Appendix H Correspondence Related to Public Services

Appendix H

Correspondence Related to Public Services

DONNY YOUNGBLOODSheriff-Coroner

Public Administrator

03-17-09

Karen NorthcuttNorthcutt & AssociatesP.O. Box 28933630 Golden Spur St.Lake Isabella, CA 93240

SHERIFF'S OFFICECOUNTY OF KERN

1350 Norris RoadBakersfield, California 93308-2231

Telephone (661) 391-7500

SUBJECT: Kern County Sherifrs Office Facilities and Services as Related to the Preparation of an EnvironmentalImpact Report for the Kern River Valley Specific Plan.

Dear Karen,

This communication is in response to the series of questions submitted to the Kern County Sheriff's Office for review. Most ofthe answers submitted by Commander Dougherty in the 2006 reply are still applicable so I will concentrate on questions 5 and7 (per your request).

5. Will development in accordance with the proposed Specific Plan result in adverse impacts to police protection servicessuch as the adequacy of existing or planned facilities, staffing, and equipment levels? If so, please describe the natureof these impacts.

As I understand it, the plan calls for an additional 14,000 homes at an estimated 30,000 residents. Thisnumber would necessitate the addition of 30 new Deputy Sherifrs in the Kern River Valley (1 per 1,000) witha full complement of patrol vehicles and support equipment.

Office Support would need to be increased by a minimum of 4 positions (for a total of 6) to accommodate theincreased patrol component.

A new facility would be required to manage the logistics of operating a substation of that size. The existingfacility would not accommodate that number of personnel so the purchase of a new site may be required.

The new facility should have a booking component with an appropriately sized jail facility to temporarilyhouse arrestees and those inmates going to court. If a jail component is appropriate, an addition of 5-7Detentions Deputies would be adequate to manage a jail facility of that size.

The building and attached jail would require appropriate furnishings and support equipment. I have notestimated those costs at this time.

The addition of 30,000 people in the Kern River Valley would have collateral impacts upon the existingSherifrs Office infrastructure (apart from the Kern River Valley). The additional population will impactSherifrs Office jail populations, court proceedings, transportation requirements and support needs. Theadditional costs of personnel have yet to be estimated. Personnel additions in these areas will include, DeputySherifrs, Detention Deputies and Office Service Technicians.

PLEASE ADDRESS ALL COMMUNICATIONS TO THE SHERIFF

Fully equipped Patrol Vehicles have a current estimated cost of $52,000 per unit. Substations in the KernRiver Valley must also be equipped with several 4x4 vehicles to manage the difficult terrain and weatherconditions. The current estimated cost per 4x4 unit is $54,000. Those costs would naturally increase peryear.

7. If impacts have been identified, are there any ways to mitigate those impacts?

- Expanding the current facility may relieve the need to find a new site. It is unknown if the current lot canFacilitate an expansion of that size.

**9. Are there formal or informal law enforcement agreements with other jurisdictions within the SpecificPlan Area ... (***updated information***)

We currently have an existing agreement with the school district to provide law enforcement services(1 full time Deputy). The school district has recently applied for an additional grant for similar services.

The numbers submitted in this questionnaire are only estimates and are subject to change.

Sincerely,

Donny Youngblood, Sheriff-Coroner

By:Lieutenant Kevin D. ZimmermannKern County Sheriff's OfficeLaw Enforcement BureauSubstation DivisionNorth East Section

PLEASE ADDRESS ALL COMMUNICATIONS TO THE SHERIFF

cbildren

May 13, 2009

Karen NorthcuttNorthcutt & Associates3630 Golden Spur St., Ste ALake Isabella, CA 93240-9495

RE: Kern River Valley Specific Plan EIR

Dear Ms. Northcutt:

Pursuant to your request, below please find responses from the Kernville Union School Districtconcerning the above-entitled project. We are providing information r(jf~arding this project eventhough you may have already received this by the elementary district.

0.1. It is our understanding that the Kernville Union School District operates two schoolswithin the Specific Plan Area: Kernville Elementary School and Woodrow W. WallaceElementary and Middle School. Please confirm our understanding and provide theaddress, size, and available capacity of each school.

A.1. Kernville Elementary: 13350 Sierra Way, Kernville; Enrollment 158; Capacity 300

Woodrow W. Wallace Elementary: 3240 Erksine Creek Rd., Lake Isabella; Enmllment410; Capacity 550

Woodrow W. Wallace Middle: 3240 Erksine Creek Rd., Lake Isabella; Enmllment 304;Capacity 450

0.2. Are there adopted standards in terms of schools per thousands population, square feetper school, etc.? If so, what are they?

A 2. Kindergarten and grades 1-6: 59 square feet per pupilGrades 7-8: 80 square feet per pupil

0.3. Is new development, residential or otherwise, subject to any school mitigation fees?Please discuss any ordinances, fee amounts and when any fees are required to be paid.

A. 3. Yes. Currently residential fees are $2.97 per square foot and commercial/industrial feesare $0.47 per square foot. These fees are required at the time of building permitissuance and are collected by the agency issuing the building pe/TJ1it.

0.4. Are there any plans for new schools? If so, please provide information.

A. 4. Wallace Middle School is currently newly constructed with 19 cfasrooms and restroomfacilities. The new community center gym is approximately 16,000 square feet.

Printed on recycled paper

Ms. Karen NorthcuttNorthcutt & Associates

Kern River Valley Specific Plan EIRMay 13, 2009Page 2

Q.5. From your perspective, would development in accordance with the proposed SpecificPlan result in the generation of student population in excess of existing school capacity?Would the construction of new facilities or the expansion of existing facilities berequired?

A. 5. There is a potential for expansion of school facilities in the future There is also a need tomaintain the existing facilities.

Q.6. Does the Kernville Union School District anticipate or expect any impacts to schoolfacilities and services due to anticipated development within the Kern River Valley? Ifso, please describe the nature of these impacts and how the proposed project maycontribute to those impacts.

A. 6. Not at ths time.

Q.7. If impacts have been identified, are there ways to mitigate those impacts?

A. 7. We reserve the opportunity to comment on this when more information about this projectbecomes available.

Should you have any questions or if I can be of additional assistance, please do not hesitate tocontact me at (661) 636-4599 or via e-mail at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Larry E. Reider. County

Mary L. Baker, ManagerSchool District F~cility Services

MLBEne.

cc: Mary Barlow, SuperintendentKernville Union School District

Kernville.EIR Kern River Valley.wpd

KERN HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTBOARD OF TRUSTEES

Joel Heinrichs, PresidentKen Mettler, Vice President J. Bryan Batey, ClerkWilliam (Bill) Perry, Ed.D. Chad Vagas

DONALD E. CARTER, Ed.D. SUPERINTENDENT

5801 SUNDALE AVENUE • BAKERSFIELD • CALIFORNIA • 93309-2924 • (661) 827-3100 • FAX:(661) 827-3308

CHARLES ROSENGARDManager, Research & Planning

February 23, 2009

Andrew Martin, AssociateP&D Consultants, Inc.

re: Kern River Valley Specific Plan EIR

In response to the questions in your letter to Dr. Carter of February 16, 2009:

1. Kern Valley High School serves the Specific Plan area. It is located at 3340 Erskine CreekRd., Lake Isabella, CA 93240. Additional information is available at

. Kern High School sees the base capacity at KernValley High School at approximately 600 students. The site has accommodated over 700students through maximum utilization of classrooms and some relocatables. Kern HighSchool District is undergoing rapid growth and currently has some sites which accommodate30% more students than their base capacity through maximum utilization of classrooms andrelocatables. Kern High School District does not have an enrollment cap at any site.

2. Kern High School District provides facilities in response to student enrollment and as of theopening of Frontier High School will have opened six new high schools each with a basecapacity of approximately 2,150 students (at each of these sites) since 1990. Two additionalsimilarly sized sites will be open in 2008. Base capacity has also been expanded at a numberof sites, most recently with classroom expansion projects at East Bakersfield High andShafter High. We do not have a rigid formula; we respond as need and funding allow.

3. Developer fees are collected through the County of Kern. A revision of these is forthcoming.4. Frontier High School, 6401 Allen Road, Bakersfield, Ca. 93314 will open in August, 2006.

Additional sites are being developed at McCutchen and Old River and at Fairfax and Redbank.These are slated to open in 2008. Please see for detailsand maps. Kern High School District currently has funding through 'Measure N' (November,2004) for two schools beyond the 2008 sites and is evaluating potential sites. Please see

._.~.~ .. . ._..__. . . for additional details.5. As the indicated build-out proceeds, Kern High School District would certainly expand

existing facilities and consider new facilities as needed.6. As the indicated build-out proceeds, Kern High School District would certainly expand

existing facilities and consider new facilities as needed.7. No impacts have been identified.

Sincerely,

Charles RosengardManager, Research and PlanningCR:bc

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER

2/9/10 6:36 PMPublic Services Folder

Page 1 of 3http://webmail.earthlink.net/wam/printable.jsp?msgid=862&x=373281766

From:To:Subject:Date:

Public Services Folder

Lauren Jue <[email protected]>Gregory JuePublic Services FolderFeb 9, 2010 6:29 PM

------ Forwarded MessageFrom: Karen Northcutt <[email protected]>Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:22:55 -0800To: Lauren Jue <[email protected]>Subject: Kernville Union School District Information for KRV Specific Plan EIR

From: "Mary Barlow" <[email protected]>To: "'Karen Northcutt'" <[email protected]>Cc: "'Jenny Hannah'" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: School District Information for KRV Specific Plan EIRDate: Mon, 11 May 2009 09:00:04 -0700X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11Thread-index: AcnR6G9/XqM0oVB8Tn637x/RtY5dGAAZtD8gX-KCSOS-MailScanner-ESVA-Information: Please contact User Support for moreinformationX-KCSOS-MailScanner-ESVA: Found to be cleanX-KCSOS-MailScanner-ESVA-From: [email protected]: NoX-ELNK-Received-Info: spv=0;X-ELNK-AV: 0X-ELNK-Info: sbv=0; sbrc=.0; sbf=00; sbw=000;

Hello Karen good to hear from you. I‚m sorry I missed this request. I have attached my answers. I have also forwardedthis to Kern County Superintendent of Schools Office as they respond to the requests for details regarding facilities fees,OPSC square footage requirements, and proposed new development. Jenny can you pass this on to Mary Baker and her staff for the response to items 2 &3 (and if there is anything I statedincorrectly please let me know). Thanks so much. Mary

From: Karen Northcutt [ mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ] Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2009 8:27 PMTo: Mary BarlowSubject: School District Information for KRV Specific Plan EIR

Hi Mary,Back in February, we send the Kernville Union School District a letter requesting some information so we could includecorrect data in the EIR we are preparing for the Kern Co. Planning Dept. We never received a response, and I would liketo make sure we have this information so we can have a complete assessment of the school situation. The questions we

mailto:[email protected]




asked in the letter are included below in this email, so if it would be easier to just reply to this email, that will be fine.

The Specific Plan Area currently has approximately 9,500 existing dwelling units and approximately 15,000existing residents. At the end of the planning time frame for the Specific Plan (2030) the estimated population isprojected to be a bit over 20,000, with over 12,700 dwelling units.

Questions

To adequately assess the proposed project's potential environmental impacts on school facilities, we would like torequest the following information from your office:1. It is our understanding that Kernville Union School District operates two schools within the Specific PlanArea: Kernville Elementary School and Woodrow W. Wallace Elementary and Middle School. Please confirm ourunderstanding and provide the address, current student size, and available capacity (or design capacity) of eachschool. [Mary Barlow] Kernville Elementary School (K-5 grade) 13350 Sierra Way Kernville 93238 currentenrollment 156, capacity 300. Woodrow Wallace Elementary and Middle School 3240 Erskine CreekBlvd. Lake Isabella CA 93240 current enrollment Wallace Elementary 410 (capacity 550) WallaceMiddle School current enrollment 304 (capacity 450).2. Are there adopted standards for the school district in terms of schools per thousands population, square feetper school, etc.? If so, what are they?[Mary Barlow] 3. Is new development, residential or otherwise, subject to any school mitigation fees? Please discuss anyordinances, fee amounts and when any fees are required to be paid.[Mary Barlow] 4. Are there any plans for new schools, or planned expansion of existing facilities? If so, please provideinformation.[Mary Barlow] Wallace Middle School is currently newly constructed with 19 classrooms and restroomsfacilities. The new community center gym is approximately 16,000 square feet. 5. From your perspective, would development in accordance with the proposed Specific Plan result in thegeneration of student population in excess of existing school capacity? Would the construction of new facilities orthe expansion of existing facilities be required?[Mary Barlow] there is a potential for expansion of school facilities in the future. There is also a needto maintain the existing facilities. 6. Does the Kernville Union School District anticipate or expect any impacts to school facilities and services dueto anticipated development within the Kern River Valley? If so, please describe the nature of these impacts andhow the proposed project may contribute to those impacts.[Mary Barlow] Not at this time.7. If impacts have been identified, are there ways to mitigate those impacts?

We would greatly appreciate your assistance with these questions, as our document will not bedeemed adequate without the information from the Kernville Union School District. If we need todiscuss any of the questions, please give me a call on my cell at 661-330-5799.

Thank you in advance for your response. Best regards,Karen

Karen [email protected] (760) 379-4626 or cell (661) 330-5799

--



This message was scanned by zeus.kern.org and is believed to be clean. Click here to report this message as spam. <http://smtp.zeus.kern.org/cgi-bin/learn-msg.cgi?id=F09621BC6C.893BC> Click here to report this message as good email. <http://smtp.zeus.kern.org/cgi-bin/learn-good.cgi?id=F09621BC6C.893BC> -- This message has been checked by zeus.kern.org and is believed to be clean. Karen [email protected] (760) 379-4626 or cell (661) 330-5799

------ End of Forwarded Message

http://smtp.zeus.kern.org/cgi-bin/learn-msg.cgi?id=F09621BC6C.893BC

http://smtp.zeus.kern.org/cgi-bin/learn-good.cgi?id=F09621BC6C.893BC






------ Forwarded MessageFrom: Karen Northcutt <[email protected]>Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:12:53 -0800To: Lauren Jue <[email protected]>Subject: Additional Information for South Fork School

From: "Robin Shive" <[email protected]>To: "'Karen Northcutt'" <[email protected]>Subject: RE: questionsDate: Mon, 11 May 2009 11:50:25 -0700X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11Thread-index: AcmjfFhUQTRPm5UdT0q2L27j9Mg6Xwu7KJCwX-KCSOS-MailScanner-ESVA-Information: Please contact User Support for moreinformationX-KCSOS-MailScanner-ESVA: Found to be cleanX-KCSOS-MailScanner-ESVA-From: [email protected]: NoX-ELNK-Received-Info: spv=0;X-ELNK-AV: 0X-ELNK-Info: sbv=0; sbrc=.0; sbf=00; sbw=000;

149 at Middle School 147 with elem. School. No. the facilities is not maxed out. We have empty classrooms at both school sites.

From: Karen Northcutt [ mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ] Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 6:37 PMTo: Robin ShiveCc: 'Lissa Robinson'; Lauren JueSubject: Re: questions

Hi,Thank you for these responses. I do have a couple of additional questions.

1. Can you provide the existing student count for both the elementary and middle schools?

2. Based on the existing facilities (number of classrooms, etc.), is there a maximum student population for each of theschools?

Thanks,Karen





At 01:33 PM 5/10/2009, Robin Shive wrote:

Here are best responses to your letter dated January 16, 2009. #1. Yes. Size for elementary school site is 10.25 acres, middle school is 21.25 acres. I dont know the capacity.#2 No adopted standards in terms of schools per thousands population, etc.#3. Yes. Developer Fees: a.) $2.97 per square foot of accessible space of all new residential construction to the extent any resulting increasein accessible space in excess of 500 square feet. b.) $0.47 per square foot of all chargeable covered and enclosed space of any new commercialor industrial construction not within a category expressly exempted by this board in a resolution.#4 No.#5 Not in the near future.#6 No.#7 No impacts have been identified. Let me know if you need more information. Robin ShivePrincipal / SuperintendentSouth Fork Union School District760-378-4000 Phone760 378-3046 Fax -- This message has been checked by zeus.kern.org and is believed to be clean.


-- This message was scanned by zeus.kern.org and is believed to be clean. Click here to report this message as spam. <http://smtp.zeus.kern.org/cgi-bin/learn-msg.cgi?id=300731BC48.82B3E> Click here to report this message as good email. <http://smtp.zeus.kern.org/cgi-bin/learn-good.cgi?id=300731BC48.82B3E> -- This message has been checked by zeus.kern.org and is believed to be clean. Karen [email protected] (760) 379-4626 or cell (661) 330-5799


http://smtp.zeus.kern.org/cgi-bin/learn-msg.cgi?id=300731BC48.82B3E

http://smtp.zeus.kern.org/cgi-bin/learn-good.cgi?id=300731BC48.82B3E


Page 1 of 3http://webmail.earthlink.net/wam/printable.jsp?msgid=863&x=-115859299




------ Forwarded MessageFrom: Karen Northcutt <[email protected]>Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:28:16 -0800To: Lauren Jue <[email protected]>Subject: Parks Information for Kern River Valley Specific Plan

X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,432,1233561600"; d="scan'208";a="111173647"X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 7.0.3 Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 09:38:32 -0700From: "John Wilbanks" <[email protected]>To: <[email protected]>Subject: Kern River Valley Specific PlanX-ELNK-Received-Info: spv=0;X-ELNK-AV: 0X-ELNK-Info: sbv=0; sbrc=.0; sbf=00; sbw=000;

Good Morning Karen-

I apologize for the lateness in responding to your request for information concerningthe proposed Kern River Specific Plan. We had talked about this and I spoke with Boband then it got buried under the Master Plan work. However, in answer to yourquestions to parks and facilities in the kern River Valley, here are the responses toyour questions:

1. parks and facilities within the plan area: a. Regional: Greenhorn Mtn. Park; 9665 Old State Rd., Alta Sierra; 190 ac; includes the campgrounds, Yennis Haunte, and Camp Kaweah (closed)

b. Local/Neighborhood Parks: Circle Park; 11041 Kernville Rd., Kernville; 0.5 ac Riverside Park; 10 Kern River Dr., Kernville; 7.5 ac Wofford Heights Park; 316 E. Evans Rd., 7 ac (developed and undevelopedland - currently leased from USFS and working on land exchange to acquire the land) Lake Isabella Park / Linda Kissick Ballfield; 5000 Lake Isabella Blvd., LakeIsabella; 33.7 ac (developed and undeveloped land) Mtn. Mesa Park; 4361 McCray Rd., Mtn. Mesa; 4.6 ac Scodie Park; 8181 Scodie Park Rd., Onyx; 5 ac

c. Buildings: Kern River Veterans / Senior Bldg.; 6405 Lake Isabella Blvd., Lake



Isabella; 3 ac

d. Other: Wetlands - Bob Powers Gateway Project; SE corner of Hwy 178 andHwy 155; 18 ac

2. The department is currently involved in the development of the Parks Master Plan. With this document, goals and standards will be developed for the department forfuture use. Currently, the standard for parkland is 2.5 ac / 1,000 population. Thereare no other standards or goals for parks or facilities.

3. The department has a current parkland standard of 2.5 acres per 1,000 populationfor new developments. As previously stated, this standard will be evaluated in themaster plan process and may be changed. Currently, Quimby fees are collected fornew developments in the form of in-lieu fees and used to provide capitalimprovements to existing parks.

4. There are currently no Recreation & Park Districts or CSAs for park and recreationuse within the proposed plan area.

5. Currently, based on your population numbers, approximately 35 acres would berequired to meet the current 2.5 ac /1,000 population. With out the inclusion ofGreenhorn Mtn. Park, there is approximately 56 acres of park land provided in theproposed plan area.

However, if the 2.5 ac / 1,000 population requirement is changed and/or thepopulation in the proposed plan area increases, the possibility exists that parklandcurrently provided may be inadequate. Further, with the current funding levels, anymaintenance or improvements to existing parks / facilities is minimal at best. Anyincrease in use as a result of population increase would certainly create impacts onexisting facilities.

6. Any sizable development created by the proposed specific plan should beindividually addressed to minimize possible impacts to existing facilities. Dependingon the size of new development, new neighborhood parks should be required with theestablishment of a maintenance district. The proposed development of these parkswould lessen the impacts to existing facilities and better serve any new development. Additionally, the establishment of a maintenance district would provide ongoingmaintenance and allow for future upgrades to the facility.

7. The Parks Master Plan is currently scheduled to be completed by July 1, 2009.

8. To my knowledge, there are no cooperative agreements with any other jurisdictionfor the management and/or maintenance of County parks within the proposed planarea. The Gateway project is managed by a small non-profit organization throughagreement with the County.

9. The Rangers performing lake patrol duties do not have sufficient staff orequipment. According to the Lieutenant Ranger, the department is short by two (2)ranger staff, two (2) patrol cars, and one (1) patrol boat.



I hope this information provides the answers to your questions. Should you have anyquestions or require additional information, please let me know. If you would like thisinformation in a letter format, e-mail me and I will prepare the letter and deliver itnext week. I used this format to expedite the responses as you requested theinformation be submitted a few weeks ago in your letter.

JOHN R. WILBANKSKERN CO. PARKS AND RECREATION DEPT1110 GOLDEN STATE AVEBAKERSFIELD, CA 93301(661) 862-5108(661) 862-5109 (FAX)



Appendix H Correspondence Related to Public Services

Documents

Transcript of Appendix H Correspondence Related to Public Services