 Total O&M Expenses 44,765,681$ 48,553,637$ 48,891,718$ 51,601,406$ 51,699,971$ 22 23 Non-Growth/Regulatory C IP 13,500,000$ 6,942,650$ 7,830,892$ 5,973,973$ 6,988,890$ 24 Total Expenditures 58,265,681$ 55,496,287$ 56,722,610$ 57,575,379$ 58,688,861$ 25 26 Net Cashflow (Net Income) (1,685,551)$ (2,003,589)$ (548,066)$ (203,317)$ 1,246,474$ 27 28 Beginning Balance 25,266,863$ 23,581,312$ 21,577,723$ 21,029,657$ 20,826,340$ 29 Ending Balance 23,581,312$ 21,577,723$ 21,029,657$ 20,826,340$ 22,072,814$ 30 31 Reserve Target
32 25% of Annual O&M 11,191,420$ 12,138,409$ 12,222,930$ 12,900,352$ 12,924,993$ 33 5-Year Regulatory C IP 8,247,281$ 6,934,101$ 6,931,252$ 6,481,432$ 6,988,890$ 34 S G MA Domestic Well Mitigation 167,667$ 167,667$ 167, 667$ 167,667$ 167,667$ 35 Total Target 19,606,368$ 19,240,178$ 19,321,848$ 19,549,450$ 20,081,550$ 36 37 Variance From Target 3,974,943$ 2,337,545$ 1,707,809$ 1,276,890$ 1,991,264$ City of Bakersﬁeld 2025 Supplemental Report

Page 21 ends

Figure 5-8 Domes�c Fund Ending Balance vs Required Reserve Target Figure 5-9 C
omparison of Water Rate with other Bakersﬁeld Water Purveyors. $-
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 27-28 FY 28-29 FY 29-30
Ending Fund Balance vs Required Reserve Target
Ending Fund Balance Reserve Target

EXHIBIT A. DOMESTIC WATER FINANCIAL MODEL
FY 2025-2026 FY 2026-2027 FY 2027-2028 FY 2028-2029 FY 2029-2030 Personnel % Increase 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00%

3.50% 3.50% 3.50% 3.50% 3.50%
$25,266,863 Starting 2024-25 Fund Balance
FY 2025-2026 FY 2026-2027 FY 2027-2028 FY 2028-2029 FY 2029-2030 Total Revenue $56,580,134 $53,492,699 $56,174,544 $57,372,062 $59,935,335 Total Expenses $58,265,681 $55,496,287 $56,722,610 $57,575,380 $58,687,925 Fund Balance $23,581,316 $21,577,728 $21,029,661 $20,826,344 $22,073,754 Reserve Target $19,606,368 $19,240,178 $19,321,848 $19,549,450 $20,081,316 $3,974,948 $2,337,550 $1,707,813 $1,276,894 $1,992,438
$ 50,195,706.23 $53,072,699 $55,724,544 $56,922,062 $59,485,335 Non-Operational Revenue $384,428 $420,000 $450,000 $450,000 $450,000 $6,000,000
$56,580,134 $53,492,699 $56,174,544 $57,372,062 $59,935,335 $1,348,617 $1,349,219 $1,349,557 $1,349,940 $1,349,150
$150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000
$90,854 $94,489 $98,268 $102,199 $106,287
$1,693,351 $1,761,085 $1,831,528 $1,904,790 $1,980,981
Civil Engineer IV [50%] $0 $133,669 $139,016 $144,576 $150,359 Reclassification FASO II to FASO III [25%] $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Municipal Water Planner [100%] $171,200 $178,048 $185,170 $192,577 $200,280 Construction Inspector 100% w/ vehicle $0 $179,600 $186,784 $194,255 $202,026 Engineer I/II $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Maintenance Craft Worker $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$41,211,659 $44,604,028 $44,844,273 $47,452,198 $47,445,200 $100,000 $103,500 $107,123 $110,872 $114,752
5-YEAR DOMESTIC WATER

FINANCIAL MODEL

PROPOSED RATE INCREASE REVENUE
FUND 4410 - Municipal Water

EXPENSES - DEBT SERVICES
Developer Reimbursement KCWA Water Rights/Capacity

AVAILABLE FUND BALANCE
CCI % Increase
Municipal Water Capital Outlay [Hydrants]

TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUE

EXPENSES - OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
GRANT REVENUE - Consolidation
Operations OVER Expenditures
Municipal Water Operations
CAO - Deputy City Attorney I [35%]
Additional
Personnel
Municipal Water Personnel
Developer Mainline Extension Reimbursement

EXPENSES - REIMBURSE OTHER CITY DEPTS
Section Project Description
TCP Treatment Program
[4 Wells] [Continuation]
Municipal L-208 TCP Removal / H2S Replace$3,000,000
Municipal L-211 TCP Removal / H2S Replace $300,000 $3,070,000 Municipal CBK-38 TCP Removal $310,500 $3,177,450
Municipal CBK-18 TCP Removal
Municipal CBK-TBD TCP Removal
Municipal CBK-TBD TCP Removal
PFOS Treatment Program
[9 Wells] [Compliance 04/2029]
Municipal PFOs Phase 1 - 6 Wells [Design/ Construct 2 well/year]$1,000,000 $3,300,000 $3,630,000 $3,993,000 Municipal H2S Vessel Replacement [CBK 31] $750,000
Municipal PFOs Phase 2 - 3 Wells [Design/ Construct 2 well/year] $600,000 Municipal PFOs Phase 3 - 2 Wells TBD
H2S Vessel Replacement Program
[Due to Corrosion [Addresses Taste and Odor]]
Municipal H2S Phase 1 - 5 Wells [Design/ Construct 2 well/year] $500,000 $2,000,000 Municipal H2S Phase 2 - 3 Wells [Design/ Construct 1 well/year] Municipal Lead & Copper Service Line Inventory$1,000,000 Municipal Consolidation Line - OR and SK -
McCutcheon Panama to Taft Hwy$6,000,000
Municipal SJVAPCD Replace Aged out Generators
(1 Replacements Per Year til 2030 then 2 per/year) $1,092,650 $1,130,892 $1,170,473 $1,211,440 Municipal Solar Power Project - 1000 Buena Vista$1,500,000 $1,500,000 Municipal Corp Yard Infrastructure $1,000,000
TOTAL EXPENSES $58,265,681 $55,496,287 $56,722,610 $57,575,380 $58,687,925

EXPENSES - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
FY 2025-2026 FY 2026-2027 FY 2027-2028 FY 2028-2029 FY 2029-2030 418,800 421,500 424,200 426,900 429,600

0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
Growth - Assumed Municipal System170,971 173,963 177,007 180,104 183,256

1.75% 1.75% 1.75% 1.75% 1.75%
Personnel % Increase4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00%

3.50% 3.50% 3.50% 3.50% 3.50%
Section Project Description
11 Admin All - Overhead $440,000 $457,600 $475,904 $494,940 $514,738 12 Direct Allocation $14,000 $14,560 $15,142 $15,748 $16,378 34 Legal [85%] $850,000 $1,050,000 $1,050,000 $1,225,000 39 Other Professional - KRGSA Consultants $200,000 $208,000 $216,320 $224,973 $233,972 39 Other Professional - Non-CIP Special Project $200,000 $208,000 $216,320 $224,973 $233,972 39 Other Professional - UWMP $300,000
TOTAL $2,004,000 $1,938,160 $1,973,686 $2,185,634 $999,059 Section Project Description
21 Internal Vehicle $90,000 $93,150 $96,410 $99,785 $103,277 24 Internal Telephone $4,200 $4,347 $4,499 $4,657 $4,820 31 - R&M Service Line Replacement $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,587,500 $2,678,063 31 - R&M TCP GAC [35 Sites] Changeouts $1,750,000 $2,000,000 $2,070,000 $2,142,450 $2,217,436 31 - R&M PFOS GAC [1 to 9 sites] Changeouts $100,000 $103,500 $107,123 $321,368 $535,613 31 - R&M On-call Electrical $517,500 $535,613 $554,359 $573,762 $593,843 31 - R&M On-call Electrical - Generators $500,000 $550,000 31 - R&M On-call Well and Pump [BKFLD&S.Val]
Well Maintenance Program $1,500,000 $1,552,500 $1,552,500 $1,606,838 $1,606,838 31 - R&M Badger AMI Meters [per Water Board] $1,500,000 $1,552,500 $1,606,838 $1,663,077 $1,721,285 31 - R&M Street Permits/ Organic Waste $30,000 $31,050 $32,137 $33,262 $34,426 TOTAL $7,491,700 $9,372,660 $8,523,865 $9,582,696 $9,495,598 40-[21-31] INTERNAL / REPAIR & MAINTENANCE
5-YEAR WATER OPERATIONS
30 - ADMIN
Growth - Assumed Residential
Growth Rate %
Growth Rate %
CCI % Increase
Section Project Description
11 Liability Insurance $150,000 $155,250 $160,684 $166,308 $172,128 12-66 Miscellaneous [line items less than $10,000] $35,000 $36,225 $37,493 $38,805 $40,163 91 - Other CWS O&M $10,405,010 $10,821,210 $11,254,058 $11,704,221 $12,172,390 91 - Other X-Connection & TCP/Arsenic/PFOS
GAC Oversight and Regulatory Sampling$1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 $1,700,000 $1,900,000 91 - Other TCP Monitor [FGL] Sampling $200,000 $208,000 $216,320 $224,973 $233,972 91 - Other PFOS Monitor Sampling $15,000 $15,600 $16,224 $48,672 $81,120 91-Other Water Conservation Administration $100,000 $103,500 $107,123 $110,872 $114,752 91 - Other Water Conservation & Rebates [CWS] $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 91 - Other Water Conservation [WAKC] $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 91 - Other Water Conservation [ID4] $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 91 - Other SWRCB Large Water System Fees $165,000 $170,000 $175,000 $180,000 $185,000 91 - Other Site Security [65%] $62,400 $64,896 $67,492 $70,192 $72,999 91 - Other Landscrape Services [75%] $8,190 $8,518 $8,858 $9,213 $9,581 91 - Other Janitor Services [75%] $5,616 $5,841 $6,074 $6,317 $6,570 91 - Other Printing Supplies $5,200 $5,408 $5,624 $5,849 $6,083 91 - Other Pest Control $910 $946 $984 $1,024 $1,065
91 - Other Professional Memberships: $2,000 $2,100 $2,100 $2,100 $2,100 TOTAL $12,662,326 $13,805,494 $14,466,035 $15,276,545 $16,005,923 Section Project Description
21-Water CWS - Treated Water [4,500 AF @ $400/AF]$1,800,000 $1,800,000 $1,800,000 $1,800,000 $1,800,000 21-Water KCWA - Treated Water [6,500 AF-Capital $] $1,514,500 $1,651,000 $1,690,000 $1,735,500 $1,774,500 21-Water ID4 - Northwest Feeder Power $386,755 $406,093 $426,397 $447,717 $470,103 21-Water ID4 - Northwest Feeder O&M $113,807 $117,790 $121,913 $126,180 $130,596 21-Water ID4 Solar O&M $1,000 $150,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 21-Water RAW Surface Water/Groundwater Replenish
[35,000 AF @ $55/AF] [Municipal Cost]$1,925,000 $1,925,000 $1,925,000 $1,925,000 $1,925,000 21-Water KD Canal Recharge [10,000AFX($24/AF + $4/AF Admin)] $280,000 $289,800 $299,943 $310,441 $321,306 22 Natural Gas $7,000 $7,245 $7,499 $7,761 $8,033
23 Electricity $11,988,800 $12,097,908 $12,521,335 $12,959,581 $13,413,167 50-[11-91] OUTSIDE SERVICES
60-[21-61] UTILITIES & SUPPLIES
31 Office Supplies $4,000 $4,140 $4,285 $4,435 $4,590
32 Maintenance [Sampling NPDES & Sumps] $61,000 $63,135 $65,345 $67,632 $69,999 38 Uniforms & Accessories $2,500 $2,588 $2,678 $2,772 $2,869 39 Computer Supplies $1,000 $1,035 $1,071 $1,109 $1,148 51 Other Material Supplies - Misc Equip $105,000 $108,675 $112,479 $116,415 $120,490 61 Furniture & Equipment [Minor] $1,000 $1,035 $1,071 $1,109 $1,148 TOTAL $18,191,362 $18,625,444 $18,989,016 $19,515,652 $20,052,948 Section Project Description
9 Bad Debt $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
11 Taxes [ ID4 Pump Tax] $840,000 $840,000 $869,400 $869,400 $869,400 11 Taxes [ Property Tax] $2,271 $2,271 $2,271 $2,271 $2,271 TOTAL $862,271 $862,271 $891,671 $891,671 $891,671
TOTAL OPERATIONS EXPENSES $41,211,659 $44,604,028 $44,844,273 $47,452,198 $47,445,200 70 - DEBT / TAXES / DEPRECIATION
EXHIBIT B. PERSONNEL MEMO

MEMORANDUM

MEMORANDUM
TO: Kristina Budak, Water Director
FROM: Dawn Spangler, Fiscal & Administrative Services Officer II DATE: March 7, 2025
SUBJECT: FY 2025-2026 to FY 34-35 Personnel Requests
As part of the Water department’s commitment to enhancing the operational capacity and sustainability of the wastewater treatment facilities, we initiated an 10 -yr infrastructure improvement plan aimed at optimizing performance, compliance, and long -term service reliability. To ensure the successful implementation and management of this plan the need for additional personnel has become critical. These skilled professionals will be essential to support both the day-to-day operations, ensuring the project is executed on schedule, within budget, and with the highest standards of safety and environmental stewardship.

This personnel request outlines the specific roles, responsibilities, and expertise required to complement the engineering, technical, and operational teams responsible for executing the 10-year infrastructure plan. By securing the necessary talent we will be positioned to maintain uninterrupted service, enhance treatment capabilities, and align with future regulatory standards.

Position: Civil Engineer IV
Justification:

This addition to the Water Department personnel is needed to address the engineering needs of the Water Department’s based on the complexity and amount of capital improvement projects in the short term and the long term. With the significant population growth of the City of Bakersfield, the constant changes and restrictions of state and federal regulations on the Water and Wastewater Industry, and the aging infrastructure, there is a need for an experienced Water Industry engineering manager to oversee the current workload and the significant increase in the near future due to multi-year projects. This position will be funded with sewer enterprise funds in FY 2025-26 and then the cost will be shared by Domestic Water and Sewer Enterprise from FY 2026-27 on.

Position: Supervisor I to Supervisor II
Justification:

Water Department Page 2
New Positions Request
regularly prepare s comprehensive reports on expenditures for both internal and external grant reporting; interacts and collaborates with local, state and federal agencies ; successfully negotiating agreements; and resolving conflicts to ensure the water resource management remains compliance.

Omar has taken a lead role in recruiting, training, and development of staff and oversees contractors in the removal of aquatic weeds and rodents throughout the Kern River system and canals. His performance has consistently demonstrated a capacity for strategic planning, project management, and administrative oversight well beyond the scope of his current position and for these reasons, Omar should be reclassed to a Supervisor II.

Position: Clerk Typist I to Administrative and Fiscal Services Specialist I Justification:

With the implementation of Oracle, management had to adjust Evelyn's duties of Clerk Typist to Administrative & Fiscal Services Specialist I to ensure the department can perform the work and meet the deadlines and expectations of the Finance Department . Evelyn , under direction, provides administrative support for assigned department projects and programs; prepares a variety of reports and documents in support of departmental goals; generates, processes, and maintains administrative and fiscal transactions; responsible for departments record keeping and document control by organizing, filing and maintaining historical and current agreement, financial, planning documents; and performs related work as required. Evelyn’s current work falls within the duties of the services specialist and that is why she should be reclassed.

Position: Domestic Water Planner
Justification:

The Domestic Water Planner is required to meet the demands of State water conservation regulations that have been placed on municipalities, including the City of Bakersfield. The City is required to reduce residential water usage by 40% by 2040 and coordinate and educate all Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional (CII) business about their requirements to reduce water use within their site. The Domestic Water Planner will be responsible to oversee the City's water conservation program, which includes outreach and monitoring of residents and CII, water usage reporting, and overall compliance. The position will also take over tasks that Cal Water currently performs on behalf of the Water Department which will result in savings of approximately $100,000 annually for the Department.

Position: Construction Inspector
Justification:

The Water Resources Department is preparing for a significant increase in its workload due to a series of capital improvement projects (CIPs) planned over the next 10 years. These projects include essential infrastructure improvements, such as PFOS treatment for wells, H2S vessel replacement, and interface improvements. To ensure the efficient, high-quality completion of these projects, it is crucial to have a dedicated Construction Inspector on staff.

The Construction Inspector will provide oversight during all phases of construction, ensuring that projects are completed on time, within budget, and in full compliance with regulatory standards. This position will be critical in managing the risks associated with these large-scale initiatives, ensuring the integrity and sustainability of the infrastructure improvements.

EXHIBIT C. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS MEMO
MEMORA
NDUM
TO: Kristina Budak, Water Department Director
FROM: D
aniel Maldonado, Water Department Assistant Director
DATE: F
ebruary 25, 2025
SUB
JECT: Proposed Capital Improvement Budget
The cost estimates for the Water Department Capital Improvement projects were based on recent price quotes and costs from similar projects that were recently completed. By looking at current market prices and using examples from real projects, we were able to make sure the estimates are accurate.

This approach helps us better understand the expected costs of the projects and account for any changes in material and labor prices.

Project Title:

L-208 TCP Removal and H2S Vessel Replacement
Amount: FY 25-26 $ 3,000,000
Council Goal: Reliable Infrastructure & Quality of Life Justification:

This well site has identified TCP in the source water and has been offline. Upon evaluation of the well site, it has also been identified the existing H2S Vessels are in need of replacement.

This is a project that consists of furnishing and installing GAC Treatment Vessels and replace the existing H2S Vessels to bring the well back on-line and provide safe reliable drinking water through the City’s Domestic Water System.

Project Title: PF
Os Treatment Program – Phase 1
Amount: FY 25-26 $ 1,000,000 FY 26-27 $3,300,000
FY 27-28 $3,630,000 FY 28-29 $3,993,000
Council Goal: Reliable Infrastructure & Quality of Life Justification:

The EPA has implemented Maximum Contaminant Levels for PFOs constituents and have given purveyors four years to become in compliance. The City has numerous well sites that are at or near the MCL, which requires GAC Treatment Vessels to be installed to bring the wells in compliance by the date the EPA has recommended. This Project consists of designing PFOs treatment facilities at existing well sites, with Construction to be phased beginning in FY26-27.

Water Department
Proposed Capital Improvement Projects

Page 2 ends

Project Title: Water Resources Solar Power Project
Amount: FY 25-26 $1,5 00,000 FY 26-27 $1,500,000
Council Goal: Efficient Government & Reliable Infrastructure Justification:

The Water Resources Administration Office at 1000 Buena Vista Road is at the location of the City’s Interface Water System and Tank that are vital to providing safe and reliable drinking water in the western part of the Municipal Water System. This tank and booster station are operating 24 hours a day, 7 days per week to meet the existing demands. Due to the significant power consumption, this Project provides on-site solar to offset rising electrical costs at its 1000 Buena Vista Road location. This investment will provide electrical savings of the Water Department.

Project Title:

Lead and Copper Service Line Inventory
Amount: FY 25-26 $1,000,000
Council Goal: Reliable Infrastructure & Quality of Life Justification:

As required by the USEPA and implemented by California Department of Drinking Water [DDW], the Lead and Copper Rule Improvements require all purveyors to develop a plan to identify the materials of service lines connected to the public water distribution system . Staff evaluated the City’s Municipal Water System connections and identified just less than 500 service lines that needed to be visually inspected to determine the material used to connect the water service from the meter to the home. DDW is requiring this evaluation to determine if there are any lead service lines within the Municipal System.

Project Title:

Corporation Yard Infrastructure
Amount: FY 25-26 $1,000,000
Council Goal: Efficient Government & Reliable Infrastructure Justification:

In anticipation of the City purchasing and developing a new location for the City’s Corporation Yard, funds have been identified to support this effort by constructing the necessary water supply infrastructure for the facility.

Project Title:

L- 211 TCP Removal and H2S Vessel Replacement
Amount: FY 26-27 $300,000 FY 27-28 $3,070,000
Council Goal: Reliable Infrastructure & Quality of Life Justification:

This well site has identified TCP in the source water and has been offline. Upon evaluation of the well site, it has also been identified the existing H2S Vessels are in need of replacement.

This is a project that consists of design of furnishing and installing GAC Treatment Vessels and replace the existing H2S Vessels to bring the well back on-line and provide safe reliable drinking water through the City’s Domestic Water System. Construction is anticipated to begin in FY27-

28. Water Department
Proposed Capital Improvement Projects

Page 3 ends

Project Title: Wellsite Generator Replacement Project
Amount: FY 26-27 $1,092,650 FY 27-28 $1,130,892
FY 28-29 $1,170, 473 FY 29-30 $1,211,440
FY 30-31 $621,000 FY 31-32 $642,735
FY 32-33 $665,231 FY 33-34 $688,514
FY 34-35 $712,612
Council Goal: Reliable Infrastructure
Justification:

The City utilizes generators at most of its well sites for emergency shutdowns that would allow the wellsite to continue to meet water demands. These generators have a certain lifespan to meet both energy loads and regulatory requirements. The City’s generators will begin to reach their lifespan and will be required to be replaced with those meeting current regulatory standards and the need of the Department. The City is anticipating replacing two (2) aged out generators beginning in FY27 to FY30, with one (1) generator replacement occurring every subsequent year.

Project Title: CBK-3
1 H2S Vessel Replacement
Amount: FY 26-27 $ 750,000
Council Goal: Reliable Infrastructure & Quality of Life Justification:

CBK-31 is a City wellsite that has H2S Vessels installed to treat the contaminant. The vessel has reached its useful life and needs to be replaced to maintain clean drinking water supplies to the surrounding community. This Project will be completed in FY27.

Project Title: CBK-3
8 TCP Removal Project
Amount: FY 28-29 $310,500 FY 29-30 - $3,177,450
Council Goal: Reliable Infrastructure & Quality of Life Justification:

This well site has identified TCP in the source water and has been offline. This is a project that consists of design of furnishing and installing GAC Treatment Vessels to bring the well back on-line and provide safe reliable drinking water through the City’s Domestic Water System.

Design will be completed in FY 29, with Construction anticipated to begin in FY30.

Project Title: H2S
Vessel Replacement Project – Phase 1
Amount: FY 28-29 $500,000 FY 29-30 $2,000,000
FY 30-31 $2,000,000 FY 31-32 $1,000,000
Council Goal: Reliable Infrastructure
Justification:

The City currently treats H2S at various well sites throughout its distribution system. These vessels have been regularly maintained; however, they are near the end of their design life and need replacement. This Project consists of evaluating and designing the replacement of five (5) of these vessels in FY29, with FY30 beginning construction and replacement of two (2) H2S Vessels per year through FY32.

Water Department
Proposed Capital Improvement Projects

Page 4 ends

Project Title: PFOs Treatment Program – Phase 2 - CONSTRUCTION Amount: FY 29-30 $ 600,000 FY 30-31 $4, 392,300
FY 31-32 $ 2,415,765
Council Goal: Reliable Infrastructure & Quality of Life Justification:

Project Title: CBK-18 T
CP Removal Project
Amount: FY 30-31 $ 321,368 FY 31-32 $3,288,661
Council Goal: Reliable Infrastructure & Quality of Life Justification:

Design will be completed in FY 31, with Construction anticipated to begin in FY32.

Project Title: TCP R
emoval Project
Amount: FY 32-33 $ 332,615 FY 33-34 $3,403,764
FY 34-35 $344,257
Council Goal: Reliable Infrastructure & Quality of Life Justification:

Well sites have been identified with TCP in the source water. This is a project that consists of design of furnishing and installing GAC Treatment Vessels to bring the well back on-line and provide safe reliable drinking water through the City’s Domestic Water System.

Project Title: H2S
Vessel Replacement Project – Phase 2
Amount: FY 32-33 $ 550,000 FY 33-34 $ 1,100,000
FY 34-35 $ 2,420,000
Council Goal: Reliable Infrastructure
Justification:

The City currently treats H2S at various well sites throughout its distribution system. These vessels have been regularly maintained, however, they are near the end of their design life and need replacement. This Project consists of evaluating and designing the replacement of five (5) of these vessels in FY29, with FY30 beginning construction and replacement of two (2) H2S Vessels.

Project Title: PFO
s Treatment Program – Phase 3 - CONSTRUCTION
Amount: FY 32-33 $ 600,000 FY 33-34 $ 2,657,342
FY 34-35 $ 2,923,076
Council Goal: Reliable Infrastructure & Quality of Life Justification:

Page 5 ends

near the MCL, which requires GAC Treatment Vessels to be installed to bring the wells in compliance by the date the EPA has recommended.

EXHIBIT D. WATER BOARD PRESENTATION

WATER DEPARTMENT
Water Rate Increase
Water Board Meeting
March 12, 2025
Municipal Services Responsibilities
• Provide safe clean drinking water to over 165,000 residents o Acquire surface water and treated water supplies
 Well field - 35,000 ac-ft recovered surface water
 KCWA-ID4 6,500 ac-ft treated water
 CWS NETP 11,000 ac-ft and CWS NGTP 6,000 ac-ft treated water o Meet all State and Federal regulatory requirements:
 Groundwater quality regulations – Arsenic, H2S, TCP 123, and PFOs  Treatment installation, Regulatory sampling and Monitor sampling  Conservation regulations– reduce residential use by 40% by 2040  Sustainable Groundwater Mgmt. Act
o Maintain the system and address aging infrastructure:
 CWS O&M cost increases annually
 Service Line replacements – poly to municipex
 Well rehabilitations – total of 58 operational wells – rehabilitate 2 a year Enterprise Funds
• WATER RATES are Included in the monthly
residential billing
 Readiness-to-Serve – 1” meter [incl. 6% rate]
2025 - $15.83
2026 - $19.15
2027 - $23.17
 Meter consumption – cost / CCF [incl. 6%
rate]
2025 - $1.40
2026 - $1.69
2027 - $2.05

Development of Rate Increases
• Develop a 10-year
Infrastructure Master Plan
o Identify maintenance, regulatory
and growth projects
o Include staffing needed to
operate expanded facilities and
manage projects
• Develop a 10-year Budget
o Evaluate and analysis O&M
line-item expenses
• Prepare rate studies
o Incorporate costs identified in
the master plan
o Determine revenue needed to
meet O&M and CIP expenses

• Required and Significant CIP Costs
o 9 Wells - PFOs treatment by April 2029
$2,000,000/ well + ongoing costs
o 8 Wells - H2S vessels – replacements
$1,000,000/ well + ongoing costs
o 4 Wells - TCP treatment – continue
$2,000,000/ well + ongoing costs
o Replace 2 aged out Generators / year
$500,000/ generator
Impacts Requiring
Water Rate Increase
• Required and Significant O&M Costs
o Water Quality:
regulatory and monitor sampling annual costs
ongoing media change outs costs
o Lead Service Line Inventory – meter to home
o Conservation – 40% reduction by 2040
o Advanced Metering Infrastructure installation
o Cost for Water – surface, treated, ground
o Electrical costs
Water Rate Increase Comparing Different Rate Options
Estimated Annual Expenses - Staff, O&M, & CIP
Estimated Annual Revenue - Meter Cost + Meter Consumption Short Fall - Approximately $12 - $15 million / year
Annual % Increase:

Current FY 26 –6% increase
FY 27– 6% increase
FY 28– 6% increase
FY 29 & 30 – 3% increase
Option 1: FY 26 – 34% increase
FY 27– 6% increase
FY 28 – 6% increase
FY 29 & 30 – 2.4% increase
Total 5-yr Increase = 50.8%
Option 2: FY 26 – 20% increase
FY 27 – 20% increase
FY 28 – 5.5% increase
FY 29 & 30 – 2.5% increase
Total 5-yr Increase = 50.5%
Option 3: FY 26 – 18% increase
FY 27 – 16% increase
FY28 – 10% increase
FY29 – 3.3% increase
FY30 - 2.5% increase
Total 5-yr increase = 49.8%
Option 4: FY 26 – 30 – 11.8% increase
Total 5-yr increase = 59%

ADD BAR CHART
comparing
proposed rate to
other
Cities/Purveyors
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
FY 25 FY 26 FY 27 FY 28 FY 29 FY 30
Reserve Target vs Ending Fund Balance for
Rate Options
Reserve Target Current Option 1
Option 2 Option 3 Option 4
Water Rate Increase
New Meter Consumption Rate Comparison

ADD IN GRAPH

ADD BAR CHART
comparing
proposed rate to
other
Cities/Purveyors $43.46 $48.38 $49.20 $52.30 $54.94
$80.79
$118.32
$142.70
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
Current
Rate
Increase
City Option
3 City Option
2 Oildale
Mutual
City Option
1 Vaughn
Water
Cal Water East Niles
Dollars
Water Purveyor
Avg. Water Bill 25/26 – Bakersfield Water Purveyors
Using 1” meter and 15 CCF usage and
City Preferred Options Compared to Cal Water
• Monthly Billing @15CCF & 1-inch meter
• 2021 – 2025 Actuals, 2026-2028 using Rate Case, assume recent average of 8% inc. for 2029-30 0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
180
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
City & Cal Water Average Water Bill
Cal Water City-Opt1 City-Opt2 City-Opt3
Timeline to Achieve Increase
• March 3 Meet with CMO
• March 12 Water Board presentation
• March 14 Admin due for Rate Increase - Prop 218
• March 26 Council Meeting – Prop 218 request
• April 7 Cal Water Billing Mailers
• June 11 Prop 218 – Water Rate
• July 1 New rates are in effect

Questions

EXHIBIT E. COUNCIL PRESENTATION

WATER DEPARTMENT
Water Rate Increase
City Council Meeting
March 26, 2025
Municipal Services Responsibilities
• Provide safe clean drinking water to over 165,000 residents o Acquire surface water and treated water supplies
 Well field - 35,000 ac-ft recovered surface water
 KCWA-ID4 6,500 ac-ft treated water
 CWS NETP 11,000 ac-ft and CWS NGTP 6,000 ac-ft treated water o Meet all State and Federal regulatory requirements:
 Groundwater quality regulations – Arsenic, H2S, 1,2,3-TCP , and PFOs  Treatment installation, Regulatory sampling and Monitor sampling  Conservation regulations– reduce residential use by 40% by 2040  Sustainable Groundwater Mgmt. Act
o Maintain the system and address aging infrastructure:
 CWS O&M cost increases annually
 Service Line replacements – poly to municipex
 Well rehabilitations – total of 58 operational wells – rehabilitate 2 a year WARD 3
WARD 5
WARD 7
WARD 6
WARD 1
WARD 2
WARD 4
City Domestic Service Area
• Required and Significant CIP Costs
o 9 Wells - PFOs treatment by April 2029
$2,000,000/ well + ongoing costs
o 8 Wells - H2S vessels – replacements
$1,000,000/ well + ongoing costs
o 4 Wells - TCP treatment – continue
$2,000,000/ well + ongoing costs
o Replace 2 aged out Generators / year
$500,000/ generator
Impacts Requiring
Water Rate Increase
• Required and Significant O&M Costs
o Water Quality:
regulatory and monitor sampling annual costs
ongoing media change outs costs
o Lead Service Line Inventory – meter to home
o Conservation – 40% reduction by 2040
o Advanced Metering Infrastructure installation
o Cost for Water – surface, treated, ground
o Electrical costs
Water Rate Increase
Estimated Annual Expenses - Staff, O&M, & CIP
Estimated Annual Revenue - Meter Cost + Meter
Consumption
Short Fall - Approximately $12 - $15 million / year
Annual % Increase:

Current FY 26 – 6% increase
FY 27 – 6% increase
FY 28 – 6% increase
FY 29 – 3% increase
FY30 – 3% increase
Proposed: FY 26 – 34% increase
FY 27– 6% increase
FY 28 – 6% increase
FY 29 - 2.4% increase
FY30 - 2.4% increase
Total 5-yr Compounded
Rate Increase = 57.87%

ADD BAR CHART
comparing
proposed rate to
other
Cities/Purveyors
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
FY 25 FY 26 FY 27 FY 28 FY 29 FY 30
Reserve Target vs Ending Fund Balance for Proposed Rate Reserve Target Current Proposed
Water Rate Increase
New Meter Cost and Consumption Rate Comparison

ADD IN GRAPH

ADD BAR CHART
comparing
proposed rate to
other
Cities/Purveyors $43.46
$52.30 $54.94
$80.79
$118.32
$142.70
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
Current Rate
Increase
Oildale Mutual Proposed Rate
Increase
Vaughn Water Cal Water East Niles
Dollars
Water Purveyor
Avg. Water Bill 25/26 – Bakersfield Water Purveyors
Using 1” meter and 15 CCF usage and
Questions

EXHIBIT F. PROP 218 NOTICE

CITY OF BAKERSFIELD

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED INCREASES TO DOMESTIC WATER RATES NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing accepting testimony will be held before the Bakersfield City Council at 5:15 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on Wednesday June 11, 2025 in the Council Chambers of City Hall located at 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, for the purpose of considering increases to Domestic Water Rates. The new rates, if adopted, will go into effect on July 1, 2025. In compliance with Proposition 218, affected propert y owners within the City of Bakersfield’s Domestic Water Service area are hereby informed of the proposed increase to Domestic Water Rates.

Background:

Pursuant to Chapters 14.04, 14.06, and 14.08 of Title 14 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code, the City of Bakersfield Domestic Water System provides residents and customers with a firm, reliable, high quality water supply in quantities and under sufficient pressure to meet customer demands. Charges for water service are paid directly by property owners and/or occupants through bills rendered monthly. In compliance with Proposition 218, property owners and/or customers of the City of Bakersfield Domestic Water System are hereby informed of a proposed increase in the Domestic Water Rates. Your water service is included in this action and is identified in the accompanying bill enclosed in this mailing.

City staff have performed a thorough evalua tion of current expenses and capital improvement projects for the Domestic Water System and have developed a ten-year infr astructure master plan and operating budget. Based on this thorough evaluation, the proposed changes will ensure that the cost of service is fairly and equitably recovered from all customer groups in proportion to the service each is receiving, and that total revenue is sufficient to fund operational and capital costs, as well as ensure suffic ient reserves to meet long-term needs.

Proposed Rate Changes:

The proposed increases will help meet the costs of operation and maintenance, meeting water quality standards, and funding for capital costs for a five-year period.

SCHEDULE OF RATES

Within City
Limits
Fairhaven &
Unincorporated
Area s
Within City
Limits
Fairhaven &
Unincorporated
Areas
Within City
Limits
Fairhaven &
Unincorporated
Areas
Within City
Limits
Fairhaven &
Unincorporated
Areas
Within City
Limits
Fairhaven &
Unincorporated
Areas
Within City
Limits
Fairhaven &
Unincorporated
Areas
Quantity Rates:

Per 100 cubic ft/month $1.40 $1.40 1.88 $ 1.88 $ 1.99 $ 1.99$ 2.11 $ 2.11$ 2.16 $ 2.16$ 2.21 $ 2.21$ 5/8" x 3/4" Service $12.84 $16.45 $17.21 $22.04 $18.24 $23.36 $19.33 $24.76 $19.79 $25.35 $20.26 $25.96 1" Service $20.00 $26.01 $26.80 $34.86 $28.41 $36.95 $30.11 $39.17 $30.83 $40.11 $31.57 $41.07 1-1/2" Service $37.90 $49.91 $50.79 $66.87 $53.84 $70.88 $57.07 $75.13 $58.44 $76.93 $59.84 $78.78 2" Service $59.38 $78.60 $79.57 $105.32 $84.34 $111.64 $89.40 $118.34 $91.55 $121.18 $93.75 $124.09 3" Service $116.66 $155.10 $156.32 $207.83 $165.70 $220.30 $175.64 $233.52 $179.86 $239.12 $184.18 $244.86 4" Service $181.10 $241.16 $242.67 $323.16 $257.23 $342.55 $272.66 $363.10 $279.20 $371.81 $285.90 $380.73 6" Service $360.10 $480.21 $482.53 $643.48 $511.48 $682.09 $542.17 $723.02 $555.18 $740.37 $568.50 $758.14 8" Service $574.90 $767.08 $770.37 $1,027.89 $816.59 $1,089.56 $865.59 $1,154.93 $886.36 $1,182.65 $907.63 $1,211.03 10" Service $1,505.69 $1,517.61 $2,017.62 $2,033.60 $2,138.68 $2,155.62 $2,267.00 $2,284.96 $2,321.41 $2,339.80 $2,377.12 $ 2,395.96 1-1/2" Connection $18.73 $18.87 $25.10 $25.28 $26.61 $26.80 $28.21 $28.41 $28.89 $29.09 $29.58 $29.79 2" Connection $5.53 $6.95 $7.41 $9.32 $7.85 $9.88 $8.32 $10.47 $8.52 $10.72 $8.72 $10.98 3" Connection $12.07 $12.92 $16.18 $17.31 $17.15 $18.35 $18.18 $19.45 $18.62 $19.92 $19.07 $20.40 4" Connection $23.35 $25.16 $31.29 $33.72 $33.17 $35.74 $35.16 $37.88 $36.00 $38.79 $36.86 $39.72 6" Connection $63.81 $69.07 $85.51 $92.55 $90.64 $98.10 $96.08 $103.99 $98.39 $106.49 $100.75 $109.05 8" Connection $133.61 $144.80 $179.04 $194.03 $189.78 $205.67 $201.17 $218.01 $206.00 $223.24 $210.94 $228.60 10" Connection $238.60 $258.73 $319.72 $346.70 $338.90 $367.50 $359.23 $389.55 $367.85 $398.90 $376.68 $408.47 12" Connection $384.11 $416.62 $514.71 $558.27 $545.59 $591.77 $578.33 $627.28 $592.21 $642.33 $606.42 $657.75 FY 29/30
Current Rates Proposed Future Water Rates
Monthly Readiness-To-Serve Charge:

Monthly Private Fire Protection Service Charge:

FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29

If you have questions regarding this notice or how it may affect your property, call (661) 326-3715 Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. or email staff at [email protected]. Supporting documentation is availabl e for review at the City Clerk’s Office, City Hall, 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California 93301.

PUBLIC COMMENT will be accepted in writing on or before the hearing date indicat ed above at the City Clerk’s Office. Any interested person, including property owners, may appear and be heard to protest against the increase to the Domestic Water Rates. Protests to the proposed increases must be delivered in writing to the City Clerk, City of Bakersfield, 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield California 93301, prior to the conclusion of the public hearing on June 11, 2025.

All written protests must: 1) identify the assessor’s parcel number 2) identify the address of the parcel and 3) include the name and signature of the property owner submitting the protest. If written protests are receiv ed from a majority of owners of the affe cted parcels, the proposed rate increases will not be approved. In accordance with the California Constitution, as amended by Proposition 218, only one protest is allowed per parcel.

Please take notice that there is a 120-day statute of limitations for challenging any new, increased, or extended fee or charge.

Dawn Spangler
Fiscal & Administrative Services Oﬃcer 326-3006
Kristina Budak
205Electrical Technician I
2 Civil Engineer IV M48
4110-84571-572-5010010Sewer Enterprise 50%
4120-84571-571-5010010Sewer Enterprise 50%
$151,552.96
$94,818.56
0 $225,000.…
Laptop, docking station, 2 - 24" monitors, phone, cell phone $4,690.00 Engineering/GIS laptop, adobe pro, cadd
229,690.00
The Water Department proposes adding a Civil Engineer IV in lieu of two (2) Electrical Technician I positions.

The Water Department needs to hire a Civil Engineer IV to manage complex capital improvement projects and oversee the increased workload due to population growth, regulatory requirements, and aging infrastructure. Key projects include upgrading and replacing equipment, new facilities due to growth, and expansion of wastewater treatment plants. See attached memo for additional.

Dawn Spangler
Kristina Budak
02/12/2025
02/18/2025
Rpbert Szilagyi Annual Position Civ Eng IV costs $246,371.52, 2-Elec Tech I c… is goal to close the 2 positions or hold? Christi Tenter Will this position request include an additional vehicle? Jaime Flores Katie Reed
Robert Szilagyi 02/25/2025

MEMORANDUM
TO: Christian Clegg, City Manager
FROM: Kristina Budak, Water Director
DATE: February 18, 2025
SUBJECT: FY 2025-26 – New Position Request
The Water Department proposes the addition of one (1) Civil Engineer IV in lieu of two (2) Electrical Technician I positions currently within the wastewater complement. The request is being made due to a significant increase in workload associated with City growth, projects required due to recent State Legislation, the evaluation and upgrade of wastewater treatment plant 2, and the expansion of wastewater treatment plant 3. The proposed change will enable the Water Department to continue efficiently managing, operating, maintaining, and repairing the Department’s wastewater treatment facilities.

Position: Civil Engineer IV
Type: New
Estimated Costs: $225,000
Funding Source: Sewer Service Plant #2 & #3
Justification:

Projects include the wastewater treatment plant equipment and process replacement and improvement due to aging infrastructure. Currently the Wastewater Division is undergoing a technical evaluation and preparing studies on the short-term and long-term planning to upgrade/expand wastewater treatment plant 3 and upgrade/rebuild wastewater treatment plant 2 and relevant facilities.

The Engineering Unit within the Water Department consists of two Civil Engineer III’s, two Civil Engineer II’s, and four environmental compliance inspectors. Currently, due to the complexities of the Water Department projects, the Assistant Water Director-Wastewater is responsible for managing contractors, consultants, and construction activities, as well as supervising engineering staff. The Assistant Director-Wastewater cannot continue to manage the daily maintenance and operations of both wastewater treatment plants and plan expansions, while still managing the Engineering Unit and all the Water Department CIPs. A Civil Engineer IV will provide the expertise required to manage and Water Department Page 2
FY 2024-25 Budget – Mid-yearNew Positions Request
complete capital improvement projects, develop succession planning for employees, and provide a supervising division head for the expanding engineering unit.

The Water Department is requesting this change be effective with the fiscal 25/26 budget due to the evaluation of WWTP2 and WWTP3, and current Engineering Unit workload. Funding for this position is already in place as the Water Department requests to add the Civil Engineer position in lieu of two (2) Electrical Technician I positions currently within the wastewater complement.

Step 1 $66.086 Step 2 $69.389 Step 3 $72.862 Step 4 $76.506 Step 5 $80.33 Salaries @ Step 3 Hourly rate Annual
Civil Engineer IV $72.862 $151,552.960 Computer $ 850.00 Standard laptop $ 1,100.00
GIS laptop $ 3,350.00
Salary: $151,552.960 Docking Station $ 270.00
Beneﬁts: 24” monitor $ 160.00
Blue Shield HMO Access+ 2 party $14,133.81 32” monitor $ 350.00 Group Life $30K $ 54.22 34” curved monitor $ 475.00 PPO Vision 2 party $ 54.08 Adobe Professional $ 100.00 UC PPO 2 Party $836.94
Workers Comp $6,983.00
$22,062.05 Desk phone $ 350.00
Cell Phone $400 plus $50/mo
Medicare $2,197.52
Pers / Misc Emp $48,496.95
Desk
TOTAL PERSONNEL COSTS $224,309.47
Requested Computer Costs $4,690.00
Computer Costs
WW Immediate Posi on Request Costs 24/25
Heavy Equipment Operator
Step 3
Other Costs

MEMORANDUM

TO: Christian Clegg, City Manager

FROM: Kristina Budak, Water Director

DATE: March 26, 2025

SUBJECT: FY 2025/26 Budget – New Positions Request and Reclassifications

The Water Department is requesting six (6) new positions and three (3) reclassifications for the FY 2025-26 Budget. Two (2) of the new positions, Civil Engineer IV and Hydrographer, were requested during the FY 2024/25 Budget process and also submitted for a FY 2024/25 Mid-year request emphasizing the need for these positions. The remaining four (4) positions have been identified as a need and are included in the Domestic Water and Sewer User Rate increase evaluation and with approval of these rate increases, these positions will be funded and should be approved to be filled in FY 2025/26. The three (3) reclassifications are associated with two staff members working outside of their current class and one position needing to be reclassed due to regulations associated with work tasks allowed to be performed.

Position: Civil Engineer IV
Type: New
Estimated Costs: $246,371.52 + $4,690.00
Funding Source: Sewer Service Plant #2 & #3
Justification:

This addition to the Water Department personnel is needed to address the engineering needs of the Water Department’s based on the complexity and amount of capital improvement projects in the short term and the long term. With the significant population growth of the City of Bakersfield, the constant changes and restrictions of state and federal regulations on the Water and Wastewater Industry, and the aging infrastructure, there is a need for an experienced Water Industry engineering manager to oversee the current workload and the significant increase in the near future due to multi- year projects. Projects include the wastewater treatment plant equipment and process replacement and improvement due to aging infrastructure. Currently the Wastewater Division is undergoing a technical evaluation and prepa ring studies on the short -term and long -term planning to upgrade/expand Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 3 (WWTP 3) and upgrade/rebuild Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 2 (WWTP 2) and relevant facilities.

Water Department Page 2
FY 2024-25 Budget – Mid-year New Positions Request

The Engineering Unit within the Water Department consist s of two Civil Engineer III’s, two Civil Engineer II’s, and four environmental compliance inspectors. Currently, due to the complexities of the Water Department projects, the Assistant Water Director -Wastewater is responsible for managing contractors, consultants, and construction activities, as well as supervising engineering staff. The Assistant Director-Wastewater cannot continue to manage the daily maintenance and operations of both wastewater treatment plants and pla nt expansions, while still managing the Engineering Unit and all the Water Department CIPs. A Civil Engineer IV will provide the expertise required to manage and complete capital improvement projects, develop succession planning for employees, and provide a supervising division head for the expanding engineering unit.

The Water Department is requesting this change be effective and funded through the FY 2025/26 budget due to the evaluation of WWTP 2 and WWTP 3, and current Engineering Unit workload. Funding for this position is already in place as the Water Department requests to add the Civil Engineer IV position in lieu of two (2) Electrical Technician I positions currently within the Wastewater Division complement.

Salary $151,552.96 Benefits $94,818.56 Total $246,371.52 Computer $4,690.00

Step 1 $66.086 Step 2 $69.389 Step 3 $72.862 Step 4 $76.506 Step 5 $80.33

Position: Hydrographer
Type: New
Estimated Costs: $124,623.60 + $500.00 + $2,070.00
Funding Source: Water Resources – River & Ag Fund
Justification:

The Water Department currently has one Hydrographer within the Water Resources - Hydrographic Unit. The Hydrographic Unit is responsible for overseeing all Kern River operations, facilitating accurate water deliveries to local water district required by contractual obligations, and collecting, verifying and recording all water measurements. Within the last two years, local, state and federal regulations have become more restrictive and required the Hydrographer to devote the majority of the time to performing open -channel surveying and measurements for accurate deliveries, performing groundwater depth calculations, monitoring the department’s SCADA and telemetry system, and reporting data to comply with state regulations. In addition to these duties, the hydrographer is responsible for data analysis, record-keeping and reporting in the hydrographic office and as a result of the more extensive field duties, the time needed for office duties is not available.

The work effort of the Hydrographer has significantly expanded, and an additional hydrographer is needed to meet state and federal requirements. In addition, all water districts that receive Kern River water supplies require accurate data and reporting in a timely manner and by having two hydrographers, the Water Department can meet our local partners expectations. With two Hydrographers, the workload will be evenly distributed as the workload of the Hydrographic Unit requires both field and office responsibilities. The addition of another Water Department Page 3
FY 2024-25 Budget – Mid-year New Positions Request

Hydrographer would provide efficiency in the Unit while meeting the reporting requirements of Local, State and Federal agencies and the role and responsibilities of Central Records of the Kern River. Funding for this position will come from the River and Ag fund, of which 75% of this positions time will be reimbursed by local water districts.

Salary $76,853.92 Benefits $47,769.98 Total $124,623.60 Furniture $500.00 Computer $2,070.00

Step 1 $33.511 Step 2 $35.193 Step 3 $36.949 Step 4 $38.8 Step 5 $40.733

Position: Supervisor I to Supervisor II
Type: Reclassification – Omar Flores
Estimated Additional Costs: $7,325
Funding Source: Water Resources - River & Agriculture
Justification:

This reclassification request is based on Omar consistently exceeding expectations in his current role as Water Resources Supervisor I and assuming responsibilities that clearly align with the requirements of a Water Resources Supervisor II. Omar consistently oversees both maintenance and water operations, managing a combined team of 20 staff. He has successfully led and managed several projects; regularly prepares comprehensive reports on expenditures for both internal and external grant reporting ; interacts and collaborates with local, state and federal agencies; successfully negotiating agreements; and resolving conflicts to ensure the water resource management remains compliance. Omar has taken a lead role in recruiting, training, and development of staff and oversees contractors in the removal of aquatic weeds and rodents throughout the Kern River system and canals. His performance has consistently demonstrated a capacity for strategic planning, project management, and administrative oversight well beyon d the scope of his current position and for these reasons, Omar should be reclassed to a Supervisor II.

Salary $5,489.12 Benefits $1,836.11 Total $7,325

Step 1 $39.688 Step 2 $41.672 Step 3 $43.758 Step 4 $45.945 Step 5 $48.241

Position: Clerk Typist I to Administrative and Fiscal Services Specialist I Type: Reclassification for Evelyn Iglesias
Estimated Additional Costs: $4,701
Funding Source: Domestic Water Funds
Justification:

With the implementation of Oracle, management had to adjust Evelyn's duties of Clerk Typist to Administrative & Fiscal Services Specialist I to ensure the department can perform the work and meet the deadlines and expectations of the Finance Department . Evelyn, under direction, provides administrative support for assigned department projects and programs; prepares a variety of reports and documents in support of departmental goals; generates , processes, and maintains administrative and fiscal transactions; responsible for departments Water Department Page 4
FY 2024-25 Budget – Mid-year New Positions Request

record keeping and document control by organizing, filing and maintaining historical and current agreement, financial, planning documents; and performs related work as required.

Evelyn’s current work falls within the duties of the services specialist and that is why she should be reclassed.

Salary $3,523 Benefits $1,178.44 Total $4,701

Step 1 $20.539 Step 2 $21.567 Step 3 $22.649 Step 4 $23.778 Step 5 $24.972

Position: Assistant Wastewater Lab Technician to Wastewater Treatment Plant Lab Technician Type: Reclassification
Estimated Additional Costs: $16,871.07
Funding Source: Sewer Service Plant #2 & #3
Justification:

With new Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program ( ELAP) TNI regulations, the Assistant Wastewater Lab Technician has taken the same level of duties as the Wastewater Treatment Plant Lab Technician (Lab Tech). The new regulations require designating separate personnel to act as the Quality Control Manager and a s the T echnical Manager. The Lab Tech cannot serve as both as they cannot provide quality control measures on their own work.

Therefore, reclassifying the Assistant Wastewater Lab Technician to a Wastewater Treatment Plant Lab Technician would be benefic ial to the current lab operations and to maintain compliance with ELAP.

Salary $12,642.24 Benefits $4,228.83 Total $16,871.07

Step 1 $28.39 Step 2 $29.812 Step 3 $31.303 Step 4 $32.861 Step 5 $34.511

Positions contingent on the increase of the Domestic Water Rate and Sewer User Rate.

Position: Domestic Water Planner
Type: New
Estimated Costs: $172,802.47 + $500.00 + $2,070.00
Funding Source: Water Resources - Domestic Water Funds
Justification:

The Domestic Water Planner is required to meet the demands of State water conservation regulations that have been placed on municipalities, including the City of Bakersfield. The City is required to reduce residential water usage by 40% by 2040 and coordinate and educate all Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional (CII) business about their requirements to reduce water use within their site. The Domestic Water Planner will be responsible to oversee the City's water conservation program , which includes outreach and monitoring of residents and CII , water usage reporting, and overall compliance. The position will also take over tasks that Cal Water currently performs on behalf of the Water Department which will result in savings of approximately $100,000 annually for the Department.

Water Department Page 5
FY 2024-25 Budget – Mid-year New Positions Request

Salary $112,956.48 Benefits $59,845.99 Total $172,802.47 Furniture $500.00 Computer $2,070.00

Step 1 $49.251 Step 2 $51.714 Step 3 $54.299 Step 4 $57.014 Step 5 $59.865

Position: WWTP Operator III
Type: New (2 Openings)
Estimated Costs: $128,227.35 + $360.00 each
Funding Source: Wastewater - Sewer Enterprise Fund – Sewer Service Plant 3 Justification:

Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 3 (WWTP 3) currently has ten operators; of those ten, two operators are assigned to the night shift and two work the weekend, leaving six operators to operate the plant for most of the week. The staffing level for an activated sludge facility the size of WWTP 3 is typically 15 operators.

This shortfall in staffing numbers has begun to cause operational issues as influent flow increases year to year and equipment that was previously offline is brought online to meet the increased demand. Two additional O perator IIIs will allow for better coverage of each treatment process and move the City closer to having adequate staffing levels.

The associated cost of each additional Operator III, taken at step 3 and with the new salary approved by Council on February 26th, 2025, would be $128,257, for a total of $257,174 for two Operator IIIs. The associated cost would be funded entirely by sewer enterprise funds.

Salary $79,554.37 Benefits $48,672.98 Total $128,227.35 Uniforms $360.00

Step 1 $34.665 Step 2 $36.398 Step 3 $38.218 Step 4 $40.129 Step 5 $42.136

Position: Wastewater Plant Mechanic
Type: New
Estimated Costs: $120,071.00 + $360.00
Funding Source: Wastewater - Sewer Enterprise Fund - Sewer Service Plant #2 & #3 Justification:

Wastewater equipment, when it is properly maintained per manufacturer’s specifications, has a useful life of 15 -20 years. At Plant 2, a majority of the equipment has been in service since 1997, and at Plant 3, the newer equipment has been in service for over 14 years. The addition of a wastewater plant mechanic at this time will assist in efforts to address the increasing need for repair and maintenance on aging equipment.

Also, similarly with the requested operator positions, as the influent flow increases and equipment that was previously offline is brought online, the total pieces of equipment needing Water Department Page 6
FY 2024-25 Budget – Mid-year New Positions Request

to be maintained has increased.

Salary $73,442.76 Benefits $46,628.65 Total $120,071.00 Uniforms $360.00

Step 1 $32.028 Step 2 $33.629 Step 3 $35.311 Step 4 $37.076 Step 5 $38.93

WASTEWATER DIVISION
MANAGE

OPERATE
AND

MAINTAIN
Provide operation & maintenance of wastewater
facilities for the purpose of treating, reclaiming, &
utilizing wastewater and its by-products in accordance
with federal, state & local requirements.

To manage the City’s
water supply and water
rights for the benefit of
present and future
residents of Bakersfield
to ensure the orderly
regulation and
distribution of Kern
River water, including
the preservation and
augmentation of
the groundwater
supply.

WATER DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCES DIVISION

WASTEWATER DIVISION
Water
Department
Department Mission Statement:

The mission of the Water
Department is to holistically
manage the City's water portfolio
to provide safe and reliable
access to water for the City's
beneficial uses in an
environmentally sensitive manner
that is responsive to regulatory
requirements.

Fiscal Year 2025-26
Proposed Budget
Proposed Budget FY 2025-26
Actual Adopted Proposed Increase / Increase /
Costs Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 in Dollars % Change
Expenditures
Personnel Services 12,483,787$ 14,644,356$ 15,311,379$ 667,023$ 4.55% Operations 47,781,167$ 56,173,415$ 65,056,878$ 8,883,463$ 15.81% Capital Outlay 32,894$ 175,250$ 170,000$ (5,250)$ (3.00%) Capital Projects 18,899,411$ 19,759,696$ 31,845,000$ 12,085,304$ 61.16% Debt Service 14,503,593$ 14,571,139$ 14,571,139$ -$ 0.00% Total Expenditures 93,700,852$ 105,323,856$ 126,954,396$ 21,630,540$ 20.54% Funding Sources
River & Agriculture Water 15,613,143$ 6,444,400$ 9,882,873$ 3,438,473$ 53.36% Domestic Water 30,099,164$ 34,504,020$ 36,677,602$ 2,173,582$ 6.30% Water Connection Fees 799,497$ 765,000$ 1,515,000$ 750,000$ 98.04% Sewer Service Plant #2 17,377,371$ 15,400,050$ 16,270,495$ 870,445$ 5.65% Sewer Service Plant #3 25,685,647$ 23,245,542$ 24,024,314$ 778,772$ 3.35% Sewer Connection Fees 8,037,858$ 5,803,725$ 6,512,633$ 708,908$ 12.21% Total Funding Sources 97,612,680$ 86,162,737$ 94,882,917$ 8,720,180$ 10.12%

River & Ag
Goals
Manage the City’s water supply and rights for current and future residents, regulate Kern River water, augment
underground supplies per the City’s Water Resources
policy, oversee the Kern River Levee District for flood control, maintain storm water basins, manage water
contracts with local agencies, implement a storm water
management program as required by the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board, and support the
Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Agency.

Accomplishments
 Managed the Kern River flows during 2024, diverted
over 690,000 acre-feet to protect property and life.
(City Council Goal 5)
 Maintained and rehabilitated over 184 storm water
recharge basins and repaired a segment of the
equestrian trail. (City Council Goal 3)
 Replaced approximately 134 concrete panels along
the Carrier and River Canals. (City Council Goal 3)
 Performed emergency maintenance to remove sand
from the Bellevue Weir, McClung Weir and Wilson
ditch area for safety and public health reasons. (City
Council Goal 3)
Budget Changes and New Proposals
• Salaries - This increase is due to the Civil Engineer III being moved to River & Ag. This increase does not include requested reclass of Supervisor or additional Hydrographer with expected increase of $140,000.
• Operations – The $559,299 increase is primarily due to Internal rates, Outside Services (Heavy equipment operator) and Other Professional for the Storm Water Management Plan. • Capital Improvement Projects decrease is mainly due to fully funded CIP River Canal Weir in FY 24/25. Additional funding for 2800 Acre Basin 12 facility reconstruction, 2800 Acre Basin 1-9 facility construction and Carrier Canal Headgate Reconstruction.

Actual Adopted Proposed Increase / Increase /
Costs Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 in Dollars % Change
Expenditures
Personnel Services 2,561,782$ 2,932,115$ 3,099,831$ 167,716$ 5.72% Operations 3,143,764$ 5,016,226$ 5,575,525$ 559,299$ 11.15% Capital Outlay 10,056$ -$ -$ -$ 0.00% Capital Projects 696,578$ 4,064,446$ 1,100,000$ (2,964,446)$ -72.94% Total Expenditures 6,412,180$ 12,012,787$ 9,775,356$ (2,237,431)$ -18.63% Funding Sources
Revenue 15,613,143$ 6,444,400$ 9,882,873$ 3,438,473$ 53.36% Proposed Budget FY 2025-26

Municipal Water Division
Goals
Operate the domestic water system, ensure high-quality
service, promote conservation, maintain storm water
basins and fire hydrants, manage water contracts with
local agencies, and enforce the storm water
management program as required by the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board. Support the Kern
River Groundwater Sustainability Agency.

Accomplishments
 Continued implementation of the City’s residential
water conservation incentive program, offering
expanded rebate program. (City Council Goal 5)
 Completed the Front Yard Landscape Project at the
Water Resources Administrative offices to promote
landscaping water savings for City residents. (City
Council Goal 5)
 Reviewed and approved 51 water line construction
plans, adding 929 new service connections for
residential, commercial, landscaping, and fire
suppression needs. (City Council Goal 1)
 Repaired and maintained 195 fire hydrants.

Conducted 202 inspections of new fire water service
lines for building fire sprinkler systems. (City Council Goal 3)
Budget Changes and New Proposals
• Salaries - The decrease in salaries is primarily due to spreading the attorney across all divisions within the water department and moving the Civil Engineer III to River & Ag. • Operations - Increase of $5,326,077 is primarily due to utilities, Internal Rates, Repair & Maintenance (Badger AMI Meters and Miscellaneous Well Maintenance), water conservation efforts and update to Urban Water Management Plan.
• Capital Improvement Projects increase of $11,348,500 due to PFOS Treatment, TCP Removal, Lead & Copper Service Line Inventory, Corp Yard Infrastructure, Solar Project, and $6,000,000 for South Kern/Old River Mutual Water Consolidation which will be funded by a grant.

Actual Adopted Proposed Increase / Increase /
Costs Budget Budget (Decrease) (Decrease)
2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 in Dollars % Change
Expenditures
Personnel Services 1,617,513$ 1,733,519$ 1,693,352$ (40,167)$ -2.32% Operations 30,674,022$ 35,877,017$ 41,203,094$ 5,326,077$ 14.85% Capital Outlay 17,032$ 101,500$ 100,000$ (1,500)$ -1.48% Capital Projects 3,239,211$ 3,351,500$ 14,700,000$ 11,348,500$ 338.61% Debt Service 1,453,528$ 1,500,639$ 1,500,639$ -$ 0.00% Total Expenditures 37,001,306$ 42,564,175$ 59,197,085$ 16,632,910$ 39.08% Funding Sources
Revenue 30,898,661$ 35,269,020$ 38,192,602$ 2,923,582$ 8.29% Proposed Budget FY 2025-26

Rate Increase
• New Positions
Domestic Water Planner
Estimated cost increase = $175,372
• Reclasses
Supervisor I to Supervisor II
Estimated cost increase = $7,325
Clerk Typist to Admin & Fiscal Services Specialist I
Estimated cost increase = $4,701
Wastewater
Goals & Accomplishments
Goals
Operate and maintain wastewater facilities
to treat, reclaim, and utilize wastewater per
federal, state, and local requirements. Plan
for future treatment needs, maximize
renewable energy use, expand recycled
wastewater opportunities, maintain
infrastructure through capital
improvements, monitor industrial waste
discharges, and collect sewer user fees.

Accomplishments
 Generated 125 million gallons of tertiary treated
water and recycled 9,283 tons of biosolids onto
Plant 2's Farm.
 Wastewater Treatment Plant 2: Completed the Bar
Screen Upgrade project which replaced the two
rake-style screens with mechanical bar screens.
(City Council Goal 3)
 Wastewater Treatment Plant 3: Completed the
replacement of the septage processing unit;
completed the replacement of the chemical
dosing skids; and completed the rehabilitation of
the dissolved air flotation units. (City Council Goal
3)
 Continued to make progress on upgrading the
programmable logic controllers (PLC) for both
plants. This will be a multi-year effort that
systematically upgrades over a dozen PLCs. (City
Council Goal 3)
Wastewater Division
Budget Changes and
New Proposals
• Salaries
 Increase in salaries due to adding
attorney to Wastewater Division
and increase in operator pay.
• Operations
 Utilities increase of $1,768,087
 Repair & Maintenance increase of
$830,000 from CIP to operating
 Other Professional increase of
$400,000 from CIP to operating
• Capital Improvement Projects
increase of $3,701,250 with most
of the cost allocated for Plant 2
due to differed maintenance of
plant.

Actual Adopted Proposed Change
2023-24 2024-25 2025-26 in Dollars % Change
Plant Operations
Plant 2
Personnel Services 1,916,937$ 2,217,122$ 2,442,311$ 225,189$ 10.16% Operations 3,078,504$ 3,735,546$ 4,013,205$ 277,659$ 7.43% Capital Outlay 4,821$ 21,500$ 20,000$ (1,500)$ -6.98% Capital Projects 1,167,248$ 1,071,500$ 5,420,000$ 4,348,500$ 405.83% Plant 3
Personnel Services 3,581,298$ 4,441,431$ 4,617,947$ 176,516$ 3.97% Operations 6,996,406$ 7,325,301$ 9,409,412$ 2,084,111$ 28.45% Capital Outlay 985$ 32,250$ 30,000$ (2,250)$ -6.98% Capital Projects 5,444,970$ 2,782,250$ 3,125,000$ 342,750$ 12.32% Debt Service 13,050,065$ 13,070,500$ 13,070,500$ -$ 0.00% Total Expenditures 35,241,234$ 34,697,400$ 42,148,375$ 7,450,975$ 21.47% Sewer & Storm (Public Works Design)
Capital Projects 7,956,024$ 7,660,000$ 7,500,000$ (160,000)$ -2.09% Total Expenditures 7,956,024$ 7,660,000$ 7,500,000$ (160,000)$ -2.09% Sewer & Storm Maintenance
Personnel Services 2,806,257$ 3,320,169$ 3,457,938$ 137,769$ 4.15% Operations 3,888,471$ 4,219,325$ 4,855,642$ 636,317$ 15.08% Capital Outlay -$ 20,000$ 20,000$ -$ 0.00% Capital Projects 395,380$ 830,000$ -$ (830,000)$ -100.00% Total Expenditures 7,090,108$ 8,389,494$ 8,333,580$ (55,914)$ -0.67% Total Wastewater Operating & CIP 50,287,366$ 50,746,894$ 57,981,955$ 7,235,061$ 14.26% Funding Sources
Revenue 51,100,876$ 44,449,317$ 46,807,442$ 2,358,125$ 5.31% Proposed Budget FY 2025-26

Rate Increase
Personnel Changes
• New Positions
2 - WWTP Operator III
 Estimated cost increase = $128,587/ea
Wastewater Plant Mechanic
 Estimated cost increase = $120,431
• Reclasses
Assistant Lab Technician to Wastewater Treatment Plant Lab Technician
 Estimated cost increase = $16,871
FY 2025-26 Water Department
Personnel Overview
9 FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget
Personnel Changes
• New Positions
 Civil Engineer IV
 Estimated cost increase = $50,000
 In lieu of 2 Electrical Technician positions
 Hydrographer
 Estimated cost increase = $127,194
Water Department
Water Department # of Positions
Water Management 8
Water Engineering 8
Water Fiscal Administration 7
WR-River & Agriculture Operations 17
WR-Hydrographic 3
WR-Domestic Water Operations 6
WW-Sewer Services Plant #2 Operations 9
WW-Sewer Services Plant #3 Operations 15
WW-Sewer Services Maintenance 16
Total FY 2024-25 Full-Time Positions 89
75 79
86 88 89
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
FY 2021-22 FY 2022-23 FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26
# of Employees - Water Department
Water Resources Wastewater Water Department

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

MEETING DATE: October 22, 2025 AGENDA CATEGORY:Consent Consent - Successor Agency TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Randy McKeegan, Finance Director
DATE: October 10, 2025
SUBJECT: Receive and file Successor Agency payments from September 26, 2025, to October 9, 2025, in the amount of $4,070.

[Document Description]

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends report be received and filed.

BACKGROUND:

The City administers payment of Successor Agency enforceable obligation payments as authorized by the State Department of Finance (DOF) to further the dissolution of the former Bakersfield Redevelopment Agency. The Successor Agency has a Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS) approved by both the Bakersfield Oversight Board and the DOF. All payments of the Successor Agency must be on this approved listing in order to be valid and authorized payments of the Successor Agency.

A check register is provided which summarizes the transactions processed during the above referenced period. Additional details are provided below for each transaction.

Check #805690 to U S BANK CR:US BANK TRUST NA for $4,070.00 for the annual account fees for the tax allocation bonds series 2009 A & B.

FISCAL IMPACT:
$4,070.00

COUNCIL GOAL:

Innovative and Efficient City Government

ATTACHMENTS:

Oracle SA Admin Check Register 10.22.25

10/10/2025 AP - CHECK REGISTER - SUCCESSOR AGENCY
FROM
07/11/2025 - 07/31/2025
PAGE 1
Payment
Number Fund Vendor Name Check Date Check Total
805690 3710 U S BANK CR:US BANK TRUST NA 10/2/2025 4,070.00$ 0 $4,070.00
E-Payables
Number
Vendor
Number Vendor Name E-Payable Date E-Payables Amount

0.00 0 $0.00
0 $4,070.00
Disbursement Total
S:\Accounting\LACEY\ADMIN-COUNCIL\2025\COUNCIL - SA\10.22.25\

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

MEETING DATE: October 22, 2025 AGENDA CATEGORY: Hearings TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Phillip Burns, Development Services Director
DATE: October 6, 2025
SUBJECT: Public Appeal Hearing of Planning Commission’s Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 7500 (Phased) and use of a previously adopted mitigated negative declaration.

McIntosh & Associates, representing Franmar Company and Loyola Properties I, LP, is proposing to subdivide 39.92 acres into 208 single-family residential lots, 1 sump lot, and 4 landscape lots in the R-1 (Single-Unit Dwelling) zone located at the northeast corner of Old River Road and Mc Cutchen Road. (Ward 5)

Consideration of a Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 7500 (Phased).

Lozeau Drury LLP submitted an appeal to the Planning Commission’s approval of the request.

RECOMMENDATION:

City staff recommends denying the appeal and upholding the Planning Commission’s decision to approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 7500 and its proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration.

BACKGROUND:

Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM) No. 7 500 consists of 208 single-family residential lots, 1 sump lot, and 4 landscape lots on 39.92 acres. Residential lots range in size from 5,000 square feet to 11,638 square feet, with the typical lot size 50 feet wide x 100 feet deep (5,000 square feet). The density is 5.98 units per net acre , which is consistent with the LR designation of the project of less than or equal to 7.26 dwelling units per net acre.

Access to this subdivision would be from Mc Cutchen Road (arterial) on the south boundary and Rio Verde Drive (local) on the subdivision's east boundary . As such, the applicant has requested 4 deviations from City standards to allow reverse corner lots, reduction of lot frontage, re duction of lot width, and double frontage lots. Staff has reviewed deviation requests and recommends approval.

Planning Commission Decision. On August 21, 2025, the Planning Commission considered VTTM No. 7500 (Phased) No comments were received. At the meeting, there were no speakers in favor or opposed to the map and the project remained on the consent agenda . The Planning Commission unanimously approved the request with Commissioner Cater absent. The Planning Commission’s findings are contained in Resolution No. 41-25 (attached).

Appeal to Planning Commission’s Decision. On August 28, 2025, Lozeau Drury LLP filed an appeal to the Planning Commission’s decision to approve VTTM No. 7 500 (Phased) . A copy of the appeal letter is attached. The basis for the appeal was set forth in the letter from the Law Offices of Lozeau Drury LLP to the Planning Commission on August 22 , 2025 which states that the reliance of the 2007 Mitigated Negative Declaration violate the California Environmental Quality Act. VTTM 7500 (Phased) may have

significant impacts that were not considered in 2007 requiring preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. Alternately, new information, changed circumstances and new mitigation measures would require preparation of a new Mitigated Negative Declaration.

Environmental Review. Based upon an initial environmental assessment, staff determined that GPA./ZC No. 07 -1874 M itigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) of the subject property was adequate environmental documentation for the proposed project. In accordance with CEQA Section 15162, no further environmental documentation is necessary because no substantial changes to the original project are proposed, there are no substantial changes in circumstances under which the project will be undertaken, and no new environmental impacts have been identified. In addition, mitigation measures from the related project have been incorporated and are attached to the resolution.

Public Notification. All required public notices have been given for both the Planning Commission public hearing held on August 21, 2025, and the City Council public hearing of October 22, 2025.

CITY COUNCIL OPTIONS:

The City Council may sustain, modify, reject, or overrule any ruling of the Planning Commission for this subdivision of land. The following options have been provided for Council’s consideration regarding the appeal:

1. Deny the Appeal and Approve VTTM No. 7 500 (Phased). If the City Council were to deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's approval, the Ve sting Tentative Tract Map would be conditionally approved and would facilitate construction of 208 single -family residential lots, 1 sump lot, and 4 landscape lots on 39.9 2 acres and adopt the M itigated Negative Declaration (Resolution attached).

2. Approve the Appeal and Deny VTTM No. 7500 (Phased). If the City Council were to approve the appeal and overturn the Planning Commission's approval, the project site could not be developed as proposed and would retain its current condition. The Mitigated Negative Declaration would not be adopted.

CONCLUSION:

Staff believes the proposed subdivision of land is consistent with applicable general and specific plans; the site is physically suitable for the type of development; the design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat; the design of the subdivision will not likely cause serious public health problems; and the design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.

Overall Recommendation. Staff finds that the applicable provisions of CEQA have been complied with, and the proposal is compatible with the surrounding area, land use designation, and zoning ordinance.

Therefore, staff recommends City Council to consider the whole of the record, to include the appellant’s concerns, and deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's decision to approv e Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 7500 (Phased).

FISCAL IMPACT:

No fiscal impact with the proposed subdivision of land. Development which will occur as a result of Vesting

Tentative Tract Map No. 7500 (Phased) will be subject to the appropriate application processing fees that have been determined to be sufficient to cover all operational expenses related to processing projects.

COUNCIL GOAL:

Community Character & Quality of Life
Reliable Infrastructure

ATTACHMENTS:

1. City Council Resolution to Deny Appeal and Approve VTTM 7500 (Phased)

2. Map Set

3. Planning Commission Staff Report

4. Planning Commission Resolution

5. Mitigated Negative Declaration for GPA/ZC 07-1874

6. Appeal Letter of Planning Commission Decision

RESOLUTION NO. _____________

Page 1 of 4 ends

RESOLUTION OF THE BAKERSFIELD CITY COUNCIL DENYING THE
APPEAL AND A PPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 7500
(PHASED) LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF OLD RIVER
ROAD AND MC CUTCHEN ROAD.

WHEREAS, the application was deemed complete on July 2, 2025; and

WHEREAS, the Secretary of the Planning Commission, did set, Thursday, August 21, 2025, at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, as the time and place for a public hearing before the Planning Commission to consider the Project, and notice of the public hearing was given in the manner provided in Title 16 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code; and

WHEREAS, After the public hearing concluded, the Planning Commission unanimously approved the project, with no speakers in favor or opposition. Notably, one Commissioner was absent during the vote (Resolution 41-25); and

WHEREAS, On August 28 , 2025 , Lozeau Drury LLP , the appellant, filed a written appeal with the City Clerk to the Planning Commission’s decision to approve the Project; and

WHEREAS, the City Council, through the City Clerk, did set the time and place of the public hearing as Wednesday, October 22, 2025, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, to consider the appeal, and notice of the public hearing was given in the manner provided in Title 16 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code; and

WHEREAS, during the October 22 , 2025, public hearing, the City Council considered all facts, testimony, and evidence concerning the staff report, and the Planning Commission’s action; and

Page 2 of 4 ends

WHEREAS, staff has determined the Project will not significantly effect the environment and, pursuant to State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15162, the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is adequate and no further environmental documentation is necessary; and

WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to CEQA and the City of Bakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures have been duly followed by city staff , the Planning Commission, and City Council; and

WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield Planning Department (1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California) is the custodian of all documents and other materials upon which the environmental determination is based; and

WHEREAS, the facts presented in the staff report, environmental review, and evidence received both in writing and by verbal testimony at the above- referenced public hearing support the findings contained in this resolution; and

WHEREAS, the Council has considered and hereby make the following finding:

1. All required public notices have been given. Hearing notices regarding the Project were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the Project area and published in the Bakersfield Californian, a local newspaper of general circulation, 10 days prior to the hearing.

2. A Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project is the appropriate environmental document to accompany its approval. In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines, staff prepared an initial study and indicated that because mitigation measures relating to biological resources, cultural resources and air quality analysis have been incorporated into the Project, the Project will have less than significant impact on the physical environment.

3. The proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451.

4. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans.

5. The site is physically suitable for the type of development.

6. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.

7. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

8. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems.

Page 3 of 4 ends

9. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision.

10. Urban services are available for the proposed development. The Project is within an area to be served by all necessary utilities and waste disposal systems.

Improvements proposed as part of the Project will deliver utilities to the individual lots or parcels to be created.

11. Mineral right owners' signatures may be waived on the final map pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 16.20.060 .A.1. The applicant has provided evidence with the Project application that it is appropriate to waive mineral right owners’ signatures because in accordance with BMC Section 16.20.060 A.1., the party’s right of surface entry has been waived by recorded document prior to recordation of any final map.

12. The conditions of approval are necessary for orderly development and to provide for public health, welfare, and safety.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Bakersfield City Council as follows:

1. The above recitals and findings incorporated herein, are true and correct.

2. The decision of the Planning Commission is upheld, subject to conditions of approval shown in attached Exhibit “A”.

3. The appeal is denied.

4. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 7500 is hereby approved, subject to the conditions of approval shown in attached Exhibit “A” and shown in attached Exhibit “C”.

o0o

Page 4 of 4 ends

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting held on October 22, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBER: ARIAS, GONZALES, WEIR, SMITH, KOMAN, BASHIRTASH, KAUR NOES: COUNCILMEMBER: _______________________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER: _______________________________________________________________ ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER: _______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________

JULIE DRIMAKIS, CMC
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk
of the Council of the City of Bakersfield

APPROVED

_______________________________

KAREN GOH
MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield

APPROVED as to form:

VIRGINIA GENNARO
City Attorney

By: ____________________________

VIRIDIANA GALLARDO-KING
Deputy City Attorney

Exhibits:

A Conditions of Approval
B Location Map with Zoning
C Tentative Map

By VM\S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

EXHIBIT “A”
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 7500

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

NOTE to Subdivider/Applicant: It is important that you review and comply with the requirements and deadlines listed in the “FOR YOUR INFORMATION” packet that is provided separately. This packet contains existing ordinance requirements, policies, and departmental operating procedures as they may apply to this subdivision.

PUBLIC WORKS

1. There was no letter submitted requesting deviations from Public Works standards.

2. Approval of this tentative map does not indicate approval of grading, drainage lines and appurtenant facilities shown, or any variations from ordinance, standard, and policy requirements which have neither been requested nor specifically approved.

3. Prior to grading plan review submit the following for review and approval:

3.1. A drainage study for the entire subdivision, or a revision to the approved study. The study shall be approved, any required retention shall be provided, and necessary easements shall be dedicated to the City.

3.2. A sewer study to include providing service to the entire subdivision and showing what surrounding areas may be served by the main line extensions. Pay sewer capacity mitigation fee equal to $350 per dwelling unit due to sewer capacity issues in the Buena Vista Sewer Line.

3.3. If the tract is discharging storm water to a canal, a channel, or the Kern River: In order to meet the requirements of the City of Bakersfield’s NPDES permit, and to prevent the introduction of sediments from construction or from storm events to the waters of the US, all storm water systems that ultimately convey drainage to the river or a canal shall have a mechanical device in the storm drain system to remove or minimize the introduction of oil, grease, trash, and sediments. This device shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and shall provide the greatest benefit to the storm drain system with the least maintenance cost.

4. The following conditions must be reflected in the design of the improvement plans:

4.1. Final plan check fees shall be submitted with the first plan check submission.

4.2. Per Resolution 108-2023 the area within the Tract shall implement and comply with the “complete streets” policy. Complete streets will require pedestrian and bicycle access to the Tract from existing sidewalks and bike lanes. If there is a gap less than ¼ mile then construction of asphalt sidewalks and bike lanes to the tract will be required.

Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 2 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

4.3. Install traffic signal interconnect conduit and pull rope for the frontage in all arterials and collectors. Install conduit and pull ropes in future traffic signal locations.

4.4. In addition to other paving requirements, on and off-site road improvements may be required from any collector or arterial street to provide left turn and right turn channelization into each street (or access point) within the subdivision (or development), where warranted and as directed by the City Engineer. Said channelization shall be developed to provide necessary transitions and deceleration lanes to meet the current CalTrans standards for the design speed of the roadway in question.

4.5. Off-site pavement and striping construction will be required to transition from the proposed/ultimate on-site improvements to the existing conditions at the time construction commences. Transitions must be designed in accordance with City Standards and/or the Caltrans Highway Design Manual. If existing conditions change during the period of time between street improvement plan approval and construction commencement, the street improvement plans must be revised and approved by the City Engineer.

4.6. Right turn deceleration lanes are required on arterials at all streets and access points if the 85
th percentile speed is less than 45 mph and the peak hour turning volume is over 200, or if the 85th percentile speed is 45 mph or greater and the peak hour turning volume is over 25.

5. The subdivider shall either construct the equivalent full width landscaped median island in McCutchen Dr for the site’s frontage or pay $100 per Linear Feet (their proportionate share of the cost for the future construction of the median). Median islands shall be designed by the first tract or development to be approved on a side.

6. The subdivide is responsible for implementing the following:

6.1. The phasing map as submitted may be unbalanced with respect to the required improvements along the tract frontages. Therefore, in order to promote orderly development, each phase shall be responsible for an equal dollar amount of frontage improvement. Prior to recordation of each final map for any phase that does not construct its share of the improvements, the difference between the cost of the frontage improvements constructed and the phase share shall be placed into an escrow account. The money deposited in this account would be for the use of the developer of any future phase responsible for more than its share of improvements. The final per-lot share will be based upon an approved engineer’s estimate. In lieu of the use of an escrow account, the developer may choose to construct with each phase its proportionate share of the frontage improvements, with approval of the City Engineer.

6.2. The following conditions are based upon the premise that filing of Final Maps will occur in the order shown on the map with Phase 1 first, then Phase 2, then Phase 3, Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 3 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

etc. If recordation does not occur in that normal progression, then, prior to recordation of each final map, the City Engineer shall determine the extent of improvements to be done with that particular phase.

6.2.1. The following shall occur with Phase 1:

6.2.1.1. Construct McCutchen Rd to full ½ width city arterial standards, from Rio Verde Dr to the westerly property line of Phase 2 lot 1.

6.2.1.2. Construct an asphalt walkway 5’ wide, along McCutchen Rd, from the westerly property line of Phase 2 lot 1 to Old River Rd.

6.2.1.3. Prior to the recordation of the Phase 1 final map, submit a proportionate fair share estimate for review and pay a deposit to the City of Bakersfield for the Phase 1 proportionate share of improvements along McCutchen Rd and Old River Rd.

6.2.1.4. Abandon irrigation line, which was constructed by Tract 7136 to provide water to this parcel. Said line shall be abandoned in place by filling the irrigation line with a controlled low strength material (CLSM) or approved material.

6.2.2. The following shall occur with Phase 2:

6.2.2.1. Construct McCutchen Rd to full ½ width city arterial standards, from the westerly property line of Phase 2 lot 1to Old River Rd.

6.2.3. The following shall occur with Phase 3:

6.2.3.1. Construct Old River Rd to full ½ width city arterial standards, from McCutchen Rd to the phase 3/4 boundary (between lots 41 & 35 of phase 3 & 4 respectively), including median landscaping.

6.2.4. The following shall occur with Phase 4:

6.2.4.1. Construct Old River Rd to full ½ width city arterial standards, from the phase 3/4 boundary (between lots 41 & 35 of phase 3 & 4 respectively) to the northern tract boundary, including median landscaping.

If the number of phases or the boundaries of the phases are changed, the developer must submit to the City Engineer an exhibit showing the number and configuration of the proposed phases. The City Engineer will review the exhibit and determine the order and extent of improvements to be constructed with each new phase. The improvement plans may require revision to conform to the new conditions.

Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 4 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

6.3. The subdivider is responsible for verifying that existing streets within the boundary of the tract are constructed to city standards and he will reconstruct streets within the boundary if not to standard.

6.4. Where streets do not have curb and gutter, construct a minimum section of 36 feet wide consisting of 2-12’ lanes, 2-4’ paved shoulders and 2 additional feet per side of either AC or other dust proof surface.

6.5. The use of interim, non-standard drainage retention areas shall be in accordance with the drainage policy adopted by letter dated January 24, 1997.

6.6. To preserve the permeability of the sump and to prevent the introduction of sediments from construction or from storm events, Best Management Practices for complying with the requirements of the Clean Water Act are required.

6.7. All lots with sumps and water well facilities will have wall and landscaping to the appropriate street standards, at the building setback with landscaping as approved by the Public Works and Parks Directors.

6.8. Drainage basins shall be reviewed and approved by both the Public Works Department and the Water Resources Department.

6.9. Install blue markers in the street at the fire hydrants per the Fire Department requirements.

7. The following must be reflected in the final map design:

7.1. A waiver of direct access shall be required for all lots abutting any arterials and collectors.

8. Prior to recordation of the first final map within this project site, subdivider shall make written notification to the City Engineer of any public improvements required to be financed or constructed outside the boundaries of the tentative map (i.e., “offsite improvements) as defined in BMC 116.16.080(E), and the cost of such offsite improvements. The notice shall include an engineer’s estimate or other documentation as required by the City Engineer that outlines by line item the specific offsite improvements for purposes of verifying extension of time eligibility pursuant to Government Code Section 66452.6(a). The written notification and documentation are subject to approval by the City Engineer or his/her designee.

9. Prior to recording the first final map:

9.1. The City Council must have taken final action for the inclusion of this tract within the Consolidated Maintenance District.

9.2. The developer is required to construct an improvement which is on the facilities list for the Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation Impact Fee Olive Dr. The developer shall receive credit against his traffic impact fees for constructing this project. The Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 5 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

developer must submit an appraisal, to be approved by the City Engineer, verifying the cost of the right-of-way to be acquired. This credit is not available until the improvement has been constructed by the developer and accepted for maintenance by the City. Any building permit issued prior to this acceptance shall pay the full impact fee.

9.3. If it becomes necessary to obtain any off-site right of way and if the subdivider is unable to obtain the required right of way, then he shall pay to the City the up-front costs for eminent domain proceedings and enter into an agreement and post security for the purchase and improvement of said right of way.

10. Prior to recording each final map:

10.1. All facilities within the boundaries of this subdivision identified by the approved drainage study shall be constructed in accordance with the plans approved by the City Engineer, and all easements required shall be provided.

10.2. The subdivider shall submit an enforceable, recordable document approved by the City Attorney to be recorded concurrently with the Final Map which will prohibit occupancy of any lot until all improvements have been completed by the subdivider and accepted by the City.

10.3. The subdivider shall submit an enforceable, recordable document approved by the City Attorney to be recorded concurrently with the Final Map containing information with respect to the addition of this subdivision to the consolidated maintenance district. Said covenant shall also contain information pertaining to the maximum anticipated annual cost per single family dwelling for the maintenance of landscaping associated with this tract. Said covenant shall be provided to each new property owner through escrow proceedings. If the parcel is already within a consolidated maintenance district, the owner shall update the maintenance district documents, including Proposition 218 Ballot and Covenant, which shall be signed and notarized.

11. Prior to Notice of Completion:

11.1. The storm drain system, including the sump, shall be inspected and any debris removed.

11.2. Street Name Signs (SNS):

11.2.1. Metro Size SNS shall be installed at the intersection of local streets with Arterial and collector streets.

11.2.2. Standard SNS shall be installed at all other locations.

12. This development is subject to conditions from GPA/ZC 07-1874.

Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 6 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

WATER RESOURCES
13 . Prior to recordation of the final subdivision map the Subdivider shall:

13. 1 Execute and record a Domestic Water Service Agreement with the Water Department.

13. 2 Pay all applicable fees to the Water Department.

13. 3 Submit a Will Serve Letter from the Water Department to the Development Services Department.

13. 4 Submit water system plans to the Water Department for review and approval.

Water system plans shall be prepared in accordance with the Water Department Standards and Specifications and per the Water Department’s engineering recommendations.

13.5 Deed to City in fee, a water facility site for a water well and/or a storage tank and/or other required water distribution infrastructure. Site size and location shall be in accordance with the Water Department Standards and Specifications and at the discretion of the Water Resources Manager.

N
ote to Subdivider: You should contact the Water Resources Dept. at least 4 months before the date you anticipate to record a final map.

13.6 The Developer shall submit an enforceable, recordable document approved by the City Attorney to be recorded concurrently with the Final Map containing information for the addition of this development to a Sump Maintenance District. Said covenant shall be provided to each new property owner through escrow proceedings.

13.7 If the Developer desires a public sump, a new Maintenance District for future maintenance of storm drain sump facilities shall be created. Undeveloped parcels within an existing Maintenance District will be required to update Maintenance District documents. Updated documents, including Proposition 218 Ballot and Covenant, shall be signed and notarized for any public sump (Note – If already within a maintenance district, the maintenance district form may need to be updated).

13.8 Drainage from this private tract shall be kept on site. Any proposed sump within the private development shall be privately maintained.

IRE SAFETY DIVISION

14. P
ipeline Easements.

Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 7 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

14.1 Concurrently with recordation of any phase that includes the pipeline easements or portions thereof, subdivider shall show the easements on the final map with a notation that structures including accessory buildings , habitable portion of a structure, garage, deck/patio, swimming pools or unoccupied permanent structure, are prohibited within the setback and record a corresponding covenant.

14.2 Prior to or concurrently with recordation of any phase that includes the pipeline easements or portions thereof, subdivider shall show on the final map that no habitable portion of a structure , garage, deck/patio, swimming pools or unoccupied permanent structure may be built within 50 feet of a gas main, or transmission line, or refined liquid product line with 36 inches of cover and record a corresponding covenant.

14.3 No structure may be within 40 feet of a hazardous liquids pipeline bearing refined product, within 48 inches or more of cover. If a pipeline meets these criteria, the 40- foot setback line shall be shown in the final map and a corresponding covenant shall be recorded prior to or concurrently with recordation of any phase that is affected.

14.4 No habitable portion of a structure may be built within thirty (30) feet of a crude oil pipeline operating at twenty percent (20%) or greater of its design strength.

14.5 Prior to or concurrently with recordation of any phase within 250 feet of the pipeline easements, subdivider shall record a covenant disclosing the location of the pipelines on all lots of this subdivision within 250 feet of the pipelines.

American Petroleum Institute Standards and Guidelines for property development

15. Fire Apparatus Access Roads and Hydrants

15.1 When fire protection, including fire apparatus access roads and water supplies for protection, is required to be installed, such shall be installed and made serviceable prior to any building permit issuance and throughout the time of construction.

15.2 Dead-End fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with width and turnaround provisions in accordance with Table D103.4

(California Fire Code)

Table D103.4

Requirments for Dead-End Fire Apparatus Access Roads
Length
(Feet)
Width
(Feet)
Turnaround Required
0-150 20 None required
Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 8 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

151-500 20
120-foot Hammerhead, 60-foot "Y" or 96-foot
diameter cul-de-sac
501-750 26
120-foot Hammerhead, 60-foot "Y" or 96-foot
diameter cul-de-sac
Over 750 Special Approval Required

15.3 Fire Apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus weighing at least 75,000 pounds and shall be surfaced with the first lift of asphalt to provide all-weather driving capabilities.

RECREATION AND PARKS

16. Prior to recordation of each final map, the subdivider shall pay an in-lieu fee based on a park land dedication requirement of 2.5 acres per 1000 population in accordance with Chapter 15.80 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code. If the number of dwelling units increases or decreases upon recordation of a final map(s), the park land requirement will change accordingly. Refer to BMC Chapter 15.80 and the Planning Information Sheet regarding calculation and payment of in-lieu fee. In accordance with Government Code Section 66020(d), you are hereby notified that the 90-day period in which you may protest the imposition of this fee has begun.

BMC Chapter 15.80 requires the Planning Commission to determine if a subdivider is to dedicate park land, pay an in-lieu fee, reserve park land or a combination of these in order to satisfy the City’s park land ordinance. Staff is recommending this condition in accordance with BMC Chapter 15.80.

17. Subdivider shall be responsible for improving medians with landscape on Old River Road.

CITY ATTORNEY

18. In consideration by the City of Bakersfield for land use entitlements, including but not limited to related environmental approvals related to or arising from this project, the applicant, and/or property owner and/or subdivider ("Applicant" herein) agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of Bakersfield, its officers, agents, employees, departments, commissioners and boards ("City" herein) against any and all liability, claims, actions, causes of action or demands whatsoever against them, or any of them, before administrative or judicial tribunals of any kind whatsoever, in any way arising from, the terms and provisions of this application, including without limitation any CEQA approval or any related development approvals or conditions whether imposed by the City, or not, except for CITY’s sole active negligence or willful misconduct.

This indemnification condition does not prevent the Applicant from challenging any decision by the City related to this project , and the obligations of this condition apply regardless of whether any other permits or entitlements are issued.

Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 9 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

The City will promptly notify Applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding, falling under this condition within thirty (30) days of actually receiving such claim. The City, in its sole discretion, shall be allowed to choose the attorney or outside law firm to defend the City at the sole cost and expense of the Applicant and the City is not obligated to use any law firm or attorney chosen by another entity or party.

PLANNING

19. This subdivision shall comply with all provisions of the Bakersfield Municipal Code, and applicable resolutions, policies and standards in effect at the time the application for the subdivision map was deemed complete per Government Code Section 66474.2.

20. The subdivision shall be recorded in no more than 5 phases. Phases shall be identified numerically and not alphabetically.

Orderly development.

21. The final map shall include a statement similar to the following and as approved by the Planning Director.

The subdivision is subject to the adopted Old River Ranch Parks & Trails Plan.

For orderly development.

22. Prior to recordation of each final map, the subdivider shall submit a “will serve” or “water availability” letter or other documentation acceptable to the Planning Director from the water purveyor stating the purveyor will provide water service to the phase to be recorded.

Required for orderly development and provide for the public health, welfare and safety by ensuring water service to the subdivision at the time of final map recordation because the water purveyor has included an expiration date in the initial “will serve” letter.

23. Mineral Rights: Prior to the recordation of the first final map, the following shall apply:

The final map will have the signatures of each party owning a recorded interest in, or right to minerals, and the nature of the respective interest, not including lessees of such rights.(Secs. 16.20.060 A. and 16.20.050)

Required to verify compliance with BMC Section 16.20.060 A. and orderly development.

24. In the event a previously undocumented well is uncovered or discovered on the project site, the subdivider is responsible to contact the Department of Conservation’s Division of Geologic Energy Management (CalGEM). The subdivider is responsible for any remedial Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 10 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VT TM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

operations on the well required by CalGEM. Subdivider shall also be subject to provisions of BMC Section 15.66.080 (B.)

Police power based on public health, welfare and safety.

25. Prior to recordation of a final map, provide a covenant disclosing the existence and location of Independence High School and its athletic fields, wi th notice of the potential for bright lights and noise from athletic game events and other school activities, and will be recorded to affect all real property within the subdivision.

26. The following Subdivision Ordinance Deviation requests are approved:
(BMC Section 16.28.170.B.3)

26.1 Reverse corner lots for:

Phase 1 Lot 27
Phase 4 Lot 40
(BMC Section 16.28.170.P)

26.2 Lot Frontage & Lot Width for:

Phase 1 through 4; All lots.
(BMC 16.28.170.B and 16.28.170.D)

26.3 Double Frontage Lots for the following with 6-foot high masonry wall and landscaping along McCutchen and Old River Roads:

Phase 2, Lots 1, 5 through 13
Phase 3, Lots 25 through 41
Phase 4, Lots 23 through 35
(BMC 16.28.170.H)

27. Subdivider shall be required to comply with clear sight lines per BMC Section 17.08.175 on all corner lots. Prior to recordation of each final map, subdivider shall submit for substantial conformance, a diagram demonstrating the corner lot(s) comply with said section and have an adequate building envelop that meets required setbacks. (Note: if unable to comply, the lot(s) shall be adjusted to comply with clear sight line or comply with other applicable ordinances to be approved by the Planning Director or Planning Commission prior to recordation of a final map.)

Required for public safety.

(See next page for Mitigation Measures)

Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 11 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

Mitigation/Conditions of Approval
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 07-1874
Cultural Impact Mitigation Measures

28. Prior to ground-disturbance activities associated with this project, personnel associated with the grading effort shall be informed of the importance of the potential cultural and archaeological resources (i.e. archaeological sites, artifacts, features, burials, etc.) that may be encountered during site preparation activities, how to identify those resources in the field, and of the regulatory protections afforded to those resources. The personnel shall be informed of procedures relating to the discovery of archaeological remains during grading activities and cautioned to avoid archaeological finds with equipment and not collect artifacts. The applicant/developer of the project site shall submit documentation to the Planning Department that they have met this requirement prior to commencement of ground-disturbance activities. This documentation should include information on the date(s) of training activities, the individual(s) that conducted the training, a description of the training, and a list of names of those who were trained. Should cultural remains be uncovered, the on-site supervisor shall immediately notify a qualified archaeologist. Mitigation for potentially significant cultural resource impacts.

29. If human remains are discovered during grading or construction activities, work would cease pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code.

If human remains are identified on the site at any time, work shall stop at the location of the find and the Kern County Coroner shall be notified immediately (Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code and Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code which details the appropriate actions necessary for addressing the remains) and the local Native American community shall be notified immediately. Mitigation for potentially significant cultural resource impacts.

Agricultural Impact Mitigation Measure

30. In an attempt to reduce complaints and unwarranted investigations undertaken by the Kern County Department of Agriculture, the following disclosure is required to be provided as part of the transfer of properties:
"If your real property is adjacent to property used for agricultural operations, you may be subject to inconveniences or discomforts arising from such operations on any 24-hour basis. Said discomforts may include, but shall not be limited to equipment noise, odors from manure and other chemicals, and dust or smoke. It has been determined that in Kern County the use of real property for agricultural operations if such operations are consistent with accepted customs, standards, and laws."
Mitigation for potentially significant agricultural resource impacts.

Air Quality Impact Mitigation Measures
PM-10 Mitigation Measures:

Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 12 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

31. During construction on the project site, the applicant shall implement the following mitigation measures in order to reduce project emissions. PM-10 will be the most affected criteria pollutant by the proposed mitigation measures.

Construction equipment mitigation measures and design feature mitigation measures are also being included to reduce project related impacts:

Water all unpaved or haul road surfaces as needed. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Limit speed on all unpaved roads to 15 mph. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Water any exposed ground surfaces as needed. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Stabilize all disturbed areas including inactive storage piles on an as needed basis.

Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Maintain at least a 6-inch freeboard space during transport of materials and/or cover and wet to limit dust emissions. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Remove mud or dirt accumulations on public roadways immediately when track out exceeds 50 or more feet as well as at the end of the workday. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Cease grading activities during periods of high winds where entrainment of dust will exceed the SJVAPCD 20% opacity requirements. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Construction Equipment Mitigation Measures:

Limit idling to no more than 20 minutes at a time. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

All construction equipment shall be maintained to manufacturers' specifications.

Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts Where possible electric equipment shall be used in lieu of diesel or gas powered equipment. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Encourage employees at the construction sites to carpool to and from work as well as during established lunch hours. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

In order to reduce project related emissions from mobile sources a number of 'design features' can be incorporated into the project. These 'design features' help to facilitate alternatives to traditional vehicle use, thereby reducing vehicle trips, miles traveled, idling and traffic congestion as well as reducing project related emissions. The following 'design features' will be incorporated into the proposed project to reduce emissions:

The applicant shall install street lighting along the project site. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Sidewalk coverage throughout the proposed project. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 13 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

Shade trees shall be installed to allow moderate coverage of walkways and/or bikeways. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Pedestrian safety signs shall be provided with signalization, where appropriate.

Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Construction Equipment Mitigation Measures:

All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

With the demolition of buildings or removal of trees, all surfaces shall be wetted during demolition/removal. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded of accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions) (Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden). Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Within urban areas, the owner/operator shall prevent carryout and track-out, or immediately remove carryout and track-out when it extends 50 feet or more from the nearest unpaved surface exit point of the site. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Any construction site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and track-out. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Enhanced and Additional Control Measures for Construction Emissions of PM-10. (From Table 6-3): The following measures shall be implemented at construction site to mitigate significant PM-10 impacts:

Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 14 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than one percent. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts
Track out will be prevented by one of the following:
• A Grizzly with rails, pipes or grates to dislodge debris off of existing vehicles, • A layer of washed gravel at one inch or larger in diameter, three inches deep,
• Extension of paved road at least 100 feet from publicly maintained road, or
• Installation of a wheel washer.

Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Install wind breaks at windward side(s) of construction areas. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds exceed 20 mph (Regardless of wind speed, an owner/operator must comply with Regulation Vlll's 20 percent opacity limitation). Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Limit area subject to excavation, grading, and other construction activity at any one time.

Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

City Attorney's Condition

32. In consideration by the City of Bakersfield for land use entitlements, including but not limited to related environmental approvals related to or arising from this project, the applicant, and/or property owner and/or subdivider ("Applicant" herein) agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of Bakersfield, its officers, agents, employees, departments, commissioners or boards ("City" herein) against any and all liability, claims, actions, causes of action or demands whatsoever against them, or any of them, before administrative or judicial tribunals of any kind whatsoever, in any way arising from, the terms and provisions of this application, including without limitation any CEQA approval or any related development approvals or conditions whether imposed by the City, or not, except for City's sole active negligence or willful misconduct.

This indemnification condition does not prevent the Applicant from challenging any decision by the City related to this project and the obligations of this condition apply regardless of whether any other permits or entitlements are issued.

Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 15 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

The City will promptly notify Applicant of any such claim, action or preceding, falling under this condition within thirty (30) days of actually receiving such claim. The City, in its sole discretion, shall be allowed to choose the attorney or outside law firm to defend the City at the sole cost and expense of the Applicant and the City is not obligated to use any law firm or attorney chosen by another entity or party.

Public Works Department Conditions

33. Along with the submittal of any development plan, prior to approval of improvement plans, or with the application for a lot line adjustment or parcel merger, the following shall occur:
a. Provide fully executed dedication for Mc Cutchen and Old River Roads to arterial standards for the full frontage of the area within the entire GPA request.

Dedications shall include sufficient widths for expanded intersections and additional areas for landscaping as directed by the City Engineer. Dedication shall also include sufficient width for trails in accordance with the approved Parks and Trails Plan for this area. Submit a current title report with the dedication documents.
b. This GPA/ZC area is too small to support it's own storm drainage sump. The City will allow no more than one sump per 80 acres; therefore, this GPA/ZC area must be included within the drainage area of adjoining property. Submit a comprehensive drainage study of the entire drainage area, to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Any required retention site and necessary easements shall be dedicated to the City.
c. Sewer service must be provided to the GPA/ZC area. Submit a comprehensive sewer study to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. The study shall be in conformance with the Plant 3 Master Study. The developer shall be responsible for the initial extension of the sewer line to serve the property. This sewer line must necessarily be sized to serve a much larger area that the project area. The City is willing to aid the developer in the formation of a Planned Sewer Area and/or an Assessment District to provide a mechanism for the reimbursement of oversizing costs to the developer.
d. In order to preserve the permeability of the sump and to prevent the introduction of sediments from construction or from storm events, all retention and detention basins (sumps) shall have a mechanical device in the storm drain system to remove or minimize the introduction of oil, grease, trash, and sediments to the sump. This device shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer, and shall provide the greatest benefit to the storm drain system with the least maintenance cost.
e. Developer is responsible for the construction of all infrastructure, both public and private, within the boundary of the GPA/ZC area. This includes the construction of any and all boundary streets to the centerline of the street, unless otherwise specified. The developer is also responsible for the construction of any off site infrastructure required to support this development, as identified in these conditions.

For orderly development.

Exhibit “A”
VTTM 7500

Page 16 of 16 ends

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx

34. Prior to issuance of a of a building permit, the developer shall pay a major transportation facility fee in the amount of $2487 for residential dwelling unit. If prior to issuance of a building permit said fee is merged into the regional TIF program then payment of the regional TIF fee will be deemed to have satisfied the intent of this condition. This fee is a component of the City Council approved action plan to pursue funds needed to complete construction of major transportation facilities to serve growth and development within Metropolitan Bakersfield. For orderly development.

35. The entire area covered by this General Plan Amendment shall be included in the Consolidated Maintenance District. The applicant shall pay all fees for inclusion in the Consolidated Maintenance District with submittal of any development plan, tentative subdivision map, Site Plan Review, or application for a lot line adjustment for any portion of this GPA area. For orderly development.

36. Payment of the proportionate share of the cost of the median for the arterial frontage of the property within the GPA/ZC request is required prior to recordation of any map or approval of any improvement plan for the GPA/ZC area. For orderly development.

37. Traffic Mitigation: Pay the proportionate share of the following mitigation measures (not paid for by the Regional Transportation Impact Fee or included with normal development improvements) as indicated in Table 6 of the traffic study. An updated estimate, based upon current costs, and fee schedule shall be developed by the applicant and approved prior to recordation of a map or issuance of a building permit. Proportionate shares from the study as follows:
a. White Ln & Old River Rd., Add 1 EBL, 1 WBR, 1 WBL, 1.04% share b. Panama Ln & Old River Rd., Expand to 1 EBL, 3 EBT, 1 EBR, 1 WBL, 3 WBT, 1 WBR, 2 NBL, 2 NBT, 1 NBR, 1 SBL, 2 SBT, 1 SBR, 1.46% share (100% share of adding No. 2 NBL)
c. Panama Ln & Gosford Rd., Expand to standard expanded intersection plus Add 1 EBT, 1 WBR, 1 NBR, 0.64% share
Mitigation for potentially significant traffic impacts.

38. Regional Transportation Impact Fee: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the RTIF program by paying the adopted residential unit fee in place at time of development. Mitigation for potentially significant traffic impacts.

MapPackages
0 500 1,000
Feet
_
KHSD Career
and Technical
Education Center
KHSD
Aquatic
Complex
Independence
High School
R-1
R-1 R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1 R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1/P.U.D.

R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1/P.U.D.

R-1
R-2
R-5
R-1

CARSONCREEK
LN

WINDING STREAM AVE

REDIRONST

DRAWBRIDGE
DR

BERK SHIR E RD

CARSON RIVER RD

DROVERS RUN RD

SNOWY RIVER DR
SHOO
TIN
G
STAR
CT

WHITNEYCREEK
CT

ALMOND CREEK DR
ROSE

CREEK WA Y
BRA
NSO
N
CRE
EK CT
ARR
OW
HEAD
TR
AIL
CT

SLEEPY HOLLOW LN
RIO
VER
DE DR
CACH
E
CR
EE
K
LN
TUCKE
R
CR
EEK
RD

THUNDERMOUNTAIN
LN
BU
CKI

NG BRON
COCT
WILD
M
USTANG
DR
W
HISKEY
CREEK
DR

OLD RIVER RD

CITRUS CREEK DR

MC CUTCHEN RD
Vesting Tentative Tract Map
7500

CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Zoning
R-1 One Family Dwelling
6,000 sq.ft. min lot
size
R-1-4.5 One Family
Dwelling
4,500 sq.ft. min lot
size
E Estate
10,000 sq.ft. min lot
size
R-S Residential
Suburban
24,000 sq.ft./dwelling
unit
R-S-( ) Residential
Suburban
1, 2.5, 5 or 10 min lot
size
R-2 Limited Multiple
Family Dwelling
4,500 sq.ft. min lot
size (single family)
6,000 sq.ft. min lot
size (multifamily)
2,500 sq.ft. lot area/
dwelling unit
R-3 Multiple Family
Dwelling
6,000 sq.ft. min lot
size
1,250 sq.ft. lot area/
dwelling unit
R-4 High Density
Multiple Family Dwelling
6,000 sq.ft. min lot
size
600 sq.ft. lot area/
dwelling unit
R-H Residential Holding
20 acre min lot size
A Agriculture
6,000 sq.ft. min lot
size
A-20A Agriculture
20 acre min lot size
PUD Planned Unit
Development
TT Travel Trailer Park
MH Mobilehome
C-O Professional and
Administrative Office
C-1 Neighborhood
Commercial
C-2 Regional
Commercial
C-C Commercial Center
C-B Central Business
PCD Planned
Commercial
Development
M-1 Light Manufacturing
M-2 General
Manufacturing
M-3 Heavy Industrial
VTTM7500

MAP PACKAGE
Exhibit B
M7
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT No. 7500
BEING A MERGER AND RE-SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 25 & 32 OF SALES MAP OF LANDS OF KERN COUNTY LAND COMPANY, FILED JUNE 16, 1897 IN THE OFFICE OF THE KERN COUNTY RECORDER, ALSO BEING A PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 30 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

CONTAINING 208 BUILDABLE RESIDENTIAL LOTS, 1 SUMP LOT AND 4 LANDSCAPE LOTS, 39.92 GROSS ACRES JANUARY 2025
80 SCALE: 1" -
40 D
80'
80 I
BASIS OF BEARING OWNER/SUBDIVIDER:

THE BEARING OF N 00'24'05" E AS SHOWN FOR THE
NORTH-SOUTH MID-SECTION LINE OF SECTION 32, 30/27
PER RECORD OF SURVEY AS FILED IN BOOK 24 OF
RECORD OF SURVEY AT PAGE 71, IN THE OFFICE OF THE

KERN COUNTY RECORDER WAS USED AS THE BASIS OF
BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON.

FRANMAR COMPANY, (66.67%) AND
LOYOLA PROPERTIES I, LP (33.33%)
P.O. BOX 11358
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93389
CONTACT: MATTHEW WADE
PHONE: (661) 885-9406
BENCHMARK ENGINEER:

NGS BENCHMARK DESIGNATION - OLD RIVER
STATION IS 0.2 MILES SOUTH OF THE CENTERLINE
INTERSECTION OF TAFT HIGHWAY 119 AND OLD RIVER
ROAD ON THE LEFT.

MclNTOSH & ASSOCIATES
10800 STOCKDALE HWY. STE.

BAKERSFIELD, CA 93311
CONTACT: BLAINE NEPTUNE
ELEVATION = 338.676' (NAVO 88 DATUM)
GENERAL NOTES:

ALL ROAD IMPROVEMENTS AND DRAINAGE IN THIS

SUBDIVISION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS ESTABLISHED BY THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD.

IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE GRADING OF THIS TRACT WILL BE WITHIN THE AMOUNTS OUTLINED WITHIN SECTION 16.16.030(0) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE.

A 10' PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT (P.U.E.) IS PROPOSED AND IS

LOCATED ON ALL FRONT AND SIDE YARDS ADJACENT TO ALL
INTERNAL STREETS.

ALL CUL-DE-SAC & KNUCKLE RETURN RADII ARE 25'.

ALL CUL-DE-SACS ARE 50' RADIUS.

ALL KNUCKLES ARE 92' RADIUS.

PHONE: (661) 834-4814

PHASING

THE NUMBERING OF THE PHASES ARE FOR

IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES AND DO NOT

NECESSARILY IMPLY THE ORDER OF
DEVELOPMENT.

THIS TRACT WILL BE DEVELOPED IN UP TO 4
PHASES.

NOTE TO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: AL TERNA TE STREET NAMES

THE FOLLOWING STREET NAMES ARE PROVIDED AS
AL TERNA TES. PLEASE CONSIDER THESE NAMES IN

THE ORDER LISTED TO REPLACE NAMES ON THE
MAP THAT MAY NOT BE ACCEPTABLE.

1. YELLA

2. UNDINE

NOTE TO PUBLIC WORKS
103
30 T. 30 S., R. 27 E.

PROJECT
SITE
McCUTCHEN ROAD
29 '3
0 VICINITY MAP
LEGEND:

WFE
S.F.F.N.

S.M.LK.C.L.C.

NO SCALE

WAIVER OF DIRECT ACCESS

WALL FOOTING EASEMENT

SEARCH FOR FOUND NOTHING

SALES MAP OF LANDS OF

KERN COUNTY LAND COMPANY
---------- PROJECT BOUNDARY
•••••••••••••••••••••••• PHASE LINE 1. SEWER CONNECTION FOR THIS TRACT SHALL BE THE 15" SEWER ALONG RIO VERDE DRIVE VIA
XANTHE WAY OR THE 48" SEWER ALONG
McCUTCHEN ROAD VIA HAVRE WAY. ----- --- ·E· --- EXISTING O.H. ELECTRICAL LINE(S) FLOOD ZONE X:

MINIMAL FLOOD HAZARD, FEMA MAP 06029C2300E
EFFECTIVE DATE 9/26/2008.

ST A TISTICS:

APN: 540-010-19
ACREAGE: 39.92 GR. AC. / 34. 78 NET AC.

NUMBER OF LOTS: 208 BUILDABLE
NET DENSITY: 5.98 D.U./NET AC.

PROPOSED USE: RESIDENTIAL
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LR
ZONING: R-1
WATER SOURCE: CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
SEWAGE DISPOSAL: CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
GAS CO. - PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY

CABLE - SPECTRUM

PHONE - AT&T
--·--·-ll---EXISTING OIL LINE(S) - APPROXIM,
--- ---- -·oH--- EXISTING OVERHEAD ELEC. LINE
------------------------ EXISTING IRRIGATION LINE
--------G---EXISTING GAS LINE
____________ EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT
-------o---- PROPOSED STORM DRAIN
- - - FUTURE LOTS
g

ELECTRICAL - PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY
SCHOOL DISTRICTS: LAKESIDE UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT
@
-0-
E--

PROPOSED CATCH BASIN

EXISTING CONTOUR

EXISTING MONUMENT

EXISTING POWER POLE

EXISTING DOWN GUY

DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE

AND APPROXIMATE GRADE
& KERN HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
SCHOOLS:

ELEMENTARY - DONALD E. SUBURU SCHOOL

MIDDLE SCHOOL - LAKESIDE SCHOOL
HIGH SCHOOL - INDEPENDENCE HIGH SCHOOL 0.25% MIN.
6' MIN P/L
55' -60' R/W BLOCK WALL
l,_____-~t----<1 '---
1 48'-54'
([_ OLD RIVER RD/ ' • 17'
TRACT BOUNDARY!-- -l ' j s n•

PHASE TABLE
NO. OF L.S. SUMP

PHASE LOTS LOT LOT
45 2 39 2
3 41 1
4 83 1
TOTAL: 208 4
y 1 ,. i Ex1sr. o.5'-~
1 s1w
i __ -,-1-,•-1 i1A.C. CURB ~
EXIST: I, i 2%cn
_.r1'Jf~~1_-~717-n-"--=2~%~--cc--Jl---l::=;===::r1~
"URB I I 2% Ml~j EXIST. MEDIAN c . CURB DETACHED....J - EXIST. GUTTER SIDEWALK PER 4: 1 MAX.

PAVEMENT C.0.B. STANDARD
CD
ST-6

OLD RIVER ROAD (ARTERIAL)

SECTION A
SCALE: 1 "=1 O'
P/L 6' MIN
BLOCK WALL R/W 55' - 70' 1
I I f-----+----1,
\.,,---" 17' 64'-48' I
• r<l. McCUTCHEN RD.
s.o· I TRACT BOUNDARY
S/W
I
-,15
~ ':'o.5' -'·•'···-:

Ill "-
~ L~ 2L LDETACH~RB & cz:::;---
4: l MAX. SIDEWALK PER GUTTER PA YEMEN I
C.0.B. STANDARD
ST-6
f1D McCUTCHEN ROAD (ARTERIAL)

W SECTION B
SCALE: 1"=10'
: 30' ·1 30' ! !-11· --,o-· ------20-· ----'r-~---~~----11 r-:--1~4~23-.-+1----,5-.6-7'----,j~ I
60'
30' 30'
I
I
;i--~10~· -...,-i ~11; ±
4 1" i
2% ... ~jg 1
1 ,, 2% I"" 21
[ --==='=?"",{-J•::,J.. --··-.=::---·--·j . ---=,=--e:"':} ' 2% MIN ~, \I '.....-EXIST. IMPROVEMENT 2% .J EXIST PAVEMENT.,., 4:1 MAX -

DETACHED

SIDEWALK PER
C.O.B. STANDARD
ST-6 ED
R/W
I
I
I
I
I 10'

SECTION C
RIO VERDE DR.

SCALE: 1 "=1 O'
30'
20'
I s·
iM I ..11L I
(LOCAL)
60'
30'
20'
2%
1%MIN L t=
14% MAX DETACHED 1-(D-"E'-+---=S=Ec=CC-'T_,_IO~N~E~------, c.61gE~~~J'}~D 1 (60' WIDE LOCAL STREET)
ST-6 (FRONT TO SIDE)
SCALE: 1"=10'
I
'
10'
!%MIN L =
l 4% MAX DET ACHEO

SIDEWALK PER
C.O.B. STANDARD ST-6
20' 20'
..11L
w z
i "-
10'
- J 1% MIN
ffi SECTION D DETACHED _J 14% MAX
, SIDEWALK PER
1 (60 WIDE LOCAL STREET) C.O.B. STANDARD
(FRONT TO FRONT) ST-6
SCALE: 1 "=1 O'
R/W ·, ~ o/ ~
10'
Ll
I
I
I
!
I
I
l
2% MIN
4:1 MAX

DETACHED

SIDEWALK PER
C.O.B. STANDARD
ST-6
I 30' •1 30' 1
,_I----~~-----+-· -----t~----:
: 10' ~o• 20' 10' I
Z% MIN / DETACHED ~DEWALi( Z% MIN 41 ;(__. 4:1 MAX : MAX PER C.O.B. SID. ST-6 DETACHED E9 SECTION F SIDEWALK
1 (60' WIDE LOCAL STREET) ~1~N%2ili
(SIDE TO SIDE) ST-6
SCALE: 1"=10
,.
m
Ul
z
0 c7i
5 w
"'
~ ,...
ffi
Ill
C,
ill'
Ill
z
ffi
~
U)
Exhibit C

MAP SET
MapPackages
0 500 1,000
Feet
_
AERIAL
KHSD Career
and Technical
Education Center
KHSD
Aquatic
Complex
Independence
High School
CARSON
CREEK
LN

WINDING STREAM AVE

RED IRON ST

DRAWBRIDGE
DR

PRESCOTT

CREEK WAY

B E R K S H I R E R D

CARSON RIVER RD

DROVERS RUN RD

SNOWY RIVER DR
S
H
O
O
T
I
N
G
S
T
A
R
C
T

WHITNEY
CREEK
CT

ALMOND CREEK DR

R O S E

C R E E K W A Y
B
R
A
N
S
O
N
C
R
E
E
K
C
T
A
R
R
O
W
H
E
A
D
T
R
A
I
L
C
T

SLEEPY HOLLOW LN
R
I
O
V
E
R
D
E
D
R
C
A
C
H
E
C
R
E
E
K
L
N
T
U
C
K
E
R
C
R
E
E
K
R
D

THUNDER

MOUNTAIN
LN
B
U
C
K
I
N
G
B
R
O
N
C
O
C T
W
I
L
D
M
U
S
T
A
N
G
D
R
W
H
I
S
K
E
Y
C
R
E
E
K
D
R

OLD RIVER RD

CITRUS CREEK DR

MC CUTCHEN RD
Vesting Tentative Tract Map
7500

CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
VTTM7500

MAP PACKAGE
MapPackages
0 500 1,000
Feet
_
R-2
R-5
R-1/P.U.D.

R-1/P.U.D.

R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1 R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
KHSD Career
and Technical
Education Center
KHSD
Aquatic
Complex
Independence
High School
CARSON
CREEK
LN

WINDING STREAM AVE

RED IRON ST

DRAWBRIDGE
DR

PRESCOTT

CREEK WAY

B E R K S H I R E R D

CARSON RIVER RD

DROVERS RUN RD

SNOWY RIVER DR
S
H
O
O
T
I
N
G
S
T
A
R
C
T

WHITNEY
CREEK
CT

ALMOND CREEK DR

R O S E

C R E E K W A Y
B
R
A
N
S
O
N
C
R
E
E
K
C
T
A
R
R
O
W
H
E
A
D
T
R
A
I
L
C
T

SLEEPY HOLLOW LN
R
I
O
V
E
R
D
E
D
R
C
A
C
H
E
C
R
E
E
K
L
N
T
U
C
K
E
R
C
R
E
E
K
R
D

THUNDER

MOUNTAIN
LN
B
U
C
K
I
N
G
B
R
O
N
C
O
C T
W
I
L
D
M
U
S
T
A
N
G
D
R
W
H
I
S
K
E
Y
C
R
E
E
K
D
R

OLD RIVER RD

CITRUS CREEK DR

MC CUTCHEN RD
Vesting Tentative Tract Map
7500

CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Zoning
Residential Zone
Designations
R-1 One
Family
Dwelling
R-1/P.U.D.

Combining
R-2 Limited
Multiple
Family
Dwelling
Zone - 1
unit/2,500
sq. ft.VTTM7500

MAP PACKAGE
MapPackages
0 500 1,000
Feet
_
LR
LRLR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR
LR LR
PS
LR
R-IA
HR
LMR LR
KHSD Career
and Technical
Education Center
KHSD
Aquatic
Complex
Independence
High School

CARSONCREEK
LN

WINDING STREAM AVE

REDIRONST

DRAWBRIDGE
DR

PRESCOTT

CREEK WAY

BERK SHIR E RD

CARSON RIVER RD

DROVERS RUN RD

SNOWY RIVER DR
SHOO
TIN
G
STAR
CT

WHITNEYCREEK
CT

ALMOND CREEK DR
ROSE

CREEK WA Y
BRA
NSO
N
CRE
EK CT
ARR
OW
HEAD
TR
AIL
CT

SLEEPY HOLLOW LN
RIO
VER
DE DR
CACH
E
CR
EE
K
LN
TUCKE
R
CR
EEK
RD

THUNDERMOUNTAIN
LN
BU
CKI

NG BRON
COCT
WILD
M
USTANG
DR
W
HISKEY
CREEK
DR

OLD RIVER RD

CITRUS CREEK DR

MC CUTCHEN RD
Vesting Tentative Tract Map
7500

CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Land Use

RESIDENTIAL
LMR - Low
Medium
Density
Residential:
> 4 units
but ≤ 10
dwelling
units/net
acre
HR - High
Density
Residential:
> 17.42
units but ≤

72.6 dwelling
units/net
acre
LR - Low
Density
Residential:
≤ 7.26
dwelling
units/net
acre
PUBLIC

FACILITIES
PS - Public/
Private
Schools

RESOURCE
R-IA -
Resource -
Intensive
Agriculture:
20 acre
minimum
parcel size
VTTM7500

MAP PACKAGE
M7
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT No. 7500
BEING A MERGER AND RE-SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 25 & 32 OF SALES MAP OF LANDS OF KERN COUNTY LAND COMPANY, FILED JUNE 16, 1897 IN THE OFFICE OF THE KERN COUNTY RECORDER, ALSO BEING A PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 30 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

CONTAINING 208 BUILDABLE RESIDENTIAL LOTS, 1 SUMP LOT AND 4 LANDSCAPE LOTS, 39.92 GROSS ACRES JANUARY 2025
80 SCALE: 1" -
40 D
80'
80 I
BASIS OF BEARING OWNER/SUBDIVIDER:

THE BEARING OF N 00'24'05" E AS SHOWN FOR THE
NORTH-SOUTH MID-SECTION LINE OF SECTION 32, 30/27
PER RECORD OF SURVEY AS FILED IN BOOK 24 OF
RECORD OF SURVEY AT PAGE 71, IN THE OFFICE OF THE

KERN COUNTY RECORDER WAS USED AS THE BASIS OF
BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON.

FRANMAR COMPANY, (66.67%) AND
LOYOLA PROPERTIES I, LP (33.33%)
P.O. BOX 11358
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93389
CONTACT: MATTHEW WADE
PHONE: (661) 885-9406
BENCHMARK ENGINEER:

NGS BENCHMARK DESIGNATION - OLD RIVER
STATION IS 0.2 MILES SOUTH OF THE CENTERLINE
INTERSECTION OF TAFT HIGHWAY 119 AND OLD RIVER
ROAD ON THE LEFT.

MclNTOSH & ASSOCIATES
10800 STOCKDALE HWY. STE.

BAKERSFIELD, CA 93311
CONTACT: BLAINE NEPTUNE
ELEVATION = 338.676' (NAVO 88 DATUM)
GENERAL NOTES:

ALL ROAD IMPROVEMENTS AND DRAINAGE IN THIS

SUBDIVISION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS ESTABLISHED BY THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD.

IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE GRADING OF THIS TRACT WILL BE WITHIN THE AMOUNTS OUTLINED WITHIN SECTION 16.16.030(0) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE.

A 10' PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT (P.U.E.) IS PROPOSED AND IS

LOCATED ON ALL FRONT AND SIDE YARDS ADJACENT TO ALL
INTERNAL STREETS.

ALL CUL-DE-SAC & KNUCKLE RETURN RADII ARE 25'.

ALL CUL-DE-SACS ARE 50' RADIUS.

ALL KNUCKLES ARE 92' RADIUS.

PHONE: (661) 834-4814

PHASING

THE NUMBERING OF THE PHASES ARE FOR

IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES AND DO NOT

NECESSARILY IMPLY THE ORDER OF
DEVELOPMENT.

THIS TRACT WILL BE DEVELOPED IN UP TO 4
PHASES.

NOTE TO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: AL TERNA TE STREET NAMES

THE FOLLOWING STREET NAMES ARE PROVIDED AS
AL TERNA TES. PLEASE CONSIDER THESE NAMES IN

THE ORDER LISTED TO REPLACE NAMES ON THE
MAP THAT MAY NOT BE ACCEPTABLE.

1. YELLA

2. UNDINE

NOTE TO PUBLIC WORKS
103
30 T. 30 S., R. 27 E.

PROJECT
SITE
McCUTCHEN ROAD
29 '3
0 VICINITY MAP
LEGEND:

WFE
S.F.F.N.

S.M.LK.C.L.C.

NO SCALE

WAIVER OF DIRECT ACCESS

WALL FOOTING EASEMENT

SEARCH FOR FOUND NOTHING

SALES MAP OF LANDS OF

MINIMAL FLOOD HAZARD, FEMA MAP 06029C2300E
EFFECTIVE DATE 9/26/2008.

ST A TISTICS:

APN: 540-010-19
ACREAGE: 39.92 GR. AC. / 34. 78 NET AC.

NUMBER OF LOTS: 208 BUILDABLE
NET DENSITY: 5.98 D.U./NET AC.

PROPOSED USE: RESIDENTIAL
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LR
ZONING: R-1
WATER SOURCE: CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
SEWAGE DISPOSAL: CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
GAS CO. - PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY

CABLE - SPECTRUM

ELECTRICAL - PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY
SCHOOL DISTRICTS: LAKESIDE UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT
@
-0-
E--

PROPOSED CATCH BASIN

EXISTING CONTOUR

EXISTING MONUMENT

EXISTING POWER POLE

EXISTING DOWN GUY

DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE

AND APPROXIMATE GRADE
& KERN HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
SCHOOLS:

ELEMENTARY - DONALD E. SUBURU SCHOOL

PHASE TABLE
NO. OF L.S. SUMP

PAVEMENT C.0.B. STANDARD
CD
ST-6

OLD RIVER ROAD (ARTERIAL)

SECTION A
SCALE: 1 "=1 O'
P/L 6' MIN
BLOCK WALL R/W 55' - 70' 1
I I f-----+----1,
\.,,---" 17' 64'-48' I
• r<l. McCUTCHEN RD.
s.o· I TRACT BOUNDARY
S/W
I
-,15
~ ':'o.5' -'·•'···-:

Ill "-
~ L~ 2L LDETACH~RB & cz:::;---
4: l MAX. SIDEWALK PER GUTTER PA YEMEN I
C.0.B. STANDARD
ST-6
f1D McCUTCHEN ROAD (ARTERIAL)

DETACHED

SIDEWALK PER
C.O.B. STANDARD
ST-6 ED
R/W
I
I
I
I
I 10'

SECTION C
RIO VERDE DR.

DETACHED

JE: VM/C:\Users\Vmartinez\Appdata\Local\Microsoft\Olk\Attachments\Ooa-2d11e898-793a-4a99- 8da5-
650942bb85f8\0342843ca6e5617021e52f7a4f89a64a4f12e30564aa9e023426dd5561d490d4\Vesting Tentative Tract Map 7500 (Phased) Staff Rpt.Docx

CITY OF BAKERSFIELD

PLANNING COMMISSION

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: August 21, 2025 AGENDA CATEGORY: 5.c.

TO: Chair Strickland and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Jennie Eng, Assistant Planning Director J. Eng
DATE: August 15, 2025
FILE: Vesting Tentative Tract Map 7500 (Phased)
STAFF PLANNER: Veronica Martinez, Associate Planner

REQUEST: A proposed vesting tentative tract map for 208 single-family residential lots, 1 sump lot, and 4 landscape lots on 39.92 acres, zoned R -1 (Single-Unit Dwelling), including a request for alternate lot and street design, and to waive mineral rights signatures pursuant to BMC 16.20.060 A.1 (Ward 5).

APPLICANT: OWNER:

McIntosh & Associates Franmar Company and Loyola Properties I, LP 10800 Stockdale Hwy, Suite 103 P.O. Box 11358
Bakersfield, CA 93311 Bakersfield, CA 93389

LOCATION: Northeast corner of Old River Road and Mc Cutchen Road in southwest Bakersfield.

APN: 540-010-19

PROJECT SIZE: 39.92 acres CEQA: Section 15162 (Previous MND)

EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LR (Low Density Residential)

EXISTING ZONE CLASSIFICATION: R-1 (Single-Unit Dwelling)

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt Resolution and suggested findings APPROVING Vesting Tentative Tract Map 7500 (Phased) with conditions.

SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The project site is vacant land. Surrounding properties are primarily developed as: north – single-family residential; east - single-family residential; south – vacant land designated multi- family dwelling zones; and west – Independence High School.

VTTM 7500 (Phased)

BACKGROUND AND TIMELINE:

• March 12. 2008 – City Council approved a General Plan Amendment/Zone Change to change the zoning of 39.92 acres from A (Agriculture) zone to the R-1 (One-Family Dwelling) zone and the land use designation from R-IA (Resource-Intensive Agriculture) to LR (Low Density Residential). A mitigated negative declaration was also adopted (GPA/ZC No. 07-1874; Ordinance No. 4499; Resolution Nos. 214-07 & 215-07).

• February 26, 2010 - The project site was annexed into the City as part of the McCutchen No. 8 Annexation (Annexation No. 549).

• July 2, 2025 – The application for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 7500 (Phased) was deemed complete.

PROJECT ANALYSIS:

The proposed vesting tentative tract subdivision consists of 208 single -family residential lots, 1 sump lot, and 4 landscape lots on 39.92 acres. The residential lots range in size from 5,000 square feet (s.f.) to 11,638 s.f., and the typical lot size is approximately 50 feet wide by 100 feet deep (5,000 square feet).

The net density is 5.98 units per net acre, which is consistent with the LR designation of the project site of less than or equal to 7.26 dwelling units per net acre.

Consistency/Deviation from Design Standards. The applicant has requested four (4) deviations from City standards as listed below in Table A. Except as may otherwise be described in this staff report, the proposed project, subject to the conditions of approval, complies with the ordinances and policies of the City of Bakersfield.

VTTM 7500 (Phased)

VTTM 7500 (Phased)
Table A. Deviation Requests

REQUEST
(BMC - Bakersfield Municipal Code
and Subdivision Design Manual)
BMC/ Subdivision Design Manual Section
APPLICANT’S

REASON/JUSTIFICATION

STAFF COMMENT/

RECOMMENDATION
1) Request to allow reverse corner
lots within Phase 1 (Lot 27); Phase
4 (Lot 40);

BMC Section ref 16.28.170.P. Reverse Corner Lots. Reversed corner lots shall not be allowed in residential zones, except where required to comply with such other ordinances, codes, and design principles of subdivision. In no instances shall an interior lot be bordered by more than one reversed corner lot in residential zones.

The proposed design is
restricted by the existing
project boundary and
road alignments. The
proposed reversed
corner and key lots will
allow for the highest use
and best design of
the tract. There are not
any interior lots bordered
by more than one
reversed corner lot.

City staff has
reviewed and does
not object.

APPROVE
2) Request to allow Reduction of
Lot Frontage & Lot Width for:

Phase 1 through 4, All Lots
Request to allow the reduction
from minimum lot frontages and
widths from 55 feet (interior lot)
and 60 feet (corner lot) to a
minimum of 50 feet (interior lot)
and 55 feet (corner lot)

BMC Section ref 16.28.170.B. Lot Frontage. All residential lots shall have a minimum street frontage of fifty-five feet except as follows:

1. The minimum street frontage for an interior one -family dwelling lot that is less than six thousand square feet in area shall be forty-five feet.

2. The minimum lot frontage for a corner lot shall be sixty feet except for a one- family dwelling lot that is less than six thousand square feet in area where it is fifty feet. For purposes of measuring frontage on a corner lot with a radius return, the distance shall be measured from the point of intersection of the Request reduction from
minimum lot widths from
55 feet (interior lot) and
60 feet (corner lot) to a
minimum 50 feet
(interior lot) and 55 feet
(corner lot). Reduced lot
width allows for more
lots to accommodate
higher density and the
best design of the site, in
compliance with BMC
Table 17.10-2.

City staff has
reviewed and does
not object.

APPROVE
VTTM 7500 (Phased)
extensions of the street side property line and the front property line.
3) Request to allow Reduction of
Lot Frontage & Lot Width for:

BMC Section ref 16.28.170. D. Lot Width. The lot width is the length of a line between side property lines that is the perpendicular bisect of the lot depth. The minimum width for residential lots shall be fifty -five feet on interior lots and sixty feet on corner lots
Request reduction from
minimum lot widths from
55 feet (interior lot) and
60 feet (corner lot) to a
minimum 50 feet
(interior lot) and 55 feet
(corner lot). Reduced lot
width allows for more
lots to accommodate
higher density and the
best design of the site, in
compliance with BMC
Table 17.10-2.

City staff has
reviewed and does
not object.

APPROVE
4) Request to allow double
frontage lots for: Phase 2, Lots 1, 5
through 13; Phase 3, Lots 25
through 41; and Phase 4, Lots 23
through 35
BMC Section ref 16.28.170.H . Double Frontage Lots. Double frontage lots having a depth less than two hundred feet will not be approved except where, as determined by the advisory agency, conditions permit no other reasonable form of platting, or where the proposed double frontage lots abut a street which functions as a major street and the advisory agency deems it to be reasonable due to such controlling factors as traffic, safety, appearance and setback. Each such lot shall have a six-foot-high masonry wall (the height shall be measured from whichever side of the wall the adjacent finished grade is higher) with landscaping (on the exterior side) installed by the subdivider adjacent to the rear property line or, where the wall and landscaping are to be maintained by a homeowners association or maintenance district installed within the street right of-way and additional landscape easement or adjacent common lot.

Alternate wall and landscape concepts may be approved in Lots with rear yard
adjacent to Old River
Road will be limited
by a block wall. Lot
frontage will be limited
to the interior
street Graziana Drive.

Lots with rear yard
adjacent to
McCutchen Road will be
limited by a block wall.

Lot frontage will be
limited to the interior
street Ithaca Lane.

City staff has
reviewed and does
not object.

APPROVE
VTTM 7500 (Phased)
areas where, in the opinion of the advisory agency, topographic or other physical conditions make strict adherence to this criteria undesirable. Conceptual wall and landscaping plans shall be reviewed and approved by the advisory agency prior to filing of any final tract or final parcel map.

VTTM 7500 (Phased)

Circulation. Access to this subdivision would be from Mc Cutchen Road (arterial) on the south boundary and Rio Verde Drive (local) on the subdivision's east boundary.

Park Land In-Lieu Fees/Dedication. The City of Bakersfield Recreation and Parks Department provides park and recreational services to the project site. The nearest existing park is Bridle Creek Park, located approximately 0.36 miles north of the project site.

Mineral Rights. The applicant is requesting the Planning Commission approve waiver of mineral rights signatures on the final map pursuant to BMC 16.20.060 A.1 as the party’s right of surface entry has been waived by recorded document prior to recordation of any final map. Staff has received evidence of surface waiver; therefore, the final map shall have a statement indicating the mineral owner’s name and nature of his or her interest. Nonetheless, should ownership change, staff is recommending a condition of approval requiring that prior to recordation of the first final map, the subdivider shall provide evidence verifying surface waiver from mineral interests otherwise the subdivider must return for a public hearing for a revised tentative map before the Planning Commissio n in accordance with BMC Section 16.20.060.

Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve waiver of these signatures on the final map, subject to the condition.

The applicant submitted a letter from the California Department of Conservation’s Division of Geologic Energy Management (CalGEM) that stated that the project site is beyond their administrative boundaries of any oil or gas fields. There are no known wells on the property and no known active operators of record.

If a well is uncovered, the subdivider must consult with CalGEM regarding proper abandonment of the well, in accordance with the municipal code (Condition 20).

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND DETERMINATION:

A Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) was adopted for GPA/ZC 07-1874 on December 20, 2007, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). No new significant impacts, nor substantial increase in severity of impacts will result with proposed VTTM 7500 from those previously identified in the MND for GPA/ZC No. 07-1874. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Section 15162, no further environmental documentation is necessary because no substantial changes to the original project are proposed, there are no substantial changes in circumstances under which the project will be undertaken, and no new environmental impacts have been identified. Mitigation measures from the related project have been incorporated and are attached to the resolution.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Public notice for the proposed project and environmental determination was advertised in The Bakersfield Californian and posted on the bulletin board in the City of Bakersfield Development Services Building, 1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California. All property owners within 300 feet of the project site were notified by United States Postal Service mail regarding this public hearing in accordance with city ordinance and state law. Signs are required as part of the public notification process and must be posted between 20 to 60 days before the public heari ng date. Photographs of the posted signage and the Declaration of Posting Public Hearing Notice signed by the applicant are on file at the Planning Division.

Comments Received. As of this writing, no further written public comments have been received.

VTTM 7500 (Phased)
CONCLUSIONS:

Consistency with General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has requested approval of VTTM 7500 (Phased) to subdivide 39.90 acres into 208 single -family residential lots, 1 sump lot, and 4 landscape lots ranging in size from 5,000 s.f. to 11,638 s.f., on property designated LR in a R-1 zone. The purpose of this request is to facilitate future residential development. The proposal is consistent with land use goals and policies as contained in the General Plan, which encourages continuity of existing development and allows incremental expansion of infrastructure. Additionally, the proposed project is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance, and any future development on -site will also be required to comply with all applicable regulations and design standards as identified in the Zoning Ordinance.

Recommendation. Staff finds that the applicable provisions of CEQA have been complied with, and the proposal is compatible with the existing land use designation and land uses in the surrounding area.

Staff finds the proposed subdivision is reasonable and the request to waive mineral rights is consistent with BMC Section 16.20.060 A.1. Based on information in the record, Staff recommends your Commission adopt the Resolution and findings APPROVING Vesting Tentative Tract Map 7500 (Phased) as outlined in this staff report subject to the recommended conditions.

ATTACHMENTS:

Map Set
• Aerial
• Zone Classification
• General Plan Designation
• Vesting Tentative Tract Map 7500 (Phased)
Planning Commission Draft Resolution

RESOLUTION NO. 41-25

RESOLUTION OF THE BAKERSFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION
TO APPROVE VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 7500 (PHASED)

LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF OLD RIVER ROAD
AND MC CUTCHEN ROAD.

WHEREAS, McIntosh & Associates (Applicant), representing Franmar Company and Loyola Properties I, LP(Property Owner), filed an application with the City of Bakersfield Planning Department requesting a Vesting Tentative Tract Map 7500 (the "Project"), and a modification request to allow reverse corner lots, lot frontage and lot width reduction, and double frontage Lots, consisting of 208 lots, 1 sump lot, and 4 landscape lots on 39.92 acres to develop single family residential development, as shown on attached Exhibit "C", located northeast corner of Old River Road and Mc Cutchen Road as shown on attached Exhibit "B"; and WHEREAS, the application was deemed complete on July 2, 2025; and WHEREAS, an initial study was conducted and it was determined that the Project would not have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and approved by the City Council on March 12, 2008, in conjunction with General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 07-1874, in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, the Secretary of the Planning Commission, did set, Thursday, August 21, 2025, at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, as the time and place for a public hearing before the Planning Commission to consider the Project, and notice of the public hearing was given in the manner provided in Title 16 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to CEQA and the City of Bakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures have been duly followed by city staff and the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield Planning Department (1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California) is the custodian of all documents and other materials upon which the environmental determination is based; and
WHEREAS, the facts presented in the staff report, environmental review, and special studies (if any), and evidence received both in writing and by verbal testimony at the above referenced public hearing support the following findings:

Page 1 of 3 ends

2. Staff determined that the proposed activity is a project, an MND was prepared for the original project (General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 07-187 4) of the subject property, and was adopted on March 12, 2008, by the City Council for the original project, and duly noticed for public review.

3. Said Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project is the appropriate environmental document to accompany approval of the Project. In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no further environmental documentation is necessary because no substantial changes to the original project are proposed, there are no substantial changes in circumstances under which the project will be undertaken, and no new environmental impacts have been identified. The Project will not significantly impact the physical environment because mitigation measures relating to General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 07-187 4 have been incorporated into the Project.

4. Urban services are available for the proposed development. The Project is within an area to be served by all necessary utilities and waste disposal systems. Improvements proposed as part of the Project will deliver utilities to the individual lots or parcels to be created.

5. The application, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan. (Subdivision Map Act Section 66473.5) The proposed density and intensity of development are consistent with the LR (Low Density Residential) land use classification on the property. Proposed road improvements are consistent with the Circulation Element. The overall design of the project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals and policies of all elements of the General Plan.

6. Mineral right owners' signatures may be waived on the final map pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 16.20.060 A.1. The applicant has provided evidence with the Project application that it is appropriate to waive mineral right owners' signatures because in accordance with BMC Section 16.20.060 A. l ., the party's right of surface entry has been by recorded document prior to recordation of any final map.

7. In accordance with BMC 16.28.170 H, Mc Cutchen Road and Old River Road function as a major streets as shown on the Project, therefore the abutting double frontage lots are reasonable due to controlling factors as traffic, safety, appearance, and setback, and are approved with construction of a 6-foot high masonry wall separating the residential lot and the major street.

8. The request for modification(s) is consistent with sound engineering practices or subdivision design features.

9. The conditions of approval are necessary for orderly development and to provide for the public health, welfare, and safety.

Page 2 of 3 ends

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Bakersfield as follows:
1 . The recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference.

2. This map pertains to the Mitigated Negative Declaration previously approved in conjunction with Project General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 07-1874.

3. Vesting Tentative Tract Map 7500 (Phased) is hereby approved with conditions of approval and mitigation measures shown on Exhibit "A".

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting held on the 21st day of August, 2025, on a motion by Commissioner Neal, seconded by Commissioner Brandt Oliver the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

Bittle, Brandt Oliver, Kaur, Martin, Neal, Strickland
None
ABSENT: Cater
Exhibits {attached):

Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Exhibit B: Location Map
APPROVED~/
~ICKLAND, C~
City of Bakersfield Planning Commission
Exhibit C: Vesting Tentative Tract Map 7500 (Phased)
By VM S:\0S_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-000I_VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\0I_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\Temp/ates\_fC-Res.docx

Page 3 of 3 ends

EXHIBIT "A"
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 7500

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
NOTE to Subdivider/ Applicant: It is important that you review and comply with the requirements and deadlines listed in the "FOR YOUR INFORMATION" packet that is provided separately. This packet contains existing ordinance requirements, policies, and departmental operating procedures as they may apply to this subdivision.

PUBLIC WORKS
l. There was no letter submitted requesting deviations from Public Works standards.

3. Prior to grading plan review submit the following for review and approval:

3.3. If the tract is discharging storm water to a canal, a channel, or the Kern River: In order to meet the requirements of the City of Bakersfield's NPDES permit, and to prevent the introduction of sediments from construction or from storm events to the waters of the US, all storm water systems that ultimately convey drainage to the river or a canal shall have a mechanical device in the storm drain system to remove or minimize the introduction of oil, grease, trash, and sediments. This device shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and shall provide the greatest benefit to the storm drain system with the least maintenance cost.

4. The following conditions must be reflected in the design of the improvement plans:

4.1. Final plan check fees shall be submitted with the first plan check submission.

4.2. Per Resolution l 08-2023 the area within the Tract shall implement and comply with the "complete streets" policy. Complete streets will require pedestrian and bicycle access to the Tract from existing sidewalks and bike lanes. If there is a gap less than ¼ mile then construction of asphalt sidewalks and bike lanes to the tract will be required.

By VM\S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-2fHJ001_ VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\VTTM 7500_Exh Con.DOCX
Exhibit "A"
VTTM 7500

Page 2 of 16 ends

4.3. Install traffic signal interconnect conduit and pull rope for the frontage in all arterials and collectors. Install conduit and pull ropes in future traffic signal locations.

4.6. Right turn deceleration lanes are required on arterials at all streets and access points if the 85th percentile speed is less than 45 mph and the peak hour turning volume is over 200, or if the 85th percentile speed is 45 mph or greater and the peak hour turning volume is over 25.

5. The subdivider shall either construct the equivalent full width landscaped median island in Mccutchen Dr for the site's frontage or pay $100 per Linear Feet (their proportionate share of the cost for the future construction of the median). Median islands shall be designed by the first tract or development to be approved on a side.

6. The subdivide is responsible for implementing the following:

6.1. The phasing map as submitted may be unbalanced with respect to the required improvements along the tract frontages. Therefore, in order to promote orderly development, each phase shall be responsible for an equal dollar amount of frontage improvement. Prior to recordation of each final map for any phase that does not construct its share of the improvements, the difference between the cost of the frontage improvements constructed and the phase share shall be placed into an escrow account. The money deposited in this account would be for the use of the developer of any future phase responsible for more than its share of improvements. The final per-lot share will be based upon an approved engineer's estimate. In lieu of the use of an escrow account, the developer may choose to construct with each phase its proportionate share of the frontage improvements, with approval of the City Engineer.

6.2. The following conditions are based upon the premise that filing of Final Maps will occur in the order shown on the map with Phase l first, then Phase 2, then Phase 3, By VM \ S:\0S_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001 _ vrTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01 _Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\ vrTM 7500_Exh Con.DOCX
Exhibit "A"
VTTM 7500

Page 3 of 16 ends

6.2. 1 . The following shall occur with Phase 1 :

6.2.1 .1. Construct Mccutchen Rd to full ½ width city arterial standards, from Rio Verde Dr to the westerly property line of Phase 2 lot 1.

6.2.1.2. Construct an asphalt walkway 5' wide, along Mccutchen Rd, from the westerly property line of Phase 2 lot 1 to Old River Rd.

6.2.2. The following shall occur with Phase 2:

6.2.2.1. Construct Mccutchen Rd to full ½ width city arterial standards, from the westerly property line of Phase 2 lot 1 to Old River Rd.

6.2.3. The following shall occur with Phase 3:

6.2.3.1. Construct Old River Rd to full ½ width city arterial standards, from Mccutchen Rd to the phase 3/ 4 boundary (between lots 41 & 35 of phase 3 & 4 respectively), including median landscaping.

6.2.4. The following shall occur with Phase 4:

6.2.4.1. Construct Old River Rd to full½ width city arterial standards, from the phase 3/ 4 boundary (between lots 41 & 35 of phase 3 & 4 respectively) to the northern tract boundary, including median landscaping.

By VM \ S:\0S_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001 YTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\0I_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\ VTTM 7500_Exh Con.DOCX
Exhibit "A"
VTTM 7500

Page 4 of 16 ends

6.4. Where streets do not have curb and gutter, construct a minimum section of 36 feet wide consisting of 2-12' lanes, 2-4' paved shoulders and 2 additional feet per side of either AC or other dust proof surface.

6.5. The use of interim, non-standard drainage retention areas shall be in accordance with the drainage policy adopted by letter dated January 24, 1997.

6.8. Drainage basins shall be reviewed and approved by both the Public Works Department and the Water Resources Department.

6.9. Install blue markers in the street at the fire hydrants per the Fire Department requirements.

7. The following must be reflected in the final map design:

7.1. A waiver of direct access shall be required for all lots abutting any arterials and collectors.

8. Prior to recordation of the first final map within this project site, subdivider shall make written notification to the City Engineer of any public improvements required to be financed or constructed outside the boundaries of the tentative map (i.e., "offsite improvements) as defined in BMC 116. l 6.080(E), and the cost of such offsite improvements. The notice shall include an engineer's estimate or other documentation as required by the City Engineer that outlines by line item the specific offsite improvements for purposes of verifying extension of time eligibility pursuant to Government Code Section 66452.6(a). The written notification and documentation are subject to approval by the City Engineer or his/her designee.

9. Prior to recording the first final map:

9.1. The City Council must have taken final action for the inclusion of this tract within the Consolidated Maintenance District.
9 .2. The developer is required to construct an improvement which is on the facilities list for the Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation Impact Fee Olive Dr. The developer shall receive credit against his traffic impact fees for constructing this project. The By VM \ S:\OS_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001 _VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\ VTTM 7500_Exh Con.DOCX
Exhibit "A"
VTTM 7500

Page 5 of 16 ends

10. Prior to recording each final map:

11. Prior to Notice of Completion:
11 .1. The storm drain system, including the sump, shall be inspected and any debris removed.

11.2. Street Name Signs (SNS):

11.2.1. Metro Size SNS shall be installed at the intersection of local streets with Arterial and collector streets.

11.2.2. Standard SNS shall be installed at all other locations.

12. This development is subject to conditions from GPA/ZC 07-187 4.

By VM \ S:\0S_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001 _ VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\0 1 _Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\ VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx
Exhibit "A"
VTTM 7500

Page 6 of 16 ends

WATER RESOURCES

13. Prior to recordation of the final subdivision map the Subdivider shall:

13.1 Execute and record a Domestic Water Service Agreement with the Water Department.

13.2 Pay all applicable fees to the Water Department.

13.3 Submit a Will Serve Letter from the Water Department to the Development Services Department.

13.4 Submit water system plans to the Water Department for review and approval.

Water system plans shall be prepared in accordance with the Water Department Standards and Specifications and per the Water Department's engineering recommendations.

Note to Subdivider: You should contact the Water Resources Dept. at least 4 months before the date you anticipate to record a final map.

13.7 If the Developer desires a public sump, a new Maintenance District for future maintenance of storm drain sump facilities shall be created. Undeveloped parcels within an existing Maintenance District will be required to update Maintenance District documents. Updated documents, including Proposition 218 Ballot and Covenant, shall be signed and notarized for any public sump (Note - If already within a maintenance district, the maintenance district form may need to be updated).

13.8 Drainage from this private tract shall be kept on site. Any proposed sump within the private development shall be privately maintained.

FIRE SAFETY DIVISION

14. Pipeline Easements.

By VM \ S:\0S_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001 _VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\ VTTM 7500_Exh Con.DOCX
Exhibit "A"
VTTM 7500

Page 7 of 16 ends

14.1 Concurrently with recordation of any phase that includes the pipeline easements or portions thereof, subdivider shall show the easements on the final map with a notation that structures including accessory buildings, habitable portion of a structure, garage, deck/patio, swimming pools or unoccupied permanent structure, are prohibited within the setback and record a corresponding covenant.

14.2 Prior to or concurrently with recordation of any phase that includes the pipeline easements or portions thereof, subdivider shall show on the final map that no habitable portion of a structure, garage, deck/patio, swimming pools or unoccupied permanent structure may be built within 50 feet of a gas main, or transmission line, or refined liquid product line with 36 inches of cover and record a corresponding covenant.

14.4 No habitable portion of a structure may be built within thirty (30) feet of a crude oil pipeline operating at twenty percent (20%) or greater of its design strength.

American Petroleum Institute Standards and Guidelines for property development

15. Fire Apparatus Access Roads and Hydrants

15.2 Dead-End fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet shall be provided with width and turnaround provisions in accordance with Table D 103.4 (California Fire Code)
Table D103.4
R eau,rmen s or ea - n ,re t f D d E d F" A t A ppara us ccess R d oa s Length Width Turnaround Required
(Feet) (Feet)
0-150 20 None required
By VM \ S:\0S_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001 _ VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01 _Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\ VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx
Exhibit "A"
VTTM 7500

Page 8 of 16 ends

151-500
501-750
Over 750
120-foot Hammerhead, 60-foot "Y" or 96-foot
20 diameter cul-de-sac
120-foot Hammerhead, 60-foot "Y" or 96-foot
26 diameter cul-de-sac
Special Approval Required

RECREATION AND PARKS

16. Prior to recordation of each final map, the subdivider shall pay an in-lieu fee based on a park land dedication requirement of 2.5 acres per l 000 population in accordance with Chapter 15.80 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code. If the number of dwelling units increases or decreases upon recordation of a final map(s), the park land requirement will change accordingly. Refer to BMC Chapter 15.80 and the Planning Information Sheet regarding calculation and payment of in-lieu fee. In accordance with Government Code Section 66020(d), you are hereby notified that the 90-day period in which you may protest the imposition of this fee has begun.

BMC Chapter 15.80 requires the Planning Commission to determine if a subdivider is to dedicate park land, pay an in-lieu fee, reserve park land or a combination of these in order to satisfy the City's park land ordinance. Staff is recommending this condition in accordance with BMC Chapter 15.80.

17. Subdivider shall be responsible for improving medians with landscape on Old River Road.

CITY ATTORNEY

This indemnification condition does not prevent the Applicant from challenging any decision by the City related to this project, and the obligations of this condition apply regardless of whether any other permits or entitlements are issued.

By VM \ S:\0S_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001 YTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\ VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx
Exhibit "A"
VTTM 7500

Page 9 of 16 ends

PLANNING

20. The subdivision shall be recorded in no more than 5 phases. Phases shall be identified numerically and not alphabetically.

Orderly development.

21. The final map shall include a statement similar to the following and as approved by the Planning Director.

The subdivision is subject to the adopted Old River Ranch Parks & Trails Plan.

For orderly development.

22. Prior to recordation of each final map, the subdivider shall submit a "will serve" or "water availability" letter or other documentation acceptable to the Planning Director from the water purveyor stating the purveyor will provide water service to the phase to be recorded.

23. Mineral Rights: Prior to the recordation of the first final map, the following shall apply:

24. In the event a previously undocumented well is uncovered or discovered on the project site, the subdivider is responsible to contact the Department of Conservation's Division of Geologic Energy Management (CalGEM). The subdivider is responsible for any remedial By VM \ S:\0S_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-000/_VTTM lS00_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\0I_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\ VTTM 7S00_Exh Con.DOCX
Exhibit "A"
VTTM 7500

Page 10 of 16 ends

operations on the well required by CalGEM. Subdivider shall also be subject to provisions of BMC Section 15.66.080 (B.)
Police power based on public health, welfare and safety.

25. Prior to recordation of a final map, provide a covenant disclosing the existence and location of Independence High School and its athletic fields, with notice of the potential for bright lights and noise from athletic game events and other school activities, and will be recorded to affect all real property within the subdivision.

26. The following Subdivision Ordinance Deviation requests are approved:
(BMC Section 16.28.170.B.3)

26.1 Reverse corner lots for:

Phase 1 Lot 27
Phase 4 Lot 40
(BMC Section 16.28.170.P)

26.2 Lot Frontage & Lot Width for:

Phase 1 through 4; All lots.
(BMC 16.28.170.B and 16.28.170.D)

26.3 Double Frontage Lots for the following with 6-foot high masonry wall and landscaping along Mccutchen and Old River Roads:

Phase 2, Lots l, 5 through 13
Phase 3, Lots 25 through 41
Phase 4, Lots 23 through 35
(BMC 16.28.170.H)

Page 11 of 16 ends

Mitigation/Conditions of Approval
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 07-1874
Cultural Impact Mitigation Measures

29. If human remains are discovered during grading or construction activities, work would cease pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code.

Agricultural Impact Miflqatjon Measure

Air Qualjty Impact Mjtigatjon Measures
By VM \ S:\0SJ._and Division\PP-TCTM-25--0001 _VTTM 7500..NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\0 IJ-learing & Noticing Documents\Draft\ VTTM 7S00_Exh Con.Docx
Exhibit "A"
VTTM 7500

Page 12 of 16 ends

PM-1 O Mitigation Measures:

31. During construction on the project site, the applicant shall implement the following mitigation measures in order to reduce project emissions. PM-1 0 will be the most affected criteria pollutant by the proposed mitigation measures.

Construction equipment mitigation measures and design feature mitigation measures are also being included to reduce project related impacts:

Water all unpaved or haul road surfaces as needed. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Limit speed on all unpaved roads to 15 mph. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Water any exposed ground surfaces as needed. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Stabilize all disturbed areas including inactive storage piles on an as needed basis.

Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Maintain at least a 6-inch freeboard space during transport of materials and/or cover and wet to limit dust emissions. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Cease grading activities during periods of high winds where entrainment of dust will exceed the SJV APCD 20% opacity requirements. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Construction Equipment Mitigation Measures:

Limit idling to no more than 20 minutes at a time. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

All construction equipment shall be maintained to manufacturers' specifications.

Encourage employees at the construction sites to carpool to and from work as well as during established lunch hours. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

The applicant shall install street lighting along the project site. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Sidewalk coverage throughout the proposed project. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

By VM \ S:\0S_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001 _VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\0 I_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Droft\ VTTM 7500_Exh Con.DOCX
Exhibit "A"
VTTM 7500

Page 13 of 16 ends

Shade trees shall be installed to allow moderate coverage of walkways and/or bikeways. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Pedestrian safety signs shall be provided with signalization, where appropriate.

Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Construction Equipment Mitigation Measures:

With the demolition of buildings or removal of trees, all surfaces shall be wetted during demolition/removal. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Any construction site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and track-out. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Enhanced and Additional Control Measures for Construction Emissions of PM-10. (From Table 6-31: The following measures shall be implemented at construction site to mitigate significant PM-1 0 impacts:

By VM \ S:\05_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001 _VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\ VTTM 7500_Exh Con.DOCX
Exhibit "A"
VTTM 7500

Page 14 of 16 ends

Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Install wind breaks at windward side(s) of construction areas. Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

Limit area subject to excavation, grading, and other construction activity at any one time.

Mitigation for potentially significant air quality impacts.

City Attorney's Condition

By VM \ S:\0S_Lond Division\PP-TCTM-25-000J_VITM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Heoring & Noticing Documents\Droft\ VITM 7500_Exh Con.DOCX
Exhibit "A"
VTTM 7500

Page 15 of 16 ends

Public Works Department Conditions

Dedications shall include sufficient widths for expanded intersections and additional areas for landscaping as directed by the City Engineer. Dedication shall also include sufficient width for trails in accordance with the approved Parks and Trails Plan for this area. Submit a current title report with the dedication documents.
b. This GPA/ZC area is too small to support it's own storm drainage sump. The City will allow no more than one sump per 80 acres; therefore, this GP A/ZC area must be included within the drainage area of adjoining property. Submit a comprehensive drainage study of the entire drainage area, to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Any required retention site and necessary easements shall be dedicated to the City.
c. Sewer service must be provided to the GPA/ZC area. Submit a comprehensive sewer study to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. The study shall be in conformance with the Plant 3 Master Study. The developer shall be responsible for the initial extension of the sewer line to serve the property. This sewer line must necessarily be sized to serve a much larger area that the project area. The City is willing to aid the developer in the formation of a Planned Sewer Area and/or an Assessment District to provide a mechanism for the reimbursement of oversizing costs to the developer.
d. In order to preserve the permeability of the sump and to prevent the introduction of sediments from construction or from storm events, all retention and detention basins (sumps) shall have a mechanical device in the storm drain system to remove or minimize the introduction of oil, grease, trash, and sediments to the sump. This device shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer, and shall provide the greatest benefit to the storm drain system with the least maintenance cost.
e. Developer is responsible for the construction of all infrastructure, both public and private, within the boundary of the GPA/ZC area. This includes the construction of any and all boundary streets to the centerline of the street, unless otherwise specified. The developer is also responsible for the construction of any off site infrastructure required to support this development, as identified in these conditions.

For orderly development.

By VM \ S:\0S_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001 _VTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\01_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\ VTTM 7500_Exh Con.Docx
Exhibit "A"
VTTM 7500

Page 16 of 16 ends

36. Payment of the proportionate share of the cost of the median for the arterial frontage of the property within the GP A/ZC request is required prior to recordation of any map or approval of any improvement plan for the GPA/ZC area. For orderly development.

37. Traffic Mitigation: Pay the proportionate share of the following mitigation measures (not paid for by the Regional Transportation Impact Fee or included with normal development improvements) as indicated in Table 6 of the traffic study. An updated estimate, based upon current costs, and fee schedule shall be developed by the applicant and approved prior to recordation of a map or issuance of a building permit. Proportionate shares from the study as follows:
a. White Ln & Old River Rd., Add l EBL, l WBR, l WBL, 1.04% share b. Panama Ln & Old River Rd., Expand to 1 EBL, 3 EBT, 1 EBR, 1 WBL, 3 WBT, 1 WBR, 2 NBL, 2 NBT, l NBR, l SBL, 2 SBT, 1 SBR, 1.46% share (100% share of adding No. 2 NBL)
c. Panama Ln & Gosford Rd., Expand to standard expanded intersection plus Add l EBT, l WBR, l NBR, 0.64% share
Mitigation for potentially significant traffic impacts.

By VM \ S:\0S_Land Division\PP-TCTM-25-0001 YTTM 7500_NEC Old River Rd & Mccutchen Rd\0 !_Hearing & Noticing Documents\Draft\ VTTM 7500_Exh Con.DOCX
Vesting Tentative Tract Map
7500
Exhibit B

CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
R-1/P.U.D.

VTTM7500
Independence
High School
R-1/P.U.D.
,-j
ct::

R-1
"' "' z UJ ~uu
<( UJ
a: a:
,_ ____ IXl U - '-'."'---_, z
SLEEPY HOLLOW LN _,
I ," ROg_j~ R-1 ~
CREEK WAY ~ t-------------- ----1~
~ R-1 J3
R-1
" UJ
~u~u ~- R-1 ~!~ ~ ~_J !:IIC'.
"' ;: < !!? :>a: Oa: :c ::.o a:~ ;:
0 a: ---
= D:OVERS R!:U~N:,_:.:,R:;_D ___ _
L----~ ...

UJ
ct!
u
R-1 "'lo
UJ a:
" " u UJ
:::, UJ
~ a: u
SNOWY RIVER DR z;::::::::::::~::::::~~=======:-<
~[ """'.~:"' "" f l :Jl,'--3 __ _,
ALMOND CREEK D,R _____________ '-./
R-1
R-1
R-5
R-2

WINDING STREAM AVE
I!)~
Zu
;:::: a:
0 <(
0~
:c "'
"'
z"' ~ UJ z a: UJ ..J
<( a: uu

DRAWBRIDGE
DR
oz
UJ O ~
~ ~ V\
R-1
R-1
Zoning
R-1 One Family Dwelling
6,000 sq,ft, min lot
size
R-1-4.5 One Family
Dwelling
4,500 sq.ft. min lot
size
E Estate
10,000 sq.ft. min lot
size
R-S Residential
Suburban
24,000 sq.ftJdwelling
unit
R-S-( ) Residential
Suburban
1, 2.5, 5 or 10 min lot
size
R-2 Limited Multiple
Family Dwelling
4,500 sq.ft. min lot
size (single family)
6,000 sq.ft . min lot
size (multifamily)
2,500 sq.ft. lot areal
dwelling unit
R-3 Multiple Family
Dwelling
6,000 sq.ft. min lot
size
1,250 sq.ft. lot areal
dwelling unit
R-4 High Density
Multiple Family Dwelling
6,000 sq.ft. min lot
size
600 sq.ft, lot areal
dwelling unit
R-H Residentlal Holding
20 acre min lot size
A Agriculture
6,000 sq.ft. min lot
size
A-20A Agriculture
20 acre min lot size
PUD Planned Unit
Development
TT Travel Trailer Park
MH Mobilehome
C-0 Professional and
Administrative Office
C-1 Neighborhood
Commercial
C-2 Regional
Commercial
C-C Commercial Center
C-B Central Business
PCD Planned
Commercial
Development
M-1 Light Manufacturing
M-2 General
Manufacturing
M-3 Heavy Industrial
l:,

BAKERSFIELD
t
Feet
0 500 1,000

MAP PACKAGE
ExhibitC
-~
I
l;e i~I§ bl
-~
i
"""'"Ji ;i ~1 J.
-"·•-··~
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT No. 7500
BBNG A MERGER AND RE-SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 25 & 32 OF SALES MAP OF LANDS OF KERN COUNTY LAND COMPANY, FILED JUNE 16, 1897 IN lliE OFFICE OF lliE KERN COUNTY RECORDER, ALSO BEING A PORTION OF lliE SOUlli\\'EST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TO\\NSHIP 30 SOUlli, RANGE 27 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN lliE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

CONTAINING 208 BUILDABLE RESIDENTIAL LOTS, 1 SUMP LOT ANO 4 LANDSCAPE LOTS, 39.92 GROSS ACRES JANUARY 2025
I
I I
TRACT No. 7243

14.BK.61~3-6
14 : ~~iR \?
: 15 ! 16
"
2! 21
, j
!.l).orf~W'501ldtlil.Wro«/~ 50.0150.oo'50.00'50.!Xf!¼o:l'SO.W' 60 65 64 63 62 61 1'54
5W~ ~ -~ -~ r:

5.lm' ~ Slld so.cxr SC.!JO' mW !.l).r,:f WW SJJrf MW 50.W 50lXI' ~oo' ric.or/ -- 1!<.gg" -
t
~
NGS BE!ICHMARK DESIGNATION - O!.D R!-.£R
OWNER/SUBDIVIDER:
fRNIMAR COMPA?~Y, (66.6~ AtlO
LOYClA PROPERTIES I, lP (JJ.JJ%)
P.O. BOX 11358
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93389
CONTACT: MATTHEW WAOE
Ptt00(;(661)885--9406
~
MdllTOSH & ASSOCIATES
STATION 1S 0.2 U:LES SOUTI:i OF lHE COHERUNt
INlERS£Cll0tl OF TAn tt:GHWAY 119 AN:l OLD Rllfffi
ROAD ON THE l£H.
10800 STOCl<OAlE HWY. STE. 103
8AK£RSflUO. CA 93311
CQNTACT: 8t.AJNE NEPTUNE
PHOt/E: (661) BJ4-<4-a14 ELEVATION .. J38.676' (N,WO ae DATUM) GENERAL NOTES·
"1l.P.OAlllllPR0\!l.lf.NtSNlltruw.Gf:1!11HS ~ ~9!AU.0Ci'l~'ICE'MTI1THE UE~CTMPIIASESAAff"ffi ! f!ro.JllOIENTSESlA£USIEl)fifn£0TYCfBAk£RSflEI.D. UlffiflCATKWfU'l?OSES,_'ltlDONOT 7m ITISAHTICl'ATEDlllATTHECRJ.DN::r.:i'rnlS 1lli.l:Tlll8E ll£CESSARI..Ylllf'l.YTI-ECRlER Cf' i'l:a=i-J lllHll"lM:AVruitSOJllJ,tOWIIGISttllOMIUU>J.{O)CJ'" ~ · M:WMOPALCOOE. litSTRA.."TNU.ll£0£\0.CffDtll.1PT04
,u REnMl RAOII AR£ 2!J' lfUS'S On-EnlSl'. lil)ml.

AU.CU..-OC-SACl:l(Nll()'1£RETIJRNRA!lilAAEn'.
lilOA.-OE-SACSAA£StflWllJS.

AU.mioo.ESAA£92'RIQll'S.

THE '!RACT $I.LL rcuow TI-ti "twi'l.ETE smu:t" f>CUCY
PfJ!RfSCUJTIOMHCl.108-2023.

NOstRLICTIJ!fSCIJIIRDill'l'tlllSIIW!.ITL
MOIIJMENTLEGfND;
Ml F0.2"1ROOPIPETAGCEOLS7214,22"octf'
P£R TRACT t4o. 7243, PM. BK. 61, PGS. l-6
U2 fD. ClllC. i/00, IN UI. W/il.C. STAMPEO LS 7Z!4
PERlRACTNo. n.r,7,ltBlt62,PCS. 31-l5
IU H.1/4COO.SfC.l2,l0/11,rD.K.C.S.2"1P.

Wfa.C. I.IKD. FOOCOO.A!iO h'OV1975P£RR/S
BK..24,PG.7I

1.14 S.E. COR.. LOT 31, fD.K.C.S. t' IP. PU! K.C.S.
fl.ED MAPffo.. 7-1 BK. 6, PG. 26
M5 FD. NA.l. & lltl FOO Rf, PER K.C.SI.B. 1132, PG 12
IJ6 ftl.R.R. Sf'll(£FCRR.P,PERK.C.5.F,B, 1132,PG.12
U7 SW. COO. LOT 17. Fl>. COOC. WOOT. W/BPJ,SS CAP
WKO.lS31!J7fflJ.l,l?HOCEPERTRACT~6ID
""5EL
MB ro:.t.'OCONC.Ma!UMENiltlUlSTAl.l?EDLS56ll
PER"tllACT7136PHJ.st:l,BK.66,POS.U.S-m.
"""'-
NOTE TO PlA'®NCOO'A-~llIDH
RE: ,1.LIERMATl:'.Sm£CTW.llrS
1H£ FCUatm. Sr,;'EET NAIIES M>£. Pi«>'.llED AS
A1.TOOA.l£S. PU.liS£ (Xffii0(R f,£SE NAIIES II
rnEORt£RUSlEDTOREF'LACfNN.IESONTI£
WJ>THATUAYJrol&NXO'TA8l£.
'·""' 2.lJND'J,iC:
~
APN:540-010-19
ACRE.'.AGE: 39.92 CR. AC./ 34.78 NET AC,
tM!BrROFtOTS:lOBBULO"-BLE

1.tTOEtlSllY, 5.930U./M;f AC.

PRoPOSEOUst:REStOE!ITIAt
WlERALPLA. .. OESIGllATION: LR
ZON',N~R-1
WATER SOORtt: CITYOf BAKERSflELD
SEWAGE DISPOSAI.: OTY Of 8A.1(fR$f1£1.D
GAS CO. - PAClflC GAS &; filCffilC COMPANY
C>.Bl.£-SPEClRl.lf.!
PHr.tlE- AT&T
30 T. 30 S., R. 27 E.

PROJECT
SITE
11131 ;
I
29 LEGEND:
;;'
~

5.fIJl
S.W.Lk.C.LC.
l'l>J\{R{il)ll[CTACCISS
WAU.fOOffiG(ASO!ull
SEARCHFORfOONDNOnmt:
5ALESMAP~LA.\'OSOf
KERff ro,;m LAW CWPA.'N
------Pilo.:tCTBOOl'iOA.~Y
-·· ----oe----- OlS!!i(; O\~A!I EllC. l.llit
--msr,;Gm:!CAJ1(],lt.N:
------ -c---OlStll.t; CAS UNE
--··-·- --- -·-····-- fUIURt LOTS
EASEMENT LEGEND;
<i>~r:~~~~~~~.i:-:,s
q)~~~r::-~~
Et.EClR/CAl - PAQFIC GAS & El£CIRIC CC,.IPA.,_Y
SCHOa.OiSlitClS:lA.'<ESOEUN:OHSCHOCI.DiSTIOCT
,.,..,--"¾s..._ _ _...........
..

EJOSllNGCQHIXJ!l
rn$JlNCWCt,\WlT
EXlSTitlG POW! PCU:
c:xm:w::OO't,NC:UY
&K°™tt:GH SCHOO.O!STitCT ◊
50100.S;
02070076900.R.
<Y ~!~?J& Cf"ooc.~1:0\Wo.R.
0 ~r~~1~~k~f::-
EI.D.lrnTA.'l:Y- OOIIAl.D E. SIJBURU SCflOOL
MllDLESOiCU.-lA.'CES10£sa«XX.
1f,OOS(.HOO.-IND£PO.WlC(H,'GHSCHOOl ~l.
h"\. CL PAOFlC CAS "' nrcmc CXM"A.'iY PQ.[
'\'1/UN£u.sEtIDITPm8K.l451,PC.6o.R.

A 10' w.oe: CTY Cf" B.-IJ(ffi$fl[Ll) nOWACf.: &; INAllU,ct:
'&'f.l.S£UENTPERDOC.tio.OJ02170231680R.
<i>
~2:
- ""'l <E> 15' ~ ClTY Cf" 8AKERSflElD PEDESTillA.'i W>ll01AY tASOIEHT <?) ~ ~·~fy ~~~~ ID!POOIJrr S£V,£R H.SOlalT
~~ P[R00C.tl(>.02iJ108H780R.
~<w ,.,,
(CUIR3\'ERRO/
~ 80!Jl,l)A/IY7-.:(1 ',.Ol$T.
. PJ.~~<l__;J;_ . J::;;.:
rn,1.~w,,= .,Z g:3~~ ~:;.
l',l,\'fUUH t.OJJ.~f-"FIRl
ED OlD RIVER ROAD (ARTERIAL)

I SECTION A
SCAtE·1• .. 10·
P/1. 6'UN
• 91.(91..-,.J. Rfil 5i1•,n I
(THE EXACT lOCAIDI ISh'OT ASC!RTMOOLE fRal R£Cal!l) J2 ~ ~
, L. v••=-~ ~- ~;o _,o,,oAA,
6"'':,41f I
A--...C.OAIDIPCW,RYWAITRLN:COOSlRUCllOOEASOJEJITPER
~DOC.tKl,21702.31&6,0.R.
,;,
"'"" ' 2
3 .

TOTAL:
m>.u
LOIS
.,
" " 83
"'
LS. SUI.If'
tOJ lOT
-
2 -
' ' ' -
' '
;,:.. .,., -l-~~~~u:e);;~L
(B MoCU "~ ,,_,
1 TCHEN ROAD (ARTOML)

SECTION B
SCALE: 1-=10'
il
2X vi 2X ~
""'-"- '..,,,.,.,,, ..,.; '"':::'.f ?~"-'"'-:::i "'f-.. , ~. . •. :::;.~""'F-l,1 2¥>} -=• ZONSA-• : --·- sfils'i.\l'e, __ :'_._'3"" ,-.:~$. •<! u.teuseut (of-) ~°l.r11. . . e1~i~ ~~ ~:~g: <;'~
~r:i:" " i .
~
,, __ _/
- ... 0
I ! ~
i ~!I!~
I
X ~ a:

Ui 1ihi ... 0 I-
It~~, Q! ' ~ ~
I _Jj I_ --
□

Page 1 of 20 ends

NEGATIVE DECLARATION

The City of Bakersfield Planning Department has completed an initial study (attached) of the possible environmental effects of the following -described project and has determined that a Negative Declaration is appropriate. It has been found that the proposed project, as described and proposed to be mitigated (if required), will not have a significant effect on the environment. This determination has been made according to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQ A), the State CEQA Guidelines and the City of Bakersfield’s CEQA Implementation Procedures.

PROJECT (Title & No.): General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 07-1874, Annexation No. 549, (McCutchen #8 Annexation).

COMMENT PERIOD BEGINS: November 16, 2007

COMMENT PERIOD ENDS: December 7, 2007

MITIGATION MEASURES (included in the proposed project to avoid potentially significant effects, if required):

Cultural Impact Mitigation Measures

1. Prior to ground -disturbance activities associated with this project, personnel associated with the grading effort shall be informed of the importance of the potential cultural and archaeological resources (i.e. archaeological sites, artifacts, features, burials, etc.) that may be encountered during site preparation activities, how to identify those resources in the field, and of the regulatory protections afforded to those resources. The personnel shall be informed of procedures relating to the discovery of archaeological remains during grading activities and cautioned to avoid archaeological finds with equipment and not collect artifacts. The applicant/developer of the project site shall submit documentation to the Planning Department that they have met this requirement prior to commencement of ground -disturbance activities.

This documentation should include information on the date(s) of training activities, the individual(s) that conducted the training, a description of the training, and a list of names of those who were trained. Should cultural remains be uncovered, the on-site supervisor shall immediately notify a qualified archaeologist.

2. If human remains are discovered during grading or construction activities, work would cease pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code. If human remains are identified on the site at any time, work shall stop at the location of the find and the Kern County Coroner shall be notified immediately (Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code and Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code which details the appropriate actions necessary for addressing the remains) and the local Native American community shall be notified immediately.

Agricultural Impact Mitigation Measure

3. In an attempt to reduce complaints and unwarranted investigations undertaken by the Kern County Department of Agriculture, the following disclosure is suggested to be provided as part of the transfer of properties:
“If your real property is adjacent to property used for agricultural operations, you may be subject to inconveniences or discomforts arising from such operations on any 24 -hour basis. Said discomforts may include, but shall not be limited to equipment noise, odors from manure and other chemicals, and dust or smoke. It has been determined that in Kern County the use of real property for agricultural operations if such operations are consistent with accepted customs, standards, and laws.”

Page 2 of 20 ends

Air Quality Impact Mitigation Measures
The applicant is proposing the following mitigation measures in order to reduce projected emissions. PM - 10 will be the most affected criteria pollutant by the proposed mitigation measures. Construction equipment mitigation measures and design feature mitigation measures area also begin included to reduce project related impacts.

PM-10 Mitigation Measures:

4. Water all unpaved or haul road surfaces as needed.

5. Limit speed on all unpaved roads to 15 mph.

6. Water any exposed ground surfaces as needed.

7. Stabilize all disturbed areas including inactive storage piles on an as needed basis.

8. Maintain at least a 6 -inch freeboard space during transport of materials and/or cover and wet to limit dust emissions.

9. Remove mud or dirt accumulations on public roadways immediately when track out exceeds 50 or more feet as well as at the end of the workday.

10. Cease grading activities during periods of high winds where entrainment of dust will exceed the SJVAPCD 20% opacity requirements.

Construction Equipment Mitigation Measures:

11. Limit idling to no more than 20 minutes at a time.

12. All construction equipment shall be maintained to manufacturers’ specifications.

13. Where possible electric equipment shall be used in lieu of diesel or gas powered equipment.

14. Encourage employees at the construction sites to carpool to and from work as well as during established lunch hours.

In order to reduce project related emissions from mobile sources a number of ‘design features’ can be incorporated into the project. These ‘design features’ help to facilitate alternatives to traditional vehicle use, thereby reducing vehicle trips, miles traveled, idling and traffic congestion as well as reducing project related emissions. The following ‘design features’ will be incorporated into the proposed project to reduce emissions:

15. Street lighting.

16. Sidewalk coverage throughout the proposed project.

17. Shade trees with moderate coverage of walkways and/or bikeways.

18. Pedestrian safety signs will be provided with signalization where appropriate.

Regulation VIII Control Measures (From Table 6-2):

19. All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover.

20. All on -site unpaved roads and off -site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.

21. All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking.

22. With the demolition of buildings up to six stories in height, all exterior surfaces of the building shall be wetted during demolition.

23. When materials are transported off -site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained.

24. All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded of accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions) (Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden)

Page 3 of 20 ends

25. Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.

26. Within urban areas, an owner/operator shall prevent carryout and track -out, or immediately remove carryout and track-out when it extends 50 feet or more from the nearest unpaved surface exit point of the site.

27. Any construction site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and track -out.

Enhanced and Additional Control Measures for Construction Emissions of PM-10. (From Table 6-3):

Enhanced Control Measures. – Measures to be implemented at construction site to mitigate significant PM-10 impacts:

28. Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph;

29. Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than one percent.

Additional Control Measures. – Measures that are encouraged at large construction sites located near sensitive receptors, or for projects requiring additional emissions reductions:

30. Track out will be prevented by one of the following:
o A Grizzly with rails, pipes or grates to dislodge debris off of existing vehicles, o A layer of washed gravel at one inch or larger in diameter, three inches deep, o Extension of paved road at least 100 feet from publicly maintained road, or o Installation of a wheel washer.

31. Install wind breaks at windward side(s) of construction areas.

32. Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds exceed 20 mph (Regardless of wind speed, an owner/operator must comply with Regulation VIII’s 20 percent opacity limitation).

33. Limit area subject to excavation, grading, and other construction activity at any one time.

Page 4 of 20 ends

INITIAL STUDY

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

1. Project (Title & No.): General Plan A mendment/Zone Change No. 07 -1874, Annexation No. 549 , (McCutchen #8)

2. Lead Agency (name and address): City of Bakersfield Planning Department , 1715 Chester Avenue , Bakersfield, California 93301

3. Contact Person (name, title, phone): Martin Ortiz, Associate Planner, (661) 326 - 3777

4. Project Location: The project site is located at the northeast corner of McCutchen Road and Old River Road. Assessor’s Parcel Number 497-032-19.

5. Applicant (name and address): McIntosh & Associates, 2001 Wheelan Court, Bakersfield, CA 93309

6. Existing General Plan Designations: R-IA (Resource-Intensive Agriculture)

7. Existing Zoning: A (Agriculture)

8. Description of Project (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation.):

The project proposes a General Plan Amendment from R-IA to LR (Low Density Residential) on 38.09 acres and a Zone Change from A to R-1 (One Family Dw elling) Zone on the same 38.09 acres. The proposal would allow the development of single family residential dwelling units on the site . The proposal also includes the annexation of the site to the City of Bakersfield.

9. Environmental setting (Briefly describe the existing onsite conditions and surrounding land uses.):

The 38.09-acre proj ect site is located in the south western portion of the Metropolitan Bakersfield are a, northeast of McCutchen Road and Old River Road . The site is currently designated with an agricultural land use and zoning. The site is currently fallow agricultural land . The area west of the site is being developed with the new Independence High School . The areas north and south of the site are fallow land and agriculture, respectively. The area east of the site is in grape vines.

SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING

DIRECTION GENERAL PLAN

DESIGNATION

ZONING DISTRICT EXISTING LAND USE
NORTH LR R-1 Fallow Agriculture Land
SOUTH R-IA A Agriculture
EAST LR R-1 Grape Vineyards
WEST LR R-1 & R-1/PUD New High School (Independence) under construction

10. Other public agencies whose approval is anticipated to be required (e.g., permits, financing approval or participation agreement): Building Permits Kern County LAFCO

Page 5 of 20 ends

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

As indicated by the checklist on the following pages, the project would result in potentially significant impacts with respect to the environmental facto rs checked below (Impacts reduced to a less than significant level through the incorporation of mitigation are not considered potentially significant.):

□ Aesthetics □ Agricultural Resources □ Air Quality
□ Biological Resources □ Cultural Resources □ Geology / Soils □ Hazards & Hazardous Materials □ Hydrology / Water Quality □ Land Use / Planning □ Mineral Resources □ Noise □ Population / Housing
□ Public Services □ Recreation □ Transportation / Traffic □ Utilities / Service Systems □ Mandatory Findings of Significance

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

□ I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment, and a negative declaration will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A mitigated negative declaration will be prepared.

□ I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, and an environmental impact report is required.

□ I find that the proposed project may have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect has been (1) adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on the attached sheets. An environmental impact report is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

□ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects have been (1) analyzed adequately in an earlier environmental impact report or negative declaration pursuant to appl icable legal standards, and (2) avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier environmental impact report or negative declaration , including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

November 10, 2007
Signature Date

Martin Ortiz, Associate Planner
Printed name

Page 6 of 20 ends

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:

1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question.

A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

4) “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, “Earlier Analyses,” may be cross-referenced).

5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed . Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures . For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.

9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.

Page 7 of 20 ends

Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

I. AESTHETICS: Would the project;
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcrops, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES:

In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project;
a) Convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance (farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use?

III. AIR QUALITY:

Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project;
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project;
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with an established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project;
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?

Page 8 of 20 ends

Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?

VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project;
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines & Geology Special Publication No. 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in the city’s most recently adopted Uniform Building Code, creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?

VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project; a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous material into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wild land fires, including where wild lands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wild lands?

VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project;
Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? a) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? b) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?

Page 9 of 20 ends

Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
d) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
e) Otherwise, substantially degrade water quality?
f) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area, structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? i) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mud flow?

IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project;
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?

X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project;
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site that is delineated in a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?

XI. NOISE: Would the project result in;
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project;
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes & businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES:
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services; i. Fire protection?
ii. Police protection?
iii. Schools?

Page 10 of 20 ends

Environmental Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
iv. Parks?
v. Other public facilities?

XIV. RECREATION: Would the project:;
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project;
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?

XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project; a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

Page 11 of 20 ends

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 07-1874
Annexation No. 549, McCutchen #8

I. AESTHETICS
a. The project site is located within an area having slopes from 0 - 5%. The area is not regarded or designated within the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan as visually important or “scenic”.

There is no scenic vista that will be impacted by construction of this project. No impact. b. The project does not include the removal of trees, the destruction of rock outcroppings or degradation of any historic building. The project is not adjacent to a state highway which is designated as “scenic”. The project site is currently undeveloped. No impact. c. There are visual impacts with any new development but this project is typical of the area and no impacts are regarded as potentially significant. Less than significant impact. d. This project involves urban development typical of the area. Light from this development will not substantially affect views in this area either at night or daytime as the light generated is typical of urban development. The general area is developed and this project will infill vacant property.

Typical development standards as required by the zoning ordinance address the issue of light and glare. Less than significant impact.

II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
a. A Farmland Conversion Study was prepared for the proposal. The project site is to change

38.09 acres from agriculture to residential land use and zoning designation. The site is currently fallow agricultural land . The project does not convert 100 acres or more of the farmlands designated prime, unique or of statewide significance to nonagricultural uses. See Department of Conservation Kern County Interim -Farmland 2004, sheet 2 of 3. Large parcel size is, in general, an important indicator of potential agricultural suitability and productivity. As of December 31, 2005, there were approximately 1.65 million acres under Williamson Act and Farmland Security Zone contracts in Kern County (Kathe Malouf, Kern County Planning Department, personal communication October 12, 2006). The loss of less than 100 acres is not considered a significant change to this resource as it represents only 0.006% of the total amount of land under Williamson Act and Farmland Security Zone contracts in Kern County. State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15206 does not regard the cancellation of less than 100 acres of land from the Williamson Act to be of statewide, regional or areawide significance. Thus, when evaluated independently and cumulatively, this project poses no impact. b. The subject site (38.09 acres) is zoned for agricultural uses and the site is currently fallow land.

The project site is not under a Williamson Act Contract . The subject site does not meet the 100 acre criteria as shown in item number II.a. above. No impact. c. There are no special attributes of this project site, related to location or natur e that will cause or could result in the conversion of farmland to non -agricultural use. Th e project is in an area designated for urban development by the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan. The project itself is typical of the development found in Metropolitan Bakersfield which should not, by its specific nature, result in the conversion of farmland to nonagricultural uses. Less than significant impact.

III. AIR QUALITY
a. An Air Quality Impact Analysis (McIntosh & Associates , October 2007 ) was prepared for the project proposal. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) encourages local jurisdictions to design all developments in ways that reduce air pollution from vehicles, which is the largest single category of air pollution in the San Joaquin Valley. The Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts promulgated by the SJVAPCD (page 16 and Section 6) list s various land uses and design strategies that reduce air quality impacts of new development. Local ordinance and general plan requirements , related to landscaping, sidewalks, street improvements, level of traffic service, energy efficient heating and cooling building code requirements, and location of commercial development in proximity to residential development is consistent with these listed strategies. According to the SJVAPCD rules , t his project would be subject to the full range of local ordinance and regional regulations, which

Page 12 of 20 ends

ensure compliance with these air quality strategies. The Air Quality Impact Analysis prepared for the project proposal has determined that the project will not interfere with adopted Air Quality standards, with the recommended mitigation measures . Therefore, there are n o significant impacts noted as implementation of existing ordinances and rules will reduce impacts to less than significant.
b. The project does not violate the air quality standards set forth on page 2 6, table 4-1 of the Ozone Precursor Emissions thresholds for Project Operations ROG 10 tons/year, N Ox 10 tons /year (Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts). The project is also not within the distance triggers noted in table 4 -2, Project screening trigger levels for potential odor sources (Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts). Dust suppression measures listed as Regulation VIII is required for all construction in the San Joaquin Valley including the City of Bakersfield and a re regarded by SJVAPCD as sufficient mitigation to reduce PM 10 impacts to less than significant. Also, additional mitigation measures were recommended by the Air Quality Impact Analysis prepared for the project and are recommended as part of the project. c. The project will not incre ase any criteria pollutant beyond the level of significance as defined by the SJVAPCD. Under GAMAQI guidelines, any proposed project that would have individually significant air quality impacts would also be considered to have significant cumulative air quality impacts. The project’s cumulative impacts would be less than significant since there are no individual significant adverse air quality related effects. The impact is regarded as less than significant.
d. According to the Air Quality Impact Analysis prepared for the project, the project will not cause one or more streets at one or more intersections within the general project area to be reduced to a Level of Service (LOS) E or F; nor will it substantially worsen an existing LOS F on one or more streets or intersections within the general project area. A CO or Hot Spots analysis was not warranted for this project and therefore, was not performed. The record does not find that this project creates any pollutant “hot spot” that would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollution receptors. The only potential “hot spots” are located at intersections which a re “severely” congested. There fore by definition no significant pollutant “hot spot” impacts are identified for this project. Less than significant impact. e. The land use proposed for this project does not have the potential to create objectionable odors.

This proposal is not on the list of those land uses generally regarded as the type to have site odor proble ms (please refer to the list on page 27, table 4 -2, of the Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts). Less than significant impact.

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a. The project is subject to the terms of the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan (MBHCP) and associated Section 10 (a) (1) (b) and Section 2081 permits issued to the City of Bakersfield by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game, respectively , and Incidental Take Permit PRT -786634 and associated Implementation/Management Agreement by and among the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, City of Bakersfield and County of Kern (said documents hereby incorporated by reference) . Terms of these permits require applicants for all development projects within the plan area to pay habitat mitigation fees, excavate known kit fox dens, and notify agencies prior to grading in areas of known dens . With implementation of the MBHCP, impacts are considered to be less than significant.

For areas having Bakersfield Blunt-Nosed Leopard Lizards, p rior to land disturbance , the applicant is required to determine the presence of Blunt -Nosed Leopard Lizards and mitigate accordingly.
b. This project is not located within or adjacent to the Kern River riparian habitat area, but is wit hin the MBHCP area. The MBHCP, in agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, includes ordinance requirements for all development projects in the HCP area. Compliance with the plan mitigates biological impacts to a less than significant level.
c. There are no wetlands adjacent to or near the project site. The proposal would not have a significant impact on any wetlands.

Page 13 of 20 ends

d. The project is not within the Kern River flood plain (noted as a wildlife corri dor in the MBHCP), or along a canal which has been identified by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service as a corridor for native resident wildlife species. The record d oes support a finding that the project area is a nursery site for native wildlife species. No Impact. e. The MBHCP has been adopted as policy and is implemented by ordinance. The plan addresses biological impacts within the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Area. The development entitled by this proposal will be required to comply with this plan and, therefore, will not be in conflict with either local biological policy or ordinance. Less than significant impact. f. There are n o other adopted plans which are applicable to this area which relate to biological resources; see answer to IV.e. above.

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
a. There are no structures on the site . A Phase I Cultural Resource Survey for the site was prepared by Hudlow Cultural Resource Associates. The Survey indicates that there are no structures on site that eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (Public Resources Code SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR Section 4850 et. Seq.) and therefore, is not an issue for the project site . There are no resources on or near the project site that are listed in a local register of historical resources as defined in Section 5020.1 (k) of the Public Resources Code .

There are no significant historical resources meeting the requirements of Section 5024.1 (g) of the Public Resources Code. No Impact.
b. The Southern San Joaquin Valley Archaeological Information Center at California State University, Bakersfield has reviewed the existing literature for archaeological resources and reported that the project will not have a significant impact on archaeological resources. Again, a Phase I Cultural Resource Survey was prepared for the project that did not identify archaeological resources on site. Mitigation measures , found on page 1 of this document, are recommended for the project to reduce impacts to less than significance. c. The project site is not located in northeast Bakersfield, the only known unique paleontological resource area within the Metropolitan Bakersfield area.

Topography of the site is relatively flat and there is no evidence that construction of the project will destroy any unique geologic structure. No significant impacts are noted. d. The proposal is not anticipated to disturb any human remains. However, if human remains are discovered during grading or construction activities, further work would be prohibited pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code. If Native American remains are identified, Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code and Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code detail the appropriate actions necessary for addressing Native American remains. Mitigation measures are recommended for the project to reduce impacts to less than significance.

VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
a.i. Bakersfield and the San Joaquin Valley are within a seismically active area. According to the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, major active fault systems border the southern portion of the San Joaquin Valley. Among these major active fault systems include the San Andreas, Breckenridge-Kern County, Garlock, Pond Poso, and White Wolf faults. There are numerous additional smaller faults suspected to occur within the Bakersfield area which may or may not be active. The active faults have a maximum credible Richter magnitude that ranges from 6.0 (Breckenridge - Kern Canyon) to 8.3 (San Andreas). Potential seismic hazards in the planning area involve strong ground shaking, fault rupture, liquefaction and landslides.

Future structures proposed on the project site are required by state law and City ordinance to be constructed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code (seismic zone 4, which has the most stringent seismic construction requirements in the United States), and to adhere to all modern earthquake construction standards, including those relating to soil characteristics. This will ensure that all seismically related hazards remain less than significant. In addition, b ecause of the relatively flat topography of the project site, landslides are not considered to be a potentially significant geologic hazard.
a.ii. See answer to VI.a.i.

Page 14 of 20 ends

a.iii. Liquefaction potential is a combination of unconsolidated soil type and high ground water combined with high potential seismic activity. This project site does not demonstrate the three attributes necessary to have a potentially significant impact. See also the answer to V I.a.i. a.iv. See answer to VI.a.i.
b. The soil types prevalent on the proposed site are listed in the unpublished Soil Survey o f Kern County, California, South western Part (United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service ). The project site includes soil typ e of Kimberlina fine sandy loam (30 acres) and of Cajon sandy loam overblown (8 acres). Due to the characteristics of the on -site soil types and the relatively flat terrain, implementation of the project will not result in significant erosion, displacement of soils or soil expansion problems or limit the use of septic systems . The project will be subject to City ordinances and standards relative to soils and geology. Standard compliance requirements include detailed site specific soil analysis prior to issuance of building permits and adherence to applicable building codes in accordance with the Uniform Building Code. No significant impact.
c. See answers to VI.a.i. and VI.a.ii. In addition, t he Seismic Hazard Atlas map of Kern County prepared by the United States Department of the Interior Geological Survey does not indicate that the project area is subject to subsidence, liquefaction or other unique geological hazard. No significant impact.
d. See answer to VI.b.
e. See answer to VI.b.

VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
a. The record does not indicate that this project (or this type of land use in general) involves the transport or use of hazardous materials in any quantity which has been identified by responsible agencies as having the potential to be a significant environmental impact. b. See answer to VII.a.
c. The record does not support a finding that this project or this category of projects has been identified by responsible agencies as having the potential to emit hazardous emissions at a level which is potentially significant.
d. The project is not located on any site catalogued on the most recent hazardous materials list compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. No significant impact is identified. e. The project site is not located within an area subject to the land use restrictions within the adopted 1996 Kern County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (1996) (ALUCP) which covers all of Kern County. No significant impact.
f. See answer to VII.e.
g. The proposed project , typical of other developments in the Bakersfield area, is not inconsistent with the adopted City of Bakersfield Hazardous Materials Area Plan (Jan.1997). This plan identifies responsibilities and provides coordination of emergency response at the local level in response to a hazardous materials incident . The project would not interfere with any local or regional emergency response or evacuation plans because the project would not result in a substantial alteration to the adjacent and area circulation system. No significant impact is noted. h. This project is not located adjacent to a wild land area nor is it within the area covered by the Hillside Development Zone (HD), which has standards required by the City of Bakersfield Fire Department to address the issue of wild land fires and urban development. No significant impacts are identified.

VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
a. The proposed project will be implemented in accordance with all applicable water quality standards and waste discharge requirements , which will ensure that the quality and quantity of surface water flowing from the site would not be substantially affected. No significant impact is identified.
b. The proposed development will not result in a need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the existing water utilities in the area. Expansion of all water utilities would be required to serve this development, but the impact is not considered significant. All w ater

Page 15 of 20 ends

companies within the project area have been contacted regarding the proposal. The appropriate water utility company may require the project applicant to provide water system improvements to service the site, but this impact is not regarded as significant. c. There are no streams or rivers on the project site, existing drainage patterns will not be altered to a significant degree . All development within the City of Bakersfield is required by ordinance to comply with an approved drainage plan (for every project) which avoids on -site and off -site flooding, erosion and siltation problems. No significant impact is identified. d. See answer to VIII.c.
e. See answer to VIII.c.
f. See answer to VIII.a.
g. The project does not propose housing within a 100 -year flood plain as identified by the Flood Insurance Rate Map or any other flood hazard map. No significant impact is noted. h. The project does not propose any structures within a 100 -year flood hazard area. No impact is noted.
i. The project is within the Lake Isabella dam failure inundation area, but not the 100 -year flood plain for the Kern River as depicted on figure VIII -2 of the Bakersfield Metropolitan General Plan (Safety Element). However, chances of loss, injury and/or death are so remote (the worst case scenario is one event in more than 10,000 years - source: Bakersfield Heart Hospital FEIR) that the risk is regarded as insignificant (reference also the Kern County Flood Evacuation Plan for Kern County and Greater Bakersfield Area below Lake Isabella Dam). j. The project site is not located near any significantly sized body of water and is, therefore, not susceptible to a seiche or tsunami. The site is not located at the foot of any significant topographical feature with the potential to be subject to a mud flow. No significant impact is noted.

IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING
a. The project is a continuation of the existing urban development pattern that does not physically divide the Metropolitan Bakersfield Plan Area . No significant impact is noted. See Table 1 below that shows the existing land uses and zoning of adjacent properties.

TABLE 1

LAND USE/ZONING OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES

LOCATION LAND USE

DESIGNATION ZONE DISTRICT EXISTING LAND USE
NORTH LR R-1 Fallow Agriculture
SOUTH R-IA A Agriculture
EAST LR R-I Grape Vineyards
WEST LR & R-IA R-1 & R-1/PUD New High School (Independence) under construction
Land Use Designations Zoning Districts
R-IA - Resource – Intensive Agriculture A - Agriculture Zone LR - Low Density Residential R-1 - One Family Dwelling Zone R-I/PUD - One Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development

b. The project is required to be consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan and the City of Bakersfield Zoning Ordinance. No significant impacts are noted. c. See answer to IV.a., IV.e., IV.f.

X. MINERAL RESOURCES
a. The project is not located within a state designated oil field or within an area of other important mineral resources. There has not been any known oil exploration and production occurring on the project site. No Impact noted.
b. See answer to X.a.

Page 16 of 20 ends

XI. NOISE
a. Development of the project site will not expose persons or generate noise in excess of those standards found in the Noise Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan . The impact is not regarded as significant.
b. There is no evidence in the record of any noise impacts associated with ground bourne vibration or noise. No significant impacts are noted.
c. Ambient noise levels will increase through any urban type of development of the site. Building code requirements required for energy conservation will result in a 20 -decibel reduction in noise for habitable interior space. In addition, typical development standards including building setbacks, walls, and landscaping will contribute to decreasing the ambient noise levels from the adjoining area. The project is not anticipated to expose people to severe noise levels and existing ordinance requirements will reduce noise impacts to less than significant. d. Noise associated with construction of the project is the only temporary (or periodic) increase of ambient noise levels. This temporary change in ambient noise levels has not been found to be significant.
e. See answer to VII.e.
f. This project is not located within the vicinity ( 5,000 feet ) of any private airstrip and therefore would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Less than significant impact.

XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
a. The project will induce population growth in this area, but this impact is regarded as less than significant as the project is the logical extension of existing urban development or is an infill project, see Table 2.

TABLE 2

POPULATION PROJECTIONS

PROPOSED

LAND USE DWELLING UNITS PERSONS PER

HOUSEHOLD POPULATION
Single Family 172 du 3.01 517
Multifamily 0 du 2.77 0
TOTALS 172 du N/A 517
Source: 2000 Federal Census

b. The project will induce population growth in this area, but this impact is regarded as less than significant as the project is the logical extension of existin g urban development . Less than significant impact.
c. The project site is currently undeveloped with no structures. No significant impacts are noted. d. The project would not result in the displacement of homes. No significant impacts are noted.

XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a. Fire protection services for the Metropolitan Bakersfield area are provided through a joint fire protection agreement between the City and County. The projected increase of approximately 517 new residents and 172 new structures into the City through the proposal may necessitate the addition of fire equipment and personnel to maintain current levels of service. However, this potential increase in fire protection services can be paid for by property taxes generated by this development and is not deemed significant.
b. Police protection will be provided by the Bakersfield Police Department upon project build out.

Current City Police services standards require 1.32 officers for every 1,000 people in the City.

The projected increase of 517 new residents into the City may necessitate the addition of law

Page 17 of 20 ends

enforcement officers to maintain current levels of service. However, this potential increase in services can be paid for by property taxes generated by this development and is not deemed significant.
c. The proposed development could produce 172 dwellings units and generate approximately 1 45 school age children as indicated in Table 3. This increase may necessitate the construction of additional school facilities. However , existing school im pact fees and increased property tax revenues will reduce impacts on schools to less than significant.

TABLE 3

SCHOOL CHILDREN GENERATION

TYPE AND NUMBER OF

DWELLING UNITS

ELEMENTARY
K - 8

HIGH SCHOOL
9 - 12 TOTAL PUPILS
Single Family
172 units 172 x 0.62 = 106 172 x 0.23 = 39 145
Duplex
(b) units N/A x 0.39 N/A x 0.14 N/A
Multifamily
(c) units N/A x 0.31 N/A x 0.17 N/A
Mobile Home
(d) units N/A x 0.34 N/A x 0.12 N/A
TOTALS 106 39 145
Source: 2000 Federal Census; Student Generation Rates - 2003 Kern County Office of Education

d. The project proposes a population increase of 517 persons and may result in an impact upon the quality and quantity of existing recreational opportunities and may create a need for new parks or recreational facilities. The parkland requirements for the proposed project are calculated based on the General Plan and City Ordinance park standards of 2.5 acres for every 1,000 people. Total park acreage estimated for the project is 1.29 acres. In addition, e very residential unit must pay a park land development fee at the time of the issuance of building permits.

Compliance with the park acreage dedication ordinance and the park development fee ordinance ensures that parks are dedicated and built in accordance with City standards. The impact is not considered significant.
e. Other public facility improvements from the proposed development and eventual buildup of this area will result in an increase in maintenance responsibility for the City of Bakersfield. These increases in services are not deemed significant.

XIV. RECREATION
a. See answer to Parks, (XIII.d.).
b. See answer to Parks, (XIII.d.).

XV. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
a. A Traffic Impact Study has been prepared for the project (McIntosh & Associates, November 2006). The trip generation analysis prepared for the project indicates that the project would generate approximately 129 AM peak hour trips and 174 PM peak hour trips, with an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 1,679.

Page 18 of 20 ends

TABLE 5

PROJECT TRAFFIC
PM Peak Hour/AM Peak Hour/Daily Traffic

Land Use

Acres

Density
D.U.’s/AC

D.U.’s

ITE
Code

Rate
Peak
Hour
Trips

Split
In

Split
Out

Single Family Residential
PM

38.09 4.50 172 210 Note 1 174 111 63
AM

38.09 4.50 172 210 Note 2 129 32 97
ADT

38.09 4.50 172 210 Note 3 1679 840 840
Source: Traffic Study, prepared by McIntosh & Associates, November 2006.

Note 1: Used average of Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.90 Ln(x) + 0.53 and Average Rate: (T) =

1.01 x (D.U.’s) to determine trip generation.

Note 2: Used average of Fitted Curve Equation: T = 0.700(x) + 9.43 and Average Rate: (T) = 0.751 x (D.U.’s) to determine trip generation.

Note 3: Used average of Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.920 Ln(x) + 2.71 and Average Rate: (T) =

9.57 x (D.U.’s) to determine trip generation.

The traffic impact study found that the project has the potential to significantly impact at several intersections and roadway segments. However, the study also found that if certain mitigation measures are proposed for the project, the impacts would be reduced to a level that is less than significant. The subject int ersections and roadway segments as well as proposed mitigation measures are described in the traffic study prepared for the project. b. See answer to XV.a.
c. There are no air traffic issues associated with the proposal. No impact. d. All road improvements are subject to compliance with accepted traffic engineering standards which are intended to reduce traffic hazards. There are no incompatible uses which have been identified with this project. No significant impact noted. e. The proposal would not impact any emergency management agency’s ability to access the area regarding emergency situations. No significant impact noted. f. The zoning ordinance requires that parking appropriate to each type of land use be provided.

No significant parking impacts specific to this project have been identified. g. The project is anticipated to be consistent with any policies or programs supporting alternative transportation and shall by ordinance be required to pay transportation impact fees which in part are used to support mass transit (acquisition of buses for GET). No significant impact.

XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
a. This project will be connected to sanitary city sewer when annexed to the City of Bakersfield and will meet the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. No potential significant impacts have been identified.
b. The proposed development w ould not result in the need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the existing water or wastewater facilities. Expansion of all utilities would be required to serve this development, but the impact is not considered significant. c. Almost all new development require s the construction of new storm water facilitie s, the construction of which is typically an extension of the existing system. This incremental improvement is not considered to be a significant impact. d. The proposed development w ould not result in a need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the existing water utilities in the area. The site is within the California Water Service District. Expansion of water utilities would be required to serve this development, but the impact is not considered significant.

Page 19 of 20 ends

Bakersfield City CouncilOctober 22, 2025

Bakersfield City Council
October 22, 2025