Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGPA/ZC P99-0482 NORSD EIRFINAL GPA/IC P99-0482 ~. ~~ Program Environmental Impact Report ii Prepared for: City of Bakersfield ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~d ~ ~1~ Submitted by: '~ { ~ r' "~~ `~ 1 ~ ~ ~`~,~ t~~'' ~~;~ Robert Bein WilliamFrost & Associates ~~ ~ .. . .~ .._,.. .. ., . _. ,-.. :. . , ,. .. . ~ r` 1 ,.. . ~ ; U ~ ~, 1.. ~nv _ '. ~ .. a ~ i4i ~v.' ~ ~ ~ i ~ t ~ I~~ ~ ~~ r P ~ ~f ~ . t P`~ ~Y ~ ~~~, c7~ t 41 P~ (~~ru~ .(~,V fry ))'~, f 1~ i /y tfi c ~~' - 1 ~ ~a ~ T~7 '1 `.R;^^- X9.1 ~ , l .,d, Y In. ; X) 1~ y j'~t r ~ 7, C f ~V. C4.~'Ap ~~ M1. i ~ a. _,.~.. ..lJ I ~hrT'x ,~^. o ~ ~` Jn ~ '~ ~~~Y a , ar 0 > PQ w ~; t 4 ~ .- p v '~„'~+'tlC"~ ' 'F! '~j ~ i ~- Il ~ ° ~` s ~~ , . ,,~' ~ ~/1 `r. ,.__ __.._,_._.~~='.r~'_L.. ~~ ~" __.._~ ate. 1 _ ~ ~,~ gg ~ .rti .. ~ ~'~, ~ ~ ~~~~~'~ ;rt~ ~~ ~ i Irv ~~ ~14,`~ ~'' Y t ~ Mir n} ~ w,, r: ~ yes., y~ ~~, i e 1 t ,~~ rt . ~ ~ ~~~ N ~R e~ ~ ~ , ,~ ~ ~.q i , / ~ ~~I i1 { , l ~ , .t~~ 4k ~ N ~. ~ ~ .: . ' ~ ~ salt' ~ ~~ ~I _ ~ - -__t___ ~ ~r ; - ~e v ~ ~ ; i Y~. i., ~ _ l f it ~~.„ --_-.._,. 'ZT K u _ . ~ _ ~, l ~ r ~> ' ~ a - . " }rtr. r g T.n n"~'d~N...~ ~~ ) ~ SS+"~• Y ..e;,,= Y t '~' yy `. .. is •* ~ ~ ') ~~ll ~ ~~ '~ o ~~ 1( ~ `"` r ' ~ ~ ~ , ~, ~~ ti r' ; , . t - - ' ~ r ? , Administrative Draft EIR Completed: February 3, 2000 Preliminary Draft EIR Completed: March 15, 2000 Draft EIR Completed: March 29, 2000 Final EIR Completed: M~~y 24, 2000 =F1 NAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ,~ General Plan Amendment & Zone Change (G PA/ZC) P99-0482 SCH #99081078 Lead Agency: CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Planning Department 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, California 93301 Contact: Mr. Martin Ortiz (661) 326-3733 Consultant: Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates 14725 Alton Parkway Irvine, California 92618 Contact: Mr. Glenn Lajoie, AICP (949) 472-3505 ~~`E~< A A'......L. ~n w,ar~rr-rte May 24, 2000 )N 10-100278 NTENTS TABLE OF CO Page 0 1 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE ................... ............... 1-1 . ................. 1.1 Purpose of the EIR ........ . ...............1-1 ~ 1.2 Compliance with CEQA ...................... ............... 1-4 ~ 1.3 EIR Scoping Process ......................... ............... 1-5 1.4 Format of the EIR ........................... ............... 1-7 1.5 Responsible and Trustee Agencies .............. ............... 1-9 2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................... ............... 2-1 .......... S ............... 2-1 ummary ................. 2.1 Project 2.2 Environmental Issues/Mitigation Summary ........ ............... 2-1 2.3 Summary of Project Alternatives ................ .............. 2-33 2.4 Areas of Controversy/Issues To Be Resolved ....... 2-34 ............. . 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................... ............... 3-1 1 Project Location and Setting ................... 3 ............... 3-1 . 3.2 Background and History ...................... ............... 3-6 3.3 Project Characteristics ....................... ............... 3-6 3.4 Project Objectives .......................... ............... 3-9 3.5 Phasing .................................. ...............3-9 3.6 Agreements, Permits and Approvals ............. ............... 3-9 4.0 BASIS FOR CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS ................ ................ 4-1 5.0 DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES .................... .............. 5.1-1 5.1 Aesthetics/Light and Glare ::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::: 5.1-1 2-1 5 5.2 Air Quality ........... . 5.3 Biological Resources ....................... .............. 5.3-1 5.4 Cultural Resources ......................... .....:: : :::::: 5.4-1 1 5.5 Geology and Soils ......................... ..... 5.5- 6 Human Health/Risk of Upset ................. 5 .............. 5.6-1 . 5.7 Land Use Compatibi I ity ..................... .............. 5.7-1 5.8 Noise ................................... .............. 5.8-1 5.9 Traffic and Circulation ...................... .............. 5.9-1 5.10 Services and Utilities ....................... ............. 5.10-1 u 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page 6.0 LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT .............. 6-1 ' Between Local Short-Term Uses 6.1 The Relationship of Man's Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement ,~ of Long-Term Productivity ................................... 6-1 6.2 Irreversible Environmental Changes That Would Be Involved in the Proposed Action Should It Be Implemented .......... 6-1 6.3 Growth Inducing Impacts .................................... 6-2 7.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT ........................ 7-1 7.1 "No Development" Alternative ................................ 7-1 7.2 "No Project" Alternative ............ ........................ 7-2 i ~ 7.3 "Reduced Density" Alternative ................................ 7-5 ° j 7.4 "Off Site" Alternative ....................................... 7-7 7.5 "Environmentally Superior" Alternative .......................... 7-8 8.0 INVENTORY OF MITIGATION MEASURES ........................... 8-1 9-1 9.0 INVENTORY OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION ................. . 10.0 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT ............:............ 10-1 11.0 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED ..................... 11-1 ~_ 12.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................... 12-1 13.0 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM ........................... 13-1 14.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES ............................ ..... 14-1 15.0 APPENDICES 15.1 Initial Study/Notice of Preparation/Correspondence 15.2 Air Quality Data 15.3 15.4 Biological Resources Technical Report Archaeological Assessment ,~ 15.5 Geological Hazards Investigation 15.6 Risk of Upset Data 15.6.1 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 15.6.2 Phase II Environmental Site Assessment 15.6.3 Hazards Analysis 15.7 Noise Data 15.8 Traffic Impact Study ~. ii LIST OF EXHIBITS Page 3-1 Regional Vicinity ................................................ 3-2 3-2 Site Vicinity ................................................... 3-3 3-3 Land Use Plan .................................................3-7 4-1 Cumulative Project Location Map ................................... 4-4 5.1-1 Project Area Photographs ....................................... 5.1-2 5.3-1 Biological Resources .......................................... 5.3-25 5.6-1 Heavy Industry Setback Distances ..................... ......... 5.6-14 5.9-1 Existing Number of Through Lanes and Intersection Controls ............ 5.9-3 5.9-2 Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan Comprehensive Circulation Plan ... ........................................ 5.9-4 5.9-3 Existing Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ............................... 5.9-5 5.9-4 Existing Volume to Capacity Ratios ................................ 5.9-6 5.9-5 Existing AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ....................... 5.9-10 5.9-6 Existing PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ....................... 5.9-11 5.9-7 Project Traffic Analysis Zone (Taz) Map ............................ 5.9-15 5.9-8 Opening Year Project Taz 1 Trip Distribution ....................... 5.9-19 5.9-9 Opening Year Project Taz 2 Trip Distribution .....:................. 5.9-20 5.9-10 Opening Year Project Taz 3 Trip Distribution ....................... 5.9-21 5.9-11 Opening Year Project Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ................... 5.9-22 5.9-12 Opening Year Project Arn Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ............ 5.9-23 5.9-13 Opening Year Project Pm Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ............. 5.9-24 5.9-14 Other Development Trip Distributions .......................... 5.9-25 5.9-15 Other Development Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ................... 5.9-26 LIST OF EXHIBITS (Continued) ' 5.9-16 Other Develo ment Am Peak Hour Intersection Volumes p .............. 5.9-27 5.9-17 Other Development Pm Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ............ 5.9-28 5.9-18 Opening Year Without Project Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ............. 5.9-30 5.9-19 Opening Year Without Project Volume to Capacity Ratios .............. 5.9-31 5.9-20 Opening Year with Project Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ................ 5.9-32 5.9-21 Opening Year with Project Volume to Capacity Ratios ................. 5.9-33 5.9-22 Opening Year Without Project Am Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ...... 5.9-36 5.9-23 Opening Year Without Project Pm Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ...... 5.9-37 5.9-24 Opening Year with Project Am Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ......... 5.9-41 5.9-25 Opening Year with Project Pm Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ......... 5.9-42 5.9-26 Year 2020 Project Taz 1 Tri Di tri J p s button .......................... 5.9-44 5.9-27 Year 2020 Project Taz 2 Trip Distribution .......................... 5.9-45 ' 5.9-28 Year 2020 Project Taz 3 Trip Distribution .......................... 5.9-46 5.9-29 Year 2020 Project Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ...................... 5.9-47 5.9-30 Year 2020 Project Am Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ................ 5.9- 48 5.9-31 Year 2020 Project Pm Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ................ 5.9-49 5.9-32 Year 2020 Without Project Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ................ 5.9- 51 j 5.9-33 Year 2020 Without Pro ect Volume to Ca acit Ratios J p Y 5.9 52 5.9-34 Year 2020 with Project Average Daily Traffic (ADT) .................. 5.9-54 5.9-35 Year 2020 with Project Volume to Capacity Ratios ................... 5.9-55 5.9-36 Year 2020 Without Project Am Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ......... 5.9- 58 5.9-37 Year 2020 Without Project Pm Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ......... 5.9-59 , 5.9-38 Year 2020 with Project Am Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ............ 5.9-63 ~~ iv ~. LIST OF EXHIBITS (Continued) 5.9-39 Year 2020 with Pro'ect Pm Peak Hour Intersection Volumes 5.9-64 5.9-40 Circulation Recommendations .................................. 5.9-66 L~ 1 1 I 1 LIST OF TABLES Table Pale 3-1 Surrounding Uses ............................................... 3-5 3-2 Land Use and Zoning Summary .................................... 3-8 4-1 Cumulative Project List .......................................... 4-3 5.2-1 Local Air Quality Levels ....................................... 5.2-6 5.2-2 APCD Air Quality Thresholds .................................... 5.2-8 5.2-3 Construction Emissions ....................................... 5.2-11 5.2-4 Long Term Project Emissions ................................... 5.2-13 5.3-1 Special Status Plant Species ..................................... 5.3-10 5.3-2 Special Status Wildlife Species .................................. 5.3-11 5.3-3 Vegetation Impact Acres .................................... 5.3-24 5.5-1 Distance of Local Faults From Project .............................. 5.5-3 5.6-1 List of Heavy Industries ......................................... 5.6-3 5.7-1 Land Use Element Goals/Policies Analysis .......................... 5.7-14 5.8-1 Sound Levels and Human Response ............................... 5.8-2 5.8-2 California Land Use Compatibility Noise Guidelines ................... 5.8-5 5.8-3 Noise Level Performance Standards ................................ 5.8-6 5.8-4 Existing Noise Levels ........................................... 5.8-7 5.8-5 Existing Traffic Noise Levels ..................................... 5.8-9 5.8-6 Significance of Changes in Cumulative Noise Exposure ................ 5.8-11 5.8-7 Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels ....................... 5.8-12 5.8-8 Year 2002 65 CNEL Noise Projections ............................. 5.8-15 5.8-9 Year 2020 65 CNEL Noise Projections ............................. 5.8-17 5.9-1 Level of Service Definitions ..................................... 5.9-8 vi LIST OF TABLES (Continued) 5.9-2 Intersection Analysis for Existing Conditions ......................... 5.9-9 5.9-3 Trip Generation Rates ......................................... 5.9-16 5.9-4 Project Trip Generation (Existing General Plan Land Uses) .............. 5.9-16 5.9-5 Project Trip Generation (Proposed General Plan Land Uses) ............ 5.9-17 5.9-6 Trip Generation Comparison ................................... 5.9-17 5.9-7 Other Development Trip Generation .............................. 5.9-17 5.9-8 Intersection Analysis for Opening Year Without Project Conditions ....... 5.9-34 5.9-9 Intersection Analysis for Opening Year with Project Conditions .......... 5.9-39 5.9-10 Intersection Analysis for Year 2020 Without Project Conditions .......... 5.9-56 5.9-11 Intersection Analysis for Year 2020 with Project Conditions ............. 5.9-61 5.9-12 Project Traffic Contribution ..................................... 5.9-67 5.10-1 Fire Protection Facilities ....................................... 5.10-1 5.10-2 School Facilities ............................................. 5.10-3 5.10-4 Water Demand Estimates ..................................... 5.10-14 5.10-5 Gas Consumption ........................................... 5.10-16 vii 1 f 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE ~~ ~ J J 1 1 L 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE EIR The City of Bakersfield is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and is responsible for preparing the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change (GPA/ZC) P99-0482 (State Clearinghouse No. 99081078). This EIR has been prepared in conformance with CEQA (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), California CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.), and the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementation of CEQA, as adopted by the City of Bakersfield. The principal CEQA Guidelines sections governing content of this document are Sections 15120 through 15132 (Content of an EIR), and Section 15168 (Program EIR). The purpose of this Program EIR is to review the existing conditions, analyze potential environmental impacts, and suggest feasible mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant effects for GPA/ZC P99-0482 located in the northwestern portion of the City of Bakersfield. 1 The EIR has been prepared as a Program EIR in accordance with Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines, addressing the environmental effects of the proposed project sites. Section 15168 states the following: "(a) General. A Program EIR is an EIR which may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related either: (1) Geographically, (2) As logical parts in the chain of contemplated actions, (3) In connection with issuance of rules, regulations, plans, or other general criteria to govern the conduct of a continuing program, or (4) As individual activities carried out under the same authorizing ' statutory or regulatory authority and having generally similar environmental effects which can be mitigated in similar ways. (b) Advantages. Use of a Program EIR can provide the following advantages. The Program EIR can: ' (1) Provide an occasion for a more exhaustive consideration of effects and alternatives than would be practical in an EIR on an individual action, ' Introduction JN 10-100278 1-1 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR (2) Ensure consideration of cumulative impacts that might be , slighted in a case-by-case analysis, (3) Avoid duplicative reconsideration of basic policy considerations, ' (4) AI low the Lead Agency to consider broad policy alternatives and program-wide mitigation measures at an early time when the agency has greater flexibility to deal with basic problems or cumulative impacts, and (5) Allow reduction in paperwork. _ (c) Use with Later Activities. Subsequent activities in the program must be ~ examined in the light of the Program EIR to determine whether an additional environmental document must be prepared. , (1) If a later activity would have effects that were not examined in the Program EIR, a new Initial Study would need to be prepared ' leading to either an EIR or a Negative Declaration. (2) If the agency finds that pursuant to Section 15162, no new effects could occur or no new mitigation measures would be required, ' the agency can approve the activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the Program EIR, and no new environmental document would be required. (3) An agency shall incorporate feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the Program EIR into subsequent ' actions in the program. (4) Where the subsequent activities involve site specific operations, the agency should use a written checklist or similar device to document the evaluation of the site and the activity to determine whether the environmental effects of the operations were covered in the Program EIR. r (5) A Program EIR will be most helpful in dealing with subsequent activities if it deals with the effects of the program as specifically and comprehensively as possible. With a good and detailed ' analysis of the program, many subsequent activities could be found to be within the scope of the project described in the Program EIR, and no furtherenvironmental documents would be required." Th di f ll ' e scussion o owing Section 15168 describes the proper process for Program EIRs as follows: " Use of the Program EIR also Pnables the Lead Agency to characterize the overall program as the project being approved at that time. Following this approach when individual activities within the program , are proposed, the agency would be required to examine the individual Introduction , JN 1 0-1 002 78 ~ 1-2 May 24, 2000 1 1 C GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR activities within the program to determine whether their effects were fully analyzed in the Program EIR. If the activities would have no effects beyond those analyzed in the Program EIR, the agency could assert that the activities are merely part of the program which had been approved earlier, and no further CEQA compliance would be required. This approach offers many possibilities for agencies to reduce their costs of CEQA compliance and still achieve high levels of environmental protection." (Discussion following CEQA Guidelines, Section 15168.) Should the City determine that additional environmental studies are necessary once development plans are submitted to the City for processing, the Program EIR will serve as the "tiering" document in accordance with Section 15152 of CEQA. "Tiering" refers to using the analysis of general matters contained in a broader EIR with later EIRs and negative declarations on narrower projects; incorporating by reference the general discussions from the broader EIR; and concentrating the later EIR or negative declaration solely on the issues specific to the later project. Agencies are encouraged to tier the environmental analyses which they prepare for separate but related projects including general plans, zoning changes, and development projects. This approach can eliminate repetitive discussions of the same issues and focus the later EIR or negative declaration on the actual issues ripe for decision at each level of environmental review. Tiering is appropriate when the sequence of analysis is from an EIR prepared for a general plan, policy, or program to an EIR or negative declaration for another plan, policy or program of lesser scope, or to asite-specific EIR or negative declaration. Tiering does not excuse the lead agency from adequately analyzing reasonably foreseeable significant environmental effects of the project and does not justify deferring such analysis to a later tier EIR or negative declaration. However, the level of detail contained in a first tier EIR need not be greater than that of the program, plan, policy, or ordinance being analyzed. In accordance with Section 15121 of CEQA, a primary purpose of this EIR is to provide decision makers and the public with specific information regarding the environmental effects associated with development of a site, identify ways to minimize the significant effects and describe reasonable alternatives to the project. Mitigation measures are provided which may be adopted as Conditions of Approval in order to reduce the significance of impacts resulting from the project. In addition, this EIR is the primary ' reference document in the formulation and implementation of a mitigation monitoring program for the proposed project. The City of Bakersfield, which has the principal responsibility of processing and approvingthe project, and other public agencies (i.e., responsible and trustee agencies, refer to Section 1.5 of this EIR) that may use this EIR in the decision making or permit Introduction )N 10-100278 1-3 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR process will consider the information in this EIR along with other information that may be presented during the CEQA process. Environmental impacts are not always mitigable to a level considered less than significant; in those cases, impacts are ' considered significant unavoidable impacts. In accordance with Section 15093(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines, if a public agency approves a project that has significant impacts that are not substantially mitigated (i.e., significant unavoidable impacts), the , agency shall state in writing the specific reasons for approving the project, based on the Final EIR and any other information in the public record for the project. This is termed, per Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, a "statement of overriding ' considerations." This document analyzes the environmental effects of the project to the degree of r specificity appropriate to the current proposed actions, as required by Section 15146 of the State CEQA Guidelines. This analysis considers the series of actions associated , with,the General Plan amendments, and zone changes, to determine the short-term and long-term effects associated with their implementation. This EIR discusses both the direct and indirect impacts of this project, as well as the cumulative impacts associated with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. CEQA requires the preparation of an objective, full disclosure document to inform agency decision makers and the general public of the direct and indirect environmental effects of the proposed action; provide mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate significant adverse effects; and identify and evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed project: ' 1.2 COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA This Program EIR is subject to a 45-day review period by responsible and trustee agencies and interested parties. Section 15087 of the CEQA Guidelines lists optional procedures for noticing including publication in a newspaper, posting on-site or mailing to owners of a property or properties contiguous to the site. In accordance with the provision of Sections 15085(a) and 15087(a)(1) of the State CEQA Guidelines, , as amended, the City of Bakersfield, serving as the Lead Agency, will: 1) publish a notice of availability of a Draft EIR in the Bakersfield Californian, a newspaper of general circulation; and 2) will prepare and transmit a Notice of Completion (NOC) to the State Clearinghouse. (Proof of publication is available at the offices of the Lead Agency.) A copy of the NOC is provided at the front of this document. , Any public agency or members of the public desiring to comment on the Draft EIR must submit their comments in writing to the individual identified on the document's NOC prior to the end of the public review period. During the public review period, the Bakersfield Planning Commission will hold aregularly-sc~leduled public hearing regarding the Draft EIR. The public will be afforded the opportunity to orally comment on the Draft EIR at the public hearing. Such comments shall be recorded and shall Introduction , JN 1 0-1 002 78 1-4 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR '~ have the same standin and res onse re uirements as written comments provided g p q during the public review period. Upon the close of the public review period, the Lead Agency will then proceed to evaluate and prepare responses to all relevant oral and written comments received from both citizens and public agencies during the public review period. The Final EIR will consist of the Draft EIR and revisions to the Draft EIR and responses to comments addressing concerns raised by responsible agencies or reviewing parties. After the Final EIR is completed and at least 10 days prior to its certification, a copy of the Responses to Comments will be transmitted to agencies providing written or oral comments on the Draft EIR. ~, 1.3 EIR SLOPING PROCESS ~ Incompliance with the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Bakersfield has taken steps to maximize opportunities for interested individuals, parties and agencies to participate in the environmental process. During the preparation of the Draft EIR, an effort was made to contact various Federal, State, regional, and local government agencies and other interested parties to solicit comments and inform the public of the proposed project. This included the distribution of an Initial Study and Notice of Preparation (NOP) on August 16, 1999, and public scoping meeting for the EIR,,scheduled for et~r September 2, 1999, then continued to October- 7, 1..999 and -ultimately held on November 4~ 1999. Initial Study In accordance with Section 15063(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, as amended, the City undertook the preparation of an Initial Study. The Initial Study determined that a number of environmental issue areas may be impacted by the construction and build-out of the GPA/ZC P99-0482 project site. As a result, the Initial Study ;~ determined that this Draft EIR should address the project's significant impacts on a variety of environmental issue areas. 1 1 1 This EIR focuses primarily on changes in the environment that would result from the proposed project. The EIR identifies potential impacts resulting from the construction and operation of the proposed project and provides measures to mitigate potential significant impacts. Those impacts which cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels are also identified. This EIR addresses impacts in the following areas: • Aesthetics/Light and Glare • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources Introduction JN 10-100278 1-5 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR • Geolo and Soils gY • Human Health/Risk of Upset • Land Use Compatibility • Noise - • • Services and Utilities Traffic and Circulation Notice of Preparation ~1 Pursuantto the provision of Section 15082 of the State CEQA Guidelines, as amended, the City of Bakersfield circulated an NOP to public agencies, special districts, and ~ members of the public requesting such notice for a public review period commencing ` August 16, 1999, and ending September 22, 1999. The purpose of the NOP was to , formally convey that the City is preparing a Draft EIR for the North of River Sanitary District Site project, and that as Lead Agency, was soliciting input regarding the scope and content of the environmental information to be included in the EIR. The Initial Study was circulated with the NOP. The NOP, Initial Study, and responses to the NOP ~~ are provided in Appendix 15.1 of this EIR. Early Consultation (scoping) During the NOP circulation period, the City of Bakersfield advertised and held one public scoping meeting. The meeting was held on November-4, 1999 and was intended to facilitate public input. The meeting was held with the specific ~` intent of affording interested individuals/groups and public agencies a forum in which ~ to orally present input directly to the Lead Agency iri an effort to assist in further ` y refining the intended scope and focus of the EIR as described in the NOP and Initial Study. '~ NOP and Scoping Results ~~ The following specific environmental concerns were raised in responses to the NOP ~ and in comments expressed during the scoping meeting held for the project (the numerical reference in parenthesis is the EIR Section in which the analysis is provided): _ • Transportation and Circulation (5.9); Compatibility between the proposed school and Kern County Airport Safety Zone C. This issue is - no longer relevant as a school site has been deleted from the project description; • Parks and Recreation (5.10); Placement of a public park underthe utility easement, park access in regards to Mohawk Street and amendment to the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan to (OS-P), parks and ,. Introduction '~ )N 10-100278 1-6 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR recreation facilities. These issues are no longer relevant as the park has been deleted from the project description; • Development and Mineral Preservation (5.6); Concerns expressed ' regarding condemnation of mineral rights; • Health and Safety Hazards (5.6); Concerns expressed regarding the proximity of proposed residential uses and the existing industrial uses. The proposed development would require a buffer zone between the residential uses and the industrial uses; • Potential industrial accidents (5.6); Concern of ex osin residents and p g school children to a potential industrial accident. This issue is no longer ' relevant with the elimination of the school site; • Proximity to oil wells (5.6, 5.7); Oil wells identified on-site include ' plugged/abandoned wells, idle and producing wells. Concern has been expressed regarding close proximity between the proposed residential uses and the existing producing wells, abandoned wells which were not abandoned to current specifications. Concerns also identified with regard to safety, access constraints and contaminated soils. ' • Increased traffic on roadways (5.9); Impacts along Olive Drive; and ' • Air Quality (5.2); Industrial facilities have the potential to create various air quality problems, i.e., odors, toxic releases, and upset conditions. ' 1.4 FORMAT OF THE EIR This Program EIR is organized into 15 sections. Section 1.0, INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE, provides CEQA compliance information. Section 2.0, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, provides a brief project description and summary of the environmental ' impacts and mitigation measures. Section 3.0, PROJECT DESCRIPTION, provides a detailed projectdescriptionindicating project location, project characteristics,phasing, and objectives, as well as associated discretionary actions required. Section 4.0, BASIS ' FOR THE CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS, describes the approach and methodology for the cumulative analysis. Section 5.0, DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES, contains a detailed environmental analysis 1 of the existing conditions, project impacts, mitigation measures and unavoidable adverse impacts. The analysis of each environmental category in this Section is organized as follows: Introduction J N 10-100278 1-7 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR • "Existing Conditions" describes the physical conditions which exist at , this time and which may influence or affect the issue under investigation; ' • "Project Impacts" describes potential environmental changes to the existing physical conditions which may occur if the proposed project is , implemented; • "Cumulative Impacts" describes potential environmental changes to the r existing physical conditions which may occurwith the proposed project together with other reasonably foreseeable, planned, and approved ' future projects; • "Mitigation Measures" are those specific measures which may be ' required of the project in order to avoid an adverse impact; minimize a significant adverse impact; rectify a significant adverse impact by restoration; reduce or eliminate a significant adverse impact over time , by preservation and maintenance operations; or compensate for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environment. The measures presented in this EIR are separated into those that would , be implemented as part of project design and measures that would mitigate project impacts above and beyond any reduction in potential impacts accomplished by project design features; and ' • "Level of Significance After Mitigation" discusses whether the project and the project's contribution to cumulative impacts can be reduced to , levels that are considered less than significant. , Section 6.0, LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT, discusses significant environmental changes that would be involved in the proposed action, should it be implemented and discusses growth inducing impacts. Section 7.0, ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT, describes a reasonable range of alternatives to the project orto the location of the project which could feasiblely attain the basic project objectives. Section 8.0, INVENTORY OF MITIGATION MEASURES, , lists mitigation measures proposed to minimize the significant impacts. Section 9.0, INVENTORY OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION, describes any impacts which would remain significant following mitigation. Section 10.0, EFFECTS FOUND NOT , TO BE SIGNIFICANT, provides an explanation of potential impacts which have been determined not to be significant. Section 11.0 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED, identifies all Federal, State or local agencies, other organizations and individuals consulted. Section 12.0, BIBLIOGRAPHY, identifies reference sources for the EIR. Section 13.0, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, identifies responsibilities for monitoring mitigation. Section 14.0, COMMENTS AND , Introduction )N 10-100278 1-8 May 24, 2000 i i GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ' RESPONSES, consists of comments and responses pertaining to the Draft EIR. Section 15.0, APPENDICES, contains technical documentation for the project. 1.5 RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES ' Certain projects or actions undertaken by a Lead Agency require subsequent oversight, approvals, or permits from other public agencies in order to be implemented. Such other agencies are referred to as Responsible Agencies and Trustee Agencies. Pursuant to Sections 15381 and 15386 of the State CEQA Guidelines, as amended, Responsible Agencies and Trustee Agencies are respectively defined as follows: n ~i Il "Responsible Agency" means a public agency which proposes to carry out or approve a project, for which a Lead Agency is preparing or has prepared an E1 R or Negative Declaration. For the purposes of CEQA the term "Responsible Agency" includes all public agencies other than the Lead Agency which have discretionary approval power over the project." (Section 15381) "Trustee Agency means a State agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project which are held in trust for the people of the State of California. Trustee Agencies include...." (Section 15386, part) Introduction JN 10-100278 1-9 May 24, 2000 3 u 1 2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY [1 Il 1 0 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ' 2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2.1 PROJECT SUMMARY ' The project is a concurrent application for an amendment to the Land Use Element and Circulation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and a Zone Change to allow residential and commercial uses on 170.90 acres. The amendment to th Ian e d use designations consist of changes from LI (Light ' Industrial), SI (Service Industrial) and HI (Heavy Industrial) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 64.58 acres, LMR (Low Medium Density Residential) on 91.84 acres and GC (General Commercial) on 14.48 acres. The proposed project includes 727 ' dwelling units, which consist of 218 low density residential units and 509 low medium density residential units. The project includes approximately 116,800 square feet of commercial uses. Amendment to the Circulation Element consisting of changes by ' deleting Mohawk Street as an Arterial north of Hageman Road to Olive Drive, change Hageman Road from a Collector to an Arterial between Mohawk Street and Knudsen Drive/Landco Drive, along with modifying the alignment by swinging it to the north ' a few hundred feet, and to establish a Collector segment for Hageman Road between Knudsen Drive/Landco Drive to State Route 99/State Route 204, and to amend the zoning from M-1 (Light Manufacturing), M-2 (General Manufacturing) and M-3 (Heavy Industrial) to R-1 (One Family Dwelling), R-2 (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling) and C-2 (Regional Commercial) zones on 170.90 acres. ' 2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES/MITIGATION SUMMARY ' The following Section provides a summary of the impacts and mitigation measures included in Section 5.0, Description of Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures, of this EIR. Refer to Section 5.0 for additional information and analysis. 1 ' Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-1 May 24, 2000 4i .~ y o~oLo ~ ~~ ~ ~ Q ~ c ~ U i ca c ~ - _ 9c~ ~> a~ C° c .a ~° ~ Q °~~~ f0 ' LL ~~ ~~~o ~ Z ~ fl.. c n ~ c y ~ w. N • m ° c m ~ ' ~ _w.l _ ui CL O y~'O "d m v ~ O ~ c9 O , U Q ~ :~_. in c ~? -p c ° o O ~ _ .N N (D ~ ~~ ° °~~ ~ CQ C Q ~ U ~ Y ~ C .~ Q L ++ ~ . zQ~ E C9m U ~~~ L ~- ~ C~ C C ca c ~.3~ c o c ui o•o ~° c ~ ~ ~ '~ o is ii ~ u ~ • o o ' ~ -o -o , ~ ~o~ ~ ~ a °' ° °' a ~ ~ ' ~ ~ C °' o co~ o~E m °~ .°''m ° o ~ ~ Q ~ co o N w ~ :° o o ~ U c ter- o ~~ a~ _ ~ ~ p~ ~ c~ c~~ c~ L m o ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q as •o ~ m c ~ E ~ ~ ~ co w o- ~~~~~~ °O-Y ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ c~ cv ` pp vi ~ - cp in U ~ ° a> a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C9 ~ °~ a~ o aci ~ d c ° ~ c ° o --~ °L~ ow ~ c 0 c 0 ~ ~ o o co 3 ' . ~ ._ ~ -p Q C7 ~ m ~ o E ~ CU ;o i ~ c .~ o o ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ Ul io a~ ~ ~ > ~ • ~ ~ ~ i o ~ 'o o L ~ a .~ ~ s a o o 1 ~ O Uv~~~no>Ev,O 23Z Z Z c C .~ co ~ ~ N M O "'' V _ _ ' 1 "_' N (6 ~ Sri Sri Sri ui . ~ ~w ~ ~ pp~ ~ O~ O C C O t~ ~, h C ~ c m 'O O~ ~ Z 0~ C ~ ~ 3, ~°~ ~ ~3' . ~~ d ~~ d a ~ ~ y Q~ maxi C ~a y c~ Q Q ?, -c asa h, i a O .C ... y y~ y`~ ~ c O cp J ~ y a. O ~ ~ w m~= C V D y_~ ° ~ V~ O ~ O O. ~ C Oi a 0 O v ° N a ~ ~ J w ~ Q C Nj d w C 3 V ` . ~ G O y H ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ d m O ,- ~ Ci iL 30pi=o ~ c ' R a ~ •) ~ .: ~~ N ~ ~ V yr ~ w ~v~ z ~ p~ O v i >~ o.y, a~~ co c+ ~ ~ _ ~ O ~? Q = ~ .' :; y G G G m C h C G . C ° O ~ E ~ N , G i E O j~ O r0 ~ w _ N m vi ~ E i O C Rs .Q ~0 N C ..: O ~ ~ ~ ~ O o ,h ~ ~ m O v y ~ ' ~ ~ N ~ ~ C7 N c~ <o ~ ~ 4 p C~ U 4>h.~~Q V M1t~ ~ -. a Q+..h ~ ~ ~ Q)U Vj ~0 QtA ~ LJ.) W ~ m H R to te F- ~ = ~ p N .. L Of M N r .., ' W Q t V1 t[i J ~ ui J to ' ~ O . O O ~ p c O ~ 0 ~ ~ W U ~ ~ ( ' Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-2 May 24, 2000 H O p ~ fo C6 y U U C P a ~ a co -o°> ° ~~~ ~ ~c>a ~ ~ ~c om>, omL~o a~ ~ ~ ~zc3°~ a'~3cn~° Q ~ E o c°~'c~~°~ °~c°ia°ic U ~ ~ o 'N "o ° ~° E °•~ o ~ m ~ co cd ~y, - Co w N L ~ ~ O C ~ L ~ ~ ~ U ~~ O N `~ C O X O~ C~ C~ C N y~~ 'OO C'7 •~ V O '~ O 3 O m~ ~ m >' ~~~ 1 W ~~ rn Z~ v~ cwo N .~ X w ~ Q c cn J a>c m ~~ iii c a~ Q•? °O oU yp ° ~ o ~ ''>U c~~o ncn'm E ~ ~C7 ~j~:oU ~.~ O o c.c O ~O n.s ° > > N n0 c o~ o , o.~Y c cL o•3 ~• ac ~~ o o.~w .~ ~ a~ .° - d ~ ~ ° a - ° ° n co N ° ~ o ° ~ ~ j O 0 d d) O~- L 'O T O O O O y ~ '~ Q v) ~ ~ _ °• •E --° Q = ° ° > ° c Y c E -o w co co ~ _ ~ ° ~ a~ o o ' a~ W ~ ~~f4~ >~o> c~°~~°c>ac~ °'E~ ~ ,~ _ '~ ° ~ ~ ° c ° _o ~ a~ ~ w ~ n co ° co _ Q o m E f9Y a~ c `o `o o ~' ~° y n ° m E ~~ o a~ c a - O ~ °~ ° ,~ °~ a~ c Q •~ ~:a ~ n~ ~ ~ °- U ~ -a c ° N•L a~ ~:a m O m ~ co ~ Eu~d~n°~c~.°a~o ~' _ ~ ~' o~~~U~~oa~Q°~~a~.c~na~ o~~ '~ ~ o ° o ~ •~ z E ° ~ ~ ° cn •- ~ a~ z d co n nom.. O ~ ~ cv v) E w ~ E 3 ~' E > 4. con co ~ v N N ~ to tf L G "' ~ G Q: N '" O O ,~ ~ a H "" d G~ "' G , i 3~° t'` ~ O C w~ _ N Q .U7 i N~ d a rp a 4:, v.. y a•~ . L G C d E: ~~ w V r. E•~2w 01 y co a w ro0 V"3`v. ~ c0~ ~ c~c va~y~4Y ~ ~~a~i~2oo0 ~aQ a, ~ o c°','ow~~ o E m a ~ ° ° ¢ `oa c~ ~ y of ~ E a~ ~ G e o~"a0~ ~ a o ao>"- u ~'a G a~ 3~ Q N C co !~= d' O a = G ~ ce co y ':. y ~° ca ' 3 g V ~ •c is 'C a " ~, ~ '° = '° E G ~ a, C c y co .., ~ V ~ ~ a~ V o G .~ O G y C G ~ ~~~ h h d~ O N~ O a d N Q~~ V y 0 0\ p~ tp ~., C ~ ' ~ ~ m a~i v '~ ~ a O O p ~ `- ~ ~ ~ 4; ~ 3 ~ y ~ 'y k d o~~~ a C d p i= d d ~ ~ Q~ ~ d p t w d G~i ~~ Os >_ a ~ a>m ~ c,op 3 a~~C9 a ~ ~-~ a~ ~~: d E ~ E a~i~'y ~ ~ ~ E q v o 3 ~ ~_ r N U u~i Q N cri Z ~O W U W N N u'i Executive Summary , )N 10-100278 2-3 May 24, 2000 Q U Z t7 N Q Z O m ~ 'O >• c c a~ a 'c •~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ d ~ O O _ U ~ W ~ ~ Q ~ ~ r Q' ~ •~ ~ - O CEO ~ ~ Y ~ U D) ~ ~ ~nm"~ m~ ~ ~ ~ aU ~ _V O O ~ N ~ ~ d ~ ~ L Q aU' co •=' E ca cu'o > U ~ ~ ~ U ~ E ~ (n O ~ ~ U C L a~0~~•3 N H U Q a _ C ~ N .c .o c ~ ~ U ~~ _~ to .~. C U f9 .~ a o E m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .L,,, C ~~~~ c o~.n3 .U O ~ O ` ~ ~ U N O C C N c9 O O ~ O O N U O E U w ~ O_ U N j 7 ~ ~ U ~ .~ U .~ d U N O r s ~ N ~ C v, 3 L ~ ~ 3 Q U C Y ~ O) O c 3 ,a C9 f9 Q ~L O ~ c o O ~ U U ~ ~ Y (0 N ~ N C o ~ o U ~ O 47 C U ~ f .~ ~ .C N is m .n co •~ y - c m O. fQ ~ C ~ ~ N ~ ~ d ~ O ~ ~ ~ Q' C L co iii E N - C ~ ~ .a E w O L O ~ N N a f9 ~ L ~ ~ ~ tq t Q1 ~ O ~ ~ C ~ ~ N ~ C to C U .~ •~ C fD O ~ ~ ~ N - ~ a~ `~ s Q1 c ~ a cv ~ ~ O C C U fD C U C ~ (p ~ ffl ~ d °'~ 3 ay ~ c~ ~ is 0 0 o a~i m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ' a~ .~ f0 O C O O ~ O Y ~ v aU ~~ w n Z ~ ~ 3 N ~ ~ ~ ~ M N N Lf) Lf7 c9 .~. U cp Gi ~ C ~ ~°. `~ °c~ C G> ~, C C O ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ., O~~~ C V V y 0 a C m ~o:. E C~ C C O) ~ ~ C: ~ H m C ~0 tp «_ = G ~ cp ~ .~ ~ V7 G C O ~0 ~, ~ ~ ~ ~- o.~ ~ ~ H cp O y y Q c ~~ w ~ ~ d _ ~ O O ~ U 4: ~- ~ ~ « .~ ~ ~ d 4 v _ ' _ ~ ~~ m a O V i N Q~~ ~~ C R ~ n y ,~ a Q k ~ ~•S o v a ~~,2 c y Q o 3U mR y o~;;m~ot0c~~ w a oa~~iQ ~a y Q- crow' c,"c ~o!_; '; ~ H c.~? aai ~ ~ ° ~ E o °~'y ° ~ °~a ~ E . . va a a m H H • C N ~ M O N O N ..I ~ U ~ Z ~O WU W N Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-4 May 24, 2000 ii 1I LJ N ~ O N ~ ° ~ U C ~ ~ U d ° o ~ a'~ g m"-EaU o ~ m ~ o Z ~`•= pL o Q ~ c --~ LL_ ~' Z cn c ~ ~ a~ o ~ ~ vi 0 W E~c'aa~ m c s •~ ~ U Q ~ ~ ~ ~ vi ~ ~ - a~ c ~p o E ~ m i Q •°' ° a~ ~ •c a~ Z o ai °• c ;o cYv ~ Z ~.~ ca ~m ~ tq T C C ~ ~ ~ >. ~ L L V ~ ~ ~ ~ > O (9 L ~ to ~ L O ~ U ~ ~ C O 3 F- -~ ~ L ~ - .~ ° ~U ~ O p ~ rn ~ v ~p !~ U ~ ~ N ~ Q !~ ~ N ~ ~ U X .~ C (0 ~ f6 7 d .~ :~ ~ C w LA ' 7 ° Q L ~ o .c o o c E ° E am a~ ~ ~ o~ ~'~ a~ ~ in _ ~ ' ~ ° ~ m ~ ~ ~~ ~ °•m N a~~ o ~ =•o °~ m 3 0 0 c ° am m a~-o °... viL o a a~~ •a ai s a .~ ~ o a o a ~ o~ c ~~ w Y~ io >, a~ cv ~ ~ _~ ° Z ~ f° ~ o ~. ~ ~~ m o m L .~ oU cn >. Y ~ ~ ~ o ~ Z a`°i Q ~ ~ ~ n ~ m o ~ ~ v o '~ c ,~o„ ° ~ c ~ ~ ~ a ca O E cao °• vi ~ c a o ~ a•°i o ° ~ w a> o ~' ~ ~° ~ .~ ° o ~ >. c E•N ca g cam ° >L m.o °~.~ o a~w.. c ~ Q c -o m N •io ~ c~ o F- ~~ U c~ U o j o 0 0 o aci ~ C7 g ~~~ j m .o•°-Y ado m,o•° c o ~~•~~ N~'o _ ca _ -o .. ~ Z ° c o 0 ~ ~ ° 3 a E Z H E o c`a .~ cn cco .~ E '~ ~ ~ ~ •°'o ~ ~ 3 cUO ;i' ~ N N ' N <'') M M lf'7 ~ t!') tf') ~ ~.~ ~',~~ a -mc ° ~ = >` ~~=' o ~ ~ H - U 3 ~ m ~, ~a m ~~ o = m - 1- o c> ~~ m ~ .~ a Q~' N c ~~ m y ea '~ y~ ~ C ~o ~ v tq ~ a~ ~ E g w 7 c a~ ~ y ~~ ~ 3 y'o ~+ ~ CO ~ L G a V ~ U~ m J Q CCi +~ a~~ L y G t6 U ~ ~ fC0 ~ W jp ~ ~ lD = .~ a ~0 ~ ~ y ~ m a~ ~= c C7 J ~ .~ h o c ~ d .~ U c G~~ y V e m Qo~o~xp,o~0 a Z o~ ~ p,a v~ o~ mp,QC, a, Qp, > E,~ Qa~N rn~ v m a h v,t~ ~ :: a m ny ~~:w y y R O > ~° w ~ ~ N 0 Qt M R ~'`~ U ~n m ~ iri V ~n Z ~O W U W ~„~ N N Executive Summary )N 10-100278 2-5 May 24, 2000 i~ { r a 5, i' U Q 4. _~ H Z a U LL Z W J m a ~ _ Q Z _ W N Q W Z 0 _ f"' Q ~ _ H ~ ' 1 U a a ,1. z ~~ WU W y vi c >. ~ a> o -O •O O C w O fD ~ ~ w U ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ o ~ ~ ~ ~~ o~ o 0 > w ~ U ~ c ~ o -0 3 -o a c ~ " ~ ~~ o cv ~ ~ L Q> ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i~ U ~'^_ U U ~' ~ O N ~ O U T C O cp "' ~ C Z C0~° aocn p y O LL d O L ~ h O w C :J (n X U JN 1 0-1 002 78 cv m c m cn ~ - o - ~ ~ a~ >. ~ a~ -o 0 ~ 3~ c _o > v> ~ s ~v c o"a c 3 •c c O O O ~) 7 m ~ cn U L N O cn ~ y O O ~ - ~ ~ •N Vi ~ C C N 7 U ~ N C '- d- C O x >, 'O .U ~ 3 o n y 3~ c a ~, o O t ~ a~ o> 0 0 0~~ c 0• 3 •~ ~ Z` c m~ w~ Z o c U o m o ° 0 3~ ~ `!' ~ c ~ n o ~ . ~ U >, a ~ ~ o ~ a~ •m a~ m ~ L r ~ ~~ ~' ` t i c ~ o~ m .n •'= o c a~'iro..o ~~ ob~ a~~ o~ U~y E~ ~'~ c .~_ •o •~ ~ ~ ~ m ~~ a~ c c ~ ~ - a a o ~ O .c4 0 0' C U ~ ~ >O cU0 •> O ~ C .C Q) L Cv h ~ y ~ ~ ~ o o ~ ~ acv ~ a~ c ~ c`o >, ~ `~ ~ d ~ ~ O ~ U ~ U ~ ~ fv ~ ~ ~ U ~ w O N O 'O f9 >, to O ~. N O ~ ~ •C ~ M •- O ~ . ~ ~ Z `~ ~ C .X ~ ~ U d p ` C '~ ~ ~ N d C O LL Q ~ _ ~ 7 N O O cn ~ 0 7 U 0 to ~ O ~ U N M cv ~ ~ c ~ c c a> a~ a~ ~ ~ ~ o ' o o a~ c`v w .n N ~ O ~ c a ~ ~ o ~ ' '° c -o N O N U U C ~ C N ccu a~~ '~ ~~ o o m in w o'Lw TQ,`O~•c O ip N "' U C •C ~ N cp N O _O C O O N~ O- j~ U O~ 0 0 U w O r .D ,> O o- ~ ~ :~ ~ a n c _~ c~v o f4 .~ ~ ~ N ~ O L O ~. N .n L ...~ O ~ 7 N .~ ~ N O ~ 7 C U O t' D- Y ~ y N - N L ~~ N O~ .~ O d O O H cv cn c c 3 a~ U ti c a N M Executive Summary 2-6 May 24, 2000 z a U C N C~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y C ~ X fn ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ n ~ W O C ~ ~ ~ _O N ~ O ~ w N ~ W i ~ ~ ~ d j 0 w ~ U Z T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ w ~ ~ ~ N ~ L C C C ~ ~ > N O ~ O ~ - C #' O .U N 'O 6 C ~ ~ - ~ <n . N O ~ N "~ "~ U .D N F- U Q a Z ~O W U W N C ~ ~ (0 ~ N ~ _~ ~ Q ~ M t!7 ~ Q ~ ~ y y ~ ~ ~`q ~ 7 (4 y Q j ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C O (9 ~ ~ ~ ~ C O ~ ~ O • .~ m ~ O ~ ~ .~ ~ N •~ O O ~'? O Z ~ in Z M ~ ~ M M M N cp N G ~~ '= ~4 b U G G ~' d d Qf C ~0 m G U S C R V ' y' U =, i9 ~ G C N N U O. ,+ ~ O i :: C~ = ~ ~~ tj v ~ Q G ~'~' m G 3 y O ~ 0~~~~.'~ ' Q .~ ~~ ~~„ ~ U G O y O O ~~ ~~~ N~-0 ~ E O ~ J ~ ~ ~ N~~+ ~ ~ v C ~0 w _ ~ ~ U ~ H = d1 Q 4i h - O O Gi ~ ~ ' R ..: O U G G~ ~p ~ .gym 4 ~' N V y d w ' _~ o~ ~ ., .. ~ c~ c E H~ ~~ O ~ 4! Q o ~~4: ~ 0 3. ~ ~ ~ ., O e Q ~ :p a~ a y j >~ ~ C 4 "' ~ ~ ip ~ y C c ~ ~ b C p ~ ~ G ~ vj R ~ G d > ~ ~ e m a~ R ~~~ ~ eo o. m eo ,~ ~ .: v..::r".y v to a , o v ~~ E m s ma a o ~° ~° a~ ~o ~ o Q~ a. ~ h o Q ~ , ~ ~ o. a ~, c ~h .. -. R ~ , o a 3mv~ ~ E a~'y m ~ .~ ~ U m m ~'~ ~ m ~, i= ~ 'C M d ~ v E ~n __ ~ iri ~ U ~ Sri ~ U ~ ~ti Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-7 May 24, 2000 1 1 i 1 I ~, N W Q W Z 0 Q _~ {"' ~a,v,a~o c ~ ~ ~~3~c~ 7 ~ (NO .V ~ ~oonU o '~ E n .r ~ m ` 'o ~ c o m c ~ L v ~ '= c ~~ m3 ~ ._ .. c ~ o vi O U (SS O ,~ C _N L O O U > C QO-O C (6 ~ E U L "'' f0 -p U U uj U C N O ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ (0 N ~ O ~ ~ U O N ~ C 'N O ~ ~ C O N Z ~._ c0inm N O ~ ~ ~ . C U 7 ~ .r ~{y y L ~ ~ ~ O U ~ t6 O ~ ` C O 3 O ~ou_~ C O L O Oy...Q U ~ C _ N f0 C N U O) O O C O ~ U O-'- O CO O ~ 3 N U ~ - O ~ N O ~ i O d tLA (y6 Q d U Q a W U o: 0 N W J H J V t9 V O N_ 2 C t0 R v .~ 0 0 d R s L Q y m d ~ N C d O C: Z ~O ' lil U ~ W N ~ JN 1 0-1 002 78 :~t (E tf ) ~ ~- ~- Q cpi L~ ~ O N p O> E r "O O '6 U ~ ] C O N N ~ v'p CO ~ n L ~ M~ 7 O U N ~ ~ fC0 E Y ~ -O 'N ~ f0 y a3 0 N~ ~ 7 d N 0 U O W N y~ U C a~ N U N ~. Y~ .C O N N (6 '~ w (•pp O p U~ ~~iaa~ca~iE~m ~~ +~ C "O ,~ 0 y L ~' U r L N f6 N 0 7 f6 "- - 0 0 '~ N O~~~ p C y f4 ~ O -p ~ Y ~' a N U N ++ L i n ~ N ~ ,Op ~ ~ E C ~ ~ ~ ~ .L-1 N W p >i ~ L N C~~ `~ C O R' Y U F- ~ w 'o m ~ W m • • • N~ O V~ O a ID ~ O O 'C Ri w ~ ~C O O cCp ~ C C 3 v ~ y d Q ~ ~ 'C O ~ C y h _ d N O~ O . 1p ~ h 'O V Q- OJ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ v v O j C U~ ~£ W U y •~ C Q d V~ C O~ ~ of 4. cp > am~~ w.mEw,. C ~ U f0 ~ ICO y cCII E ~ h i v~~ v ~'~a~m~'c~~c a'oa' ~ ° m,~a a> 2-8 ~ C~ N~~ C C> L (6 L O .~ _~ O o c4 S L Y Y ~, 'O''D Y ny~~ N >, "OL U d ~ .~ N C6 ~ d .Q O "= 'O ~ N O O O ~ ~ 3 0 O O~ w a~ 7 -p O .C C O U f6 U 0~ w •~ N> O U n c n c~~ a? ~ o~ o n cu~omc_caca-~ ,...~ ~, O (0 3 ~ C ~ ~ n ~+ ++ O U O~`; 7 C E U U N O f0 O N ~ ..c o myo>, U~o o co gi p- o ,~ c o +. ~ n O~ U U O m U U E O~ N C > u~ CO ~ ~ C ++ U O ~ O O N CO ~~ (6 R U C o n 3 U O ~ C C U (6 4_. O O (q O w 3 '6 P L C- C L~ C6 n +--' f9 N O- U~ t0 O U n N !~ ~ U m ~ ~ (6 •tq ~ ~ CO (~O L L! ) .y V cC Q. m v 7 U Executive Summa May 24, 2000 U N .~ Q N c~ y 7 O c~ a~ C O .~ O Z N tf> N O h `~ O U C c0 0~ C ~ c0 C U N O O j ~ ~ a ~° _> N ~ ~ y U ai N t!") fJ ~, ~ ~ a> ~- rnc ~~ o ~•3~~ ~ O ~ U T ~ ~ ~ QU YO -O (4 ` 'O t~ C O f6 ~ (0 ~= C y ~ m 3 (6 N C ~ N fq U N U N C6 O~ C•V E .fl O ~ N N C .n Q .L3 C N ~ ~ U L ~ U U tC ~ C ~~ ~ ~ f0 N N O ~ ~ Z N ~ m v [0 W d' Q w Z O Q _~ H 'O C N O)•D (CO ~ .C N ~ f0 ~ y ~ C U m O 7 ~ Q f9 ~a~'icoEm 7 •p to O _- ~ O ~, L (0 ~ U rT~ O - 'o ~LLU ` L ._ ... o r ai a~iw "v cn c N w O oa>ocvU a ca~c o~ca~can QO~ ~ •V O L n U ~ O O --.~ m ~U~ w O y `O p` a y i- N .r ~ d~ 0` C Y U O (0 oornn.~m Lai ~y o a~ o-m_ ~ O o U 0 ~ ` f9 N 0 i _ L~ O C U O O O c~o:~oa~ •~ o °~ mU ~ a> ~ m t -o a~ o°'ai ~$°La~ ~ o~.. U3~ ~L N .` L L ~ ~ ~ ~ N (0 ~~.3co~ac`av O y U•d O`~ •C ~ m O ~ 7 N ~ t~0 w v `m E~v~~in~ m m ~ r ~ ~ tf) In .r e `~~o m ~ ~ ~ O R 1' N ~ a ~ 'Q ~ ~-a~a Q o d ea ], a a,v~,a ~ ~ m W ..~. V G t0 'O _ O ~ ~ ~ 4 hh. N z ~o WU W N N J O D z Q } O O w N ui • ~ o a i ~ ~a gym,, v O N cp C C ~' Q C y v V a ~'y m ~ o _ g 0 ~' `0 t 3 a~ . a ~ ~ D1 h ~ ~ O w Qua oQ cm 3~ • ~ ~ t0 d ~ ~ U ~ ~ V a ~- y .~ a~ no a ~y.;° O ~ y~ 4 ~p C w y, ` a Cmy ~ w~ vJ+=..~ m O aoi ~n t9 ~ci ~ -_ ~ n O N 0 ~ L ~ .C ~w'•~U 7 ~ C f0 N > C ._. U •- O ~ ~ .n ~ •u~ o a o .4; N C W Y N U N C (6 C6 m ~ ~ C (0 "- a ~ > o 0 o w ° U c ny a~ n _o w m ~ ' c 'o ,r U O O O C c a~ o- :.. ca f9~ «f6~± ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N C UL•> f0 aU~O,m v ;"a C~ C L y 0 7 ~ f9 .r C CO U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ N f6 ~ ~ ~ ~ Y ~ ~ O y ~ N N ~ C N Y ~L per"'' - h ~ O L ~ <9 O O '3~ ~ m~ a~ c °~ -• a~=~._~~ voa? ~ c cn w -0 3 (0 ~~ ~~ (C y ~ ~ Ci ~~rnENc U ~ ttS N n'y d ~ O (lS ~ U voi ~ ns N N In lf") Ln lf) ~•o: ~ ca ~vw ~ e a rn ti to Z C co O ~ tq Q a~~ uo C y C = is v N~ C~ R of y ~~a~o ~w ~ H._ N ~ C ~ ~ N ~ C Q V w ~ Ip N v ~w~, ~- ~ c+s QEt3~ m E ~- ~ c, o o , Q ~ ~ = Q'"' w ~~ a- m a ' 3 c v o. ~' ~~wv _ .:a ~`~ =a ~ ~va'y = E ~ d ~ 3 y~ _~ y V ~ V 0 ~• ~ a ~ Q•ooa-od~~o=a~ V V ~ ~ y v m 3 t q i7 4 G~ ~ O W N 'o ~ to Sri 1 1 t i i f el Executive Summar JN 1 0-1 002 78 2-9 May 24, 2000 ~~ 1 N c 'O L cn U Q) h O p H cam=' a~ w .c ~ ~ ' V E w a := 3 c as d ~ ~ " c ~ m '`-' w ~ ca ca o m a U ~ o~ m ,... w E Q F.. ~ c ca co h ~ ca ` Z m m.~' u°i- c O Q (ate y .U7 7~'~L~ U ~' c LL ~ ~ ~ o .m ~ ,m 3 co cn ca a -- m .- ~ U.c~_~EE~,~, ca ..+ p -p caw U m W .~ a n. ~ .c ' ° ~ .U ai O m >. m o cao _o ~ V Y fa ._.. y C O~~ O c '~ ~ w c p m '° .~ Q ~~' 7 U~ Q. y ~ C p fa - 'C Q "° Y ~ Zt.C Ca f6Z.~ (a tnm ~ - ~~ ~O V 4' N ~~ O ~ O O 'C ~ h ~ L . m '° ~ y L y U -C N w (a w ~ E ~ n. ~ 0 3 ~ axi ~° c N ~ c _ v, CU •~ •~ •~ ~ o ~ m ca a> ca c a~ ~ c t c~~a ~ 'o .S ~ v ~ ~ .E N W ~ ~ m a c :~ a~ ca fl- m w m~ W ~ a~ a~ a,=~~m~,~mE ~~ ~ ca ca ° c w ~ ~ >, "y o t= v ~ ~ ~ w ° ~ c ~ m ~ ~ ~ o U Q m 7 7 .~ C fa y ~ ~a ca fa U •- c 3 (a LL. m m O` 'O m °' m ~ 'a E~ ~ .c ~ a a~ E O o ~; c c ~ caa ~ ~ m m ~ ~ •~ co ~ O a_>i Q m ~ o ~ ~~° a o ca ~~ o~ ~.- m C7 y E a~ a~ m O m U~ a~ co m~~ w ~ m a~i o o •°- m~ ~' m° o aci ~ Y m U w~ Z Z ~~ ~ n.E~ oU~ vcim co cUa M ~ r l!j l!7 (p ' In t,f) t!7 ~ O O C ~_ .c w ~ ,.: c0 a C ~ U .h ~ m ..; .C C ~C C ~ „' .> c0 U V V ' ~p d ~ m w ~ C1 = Ip .. p o= cB a~i C aro ~ 0 3~ ami a-cm„~.~ ~ 43+' 3 `0 ~ p J ~ ~' h~" ~ y~ d G ~" v' h m~ C "' V~ m `-' O y Q) O ~ C ~ V 0'Q ~ ~0 ~ N m Qa 4y V O ~ m ~ N o~~ v V ~O m~ cp Os O Cvi w. d LL m .U c`a Q O ~~ ~ C U o~~ .C Q ~ OQ O~ y G O f0 ~ O Y O y~ „O I~ ~ y~ v C ::. _ Q ~ ~ ~ O h A ~ C ~ ~ w A C r. ~ p ~ ~ •,^, ~ . co L . m y ~O N _~ C ~ E Q ~ ~ c y ~ GOi v ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ C . ~ ,C . y d ~ ~ ~ O ~ > 'C ~ ~ ~' O r...~ ~ ~ , W ~ C ~ C ~ t r. ~ Cry ~ Q d O m > Q~hy ~, E-~- 3a~4.yy 2 3 Omca`.v~a=uy~E •y ~ Z .. c ~ Q 3 c. `~ E v ~ ~ x ~? ~ ~ ~ rn cD W cn U cri 2 Q cti Z ~O W U N ~~ Sri Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-10 May 24, 2000 1 Q z N W Q W Z O Q H N U Q a Z ~O W U W -o m -o ~ a~ a~ a~ a~ a~ ~ -a c ~ o a> >, a~ >. C > ~ ~ N ~~L~~LL C C C"''L CL ~ ~q .' ' d (0 (6 ~ .` (0 m c6 (D w ° • ~ ~ a~ ~ f° a •a ~ o E ° ~ h ~ a~ c' .~ ui o o a ~ -~ v, co ~ c o c mow. X'~ -~~, a ~Q~ E N _ . - m p L O C O ~ O .O ~~ L ~ '~ ? C :~ N f9 O~ c4 Q ~ U O O Ow- N C9 .O L 'p F- C O O ~. .L-. .a O V) =p ~, ~ Q ~ ~ p~ 0 (0 Y~ L O L N a O N C V O O~` a ~ + -~ p _ > ` ~ v) `) O h ~ ~ L O L ~ .N O U U ~ ~ O 3 ~ - co m -- a~ ~ o c o - ~ ~~ O~ ~ O ~~ L m E O U~~~ ~ U C~ p O U N m- N °' ~~ N N O m~3m~~~~'m`"w~~EV~ic~ acio°c~.m~co~ Z d~3°3~mm:~oaaci~~ c~m`oC~.E3~~Na N C9 L M M ~ ~ ~ lf) l17 In ~ m C O di '"' ~: +y. N a m V ° 'O L h ~ ~ = p 'O p ~ •• O Ql . G G G ~ d TJ N G m O G G ~ = C .' .Q m~ O O m Gi .c of ° ~ m ` ~.?E.`3cm` •~ ~ ° oo~~m~cco m 0w, i ;,• ~c... a~ -c ~ ~ > 3 p 'i 4 6~~ ~~ .~ j G~ L O y p v c p v N ~p O N .O ~ C p -C a O h~ a m m ~~ .•„ ro v es O ° a°i v 'O .y c ~ ~_ c 'o° ~0 3 o y a ro~ t0 0 ~0 ' G ~~ v C O 0 ~ O G~ G ~~ ~~om'°,~ $ G~ 0 9 v) V ~ w O y ~ Qo~~ ~~mmn~~m~.,°wc ~ ,~~oU,~ c m ~ ' 3 c m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~~o._ m• m c . ~ ~ ~~ ~ Q~ y c ina~ia ~ c ~ c U m C i C~~ O~ ', h ~ oa o ~ o Y c £--~ c°'i•.. e ~ ~~ •~ ~~~ U ~ C~ G) O O Q~~ •C ~0 p ~~ ~ ~~ o ~ E~•3 vii c y °; w p c O +. O m ~~`'~ c~mot 3 a'> c`o ~ `a ~ e c ° Q~ ~C ~~ ~ ~ m ~ v~ Q +.. ~0 ° ~' °' ~ G - ' G ~ ~0 ~ ~ ~ ~ - 3 Gi V ~ ~ ~. ~p Gl V •c~ o c~ '0 0. ~~ ., a c ~ c i a ~ i~ m N p N i ~ ~ v u' ~ 0 y ° y .._ _ o i m a O .o c a ~ A C ~ i ~= ~ Of Q O O 3 ~ . ~ H h V m w v1 p v •v ~ •G a c 4~~ C ~ j . . v ~ a> m b~ O Y O O v 4. V d~ ,~O , ~ O c L V y ~~° ' m °'ooa'`0 w ~3~0>~03~•'o~~Q~o•a~a y~'~a~ ~ a i °i ° ~ ~'o m E ~~° ~' o coo `acGah ~•'o ~h m E o~ 3oD :'w v 0 c~ a r~ cD - cD ~ O Sri ~v>~c~ C O h •~ ~ .~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ o 3~ ~o ~ a~ N 'o ~ ~ ~ ~ N _O OU ~ '~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ U ~ O ~ f0 (4 7 w N ~'p mfl'OL ~ C V) O ~ o ~ ~ o (~ ~ ~ O ~ (D ~C ~ ~° ~ ° o- ~ C QJ C O ~ p coo > is •c ~ a~i L C ~ ~ ~Q p U 7 Q' r" p N d O ~ U M Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-11 i 1 May 24, 2000 U Q a _~ - f- z ' a v LL_ Z N W J m Q Q Z _ N W Q W Z 0 H Q 1 N H U a a ~~ I Z ~O W U W N C L V O ~_ ~ O .C O ~ (0 J U U L C O O O .~ O `~ ~ a~~ ~'3U ~U .~_~O N c~U N C Y U f6 ` C O) ~ O ~ CO O O O ;d ~ ~ ' ~, m ~ C3 .o ~ U 'C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ Q1 ' V ~ (9 U O C ~ ¢ ~ ~> m O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ c - o ~ ~ °~ ~ U _o p 0 O) C E O vci -o ~ ~ a~ ~ ~~~ c v~~a;~~Qa~ a~ ~ upi ~ c c .~ f6 o d ~ a.~ ~~ W LL(nC~~~ M d ~ ~ O 'd wa~~~c~ U m " ~'D 7 ~ c p E~,~ w a~ c o a c °- ~ o~-O O Q)~> N U c o °c' `~ Q) f9 X ` _ ~ O fn U ~ _ N O- N N U C ~' O CO ~ c ~ (p . V (0 c N ~ nw ai c O ~`~mU ~ r ~ d a~ M N d V C to N 7 ~o m N 7 O l0 N t0 U ~ h - T L_ (V O O p~ C O L ~Ea~-OEfOO.Ernrnn3 N ~ C N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ °- ~ f° °' `~ - `~ ~ ~c °- c g O C O ~ Y O ~ L = w .~-. -O ~ f9 :o ~ c 3 ~ ~,o~~ ~ o ~ L y o ~ ~ a~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N C9 fU O ~ ~ c f`4 w ~ ~~~";~ nc a~ a~ O O O N O _~ '~ O :~ ~ O •V ~ fD fD~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ~.O- ~A 0 0 ` ` Q >. O ~ mm~vQy> 3o-°c 3 ~ 'O N C9 N O ` ,~ 'O ~ ~ N 'p O ' O Q1 ~ ' V (p ~ U N ~ ~ ~V O n O~~~~ o~ 0 O~ O O c~ n~ 3 n~ a w m~ n-a .~ L m~~~ v l17 ~ ~ ~ ,c c O c ~ ~ O .a ~ N ~ ~ ~ Q ~ N ~ ~ N n ~ °~ ~ ~.-: m ~.n m w c n~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cya °~ o ,.- c a~ o o U ~~ ~ .N Q ~ ._ i 3 y ~ c' c v °' 3~ p N C~ O y •- d 3 ~ ~ ~~~~ ~.X ~~ ~ 7 _~ L (Q O O ~"' C ~ O '"~ O . ._~. ~ ~ U O (9 L (0 L p~,a~E~oEw.~3 O N (6 -p O C O L ~ c L c ~n .c o 3 0 O (p N y~~ C= ~, U BEY n'mon~ ,o ~ is ~ o c c E E c ~~ oa~oo d~ .~., w~ w V 'D U U .n v L!') ham" (p C U p> Q a~ Z 1~4 O 4G1 = v ~ O c0 •O ~ v~ C ..: ~ v '" G Gi ~ ~ y Q O ~ •' ~~ ~~ ~ V A~~ a d O V~~ .~ N ~, ~ Q C v~ 01 ~ i G1 C ~ .~ i O w t0 a te, O cp G~~ ~0 t d~~ L a ~ ~ ~ .~ v N G d s G u p, 3 0~ ~D W A C Gy! d~ d 0 V GCi O~ ~~ >. {~ ~ d ro 3~ G O d O >_ ~ L ~ ~. w io ~ ~ O G eyp C '.:~ a ~ ~ ~ O ~ . ~ ~ h V O ~Qy a ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ v ~ t ~ G OO E O > ~ ~n ~s w 'O O +~,, C O U m 0~ C y y (A C~ tp ~ C~ O .O ~ Q ~ ~ O C = ; 0 H ~ ~ ~ v G O O 4~ a~.E O~?aa~2t~N~ C QV a Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-12 Ma}~ 24, 2000 1 1 r N W N Q W Z O Q N H V Q a z ~o W U W ` N ` t9 C f0 C ~• w d C C U~ ~ 4_. C ~«- ~ ~ n ~ n~ C N Q ~ ~ ~ o ~ m ~i E~ aci Ew n`° ~a~i ~L ~ no m`m _ n ~w ~ i ~ T ~ ~ ~ w O N > ~ C O U~ O L 'y ~~~ ~ 'O O L N mL N 3 O w n 7 ~ n~ •> O v) ~ C O> E O~ O :) A d O"' ~ O O O >,O m~ ~~~wm c ~ m 3 ~ a ~ ~ ~° °~ L ~ ~ `~ o a~ E O -o o c~ m~ ~~~ ~o U c o n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m N E n ~' - ca o ~ oc~~°'~m ~' E v o ~ .~ a? 3 ~ n E ~ c~a ~ U V JN 1 0-1 002 78 C (9 ~ >. ~ fp "O O C N "O ~ ,~ '0 >, N N _O C f9 O L 7~ (p C C L .D ~ C N C ~ L_ ~ 'C w ~r0. L •C N (0 i- a~;~~ca~ ~c~ m ~ ~EWa> ~ c~ ~~ w o~ N u •N o~ Q _ W ca ~~ , p U O ~ Y E U ~ ~ ~ CV `~ O ~ C O to ~ (U 'C Y6 O L U N w O C U _ m m n m U~ a~ `~ ~~~~ o m w~--. (0 _N ~~ 0 0 ~ C N D O~ N O 0 0 ~ N _ ~ 'O ~ .~' ~6 ~ Y C C a C7 w L = oU y.~ ~ ~ T~ ~. ~~ E o ~ c ~ ~ m m a h c~ o~ a~ ~ 3 ~~ o ~ m f4 c ._ ~ v ~.~ so cE~nw •-~oN~ ~ n C ~. ~ _N ~~~ C_ O O C w C C •O c~ a a m ~ ~ co ai U ~ m ~ 3 ~ .S O H ~ ~ ° uvi cvv •tv c~ ~ , , If> d O'"'"" ~ m >~~'` C ww O ~ V L _ O=~~ O t O C v ~'" C ~p v L ~ ` U `~ +4% C1 C L 3 V 41 ` ~Ow;.a,~c O to Via` ~ ~ ~,,~ ~; ~~a ay aos o C ~ ti v ,~ m~ G~ +t„ G Gyi .Q O ~ o~~ m m m in V v y ,C C p d p,C m ~w ~ QN H~~V .+ p Gxi N w H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ ~ C c ~ t $ o~ m y y ,.. m .y, m ~ ~' =~ , Q ~~ o os o ~~ c ~~ a d as ~ o a'o a~n a~ ~ o,a > a. ~ d w ~ c° m o a"i.E $v~ ~~ vi c`~m0 x ~ o ~ a ~n Executive Summary 2-13 May 24, 2000 1 T ~ 'O tll ~~ 0 tll ~ C >+ t0 P T O _C ~ tll 0 tD W~ 'O ~ N N O p O N T O •~ ~ tll ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ow O " O O U ~ d ~ ~ O "O w ~ •x N U ~ ~ O Q C t `~ - ~ Y '' . - 7 ~- ~ p ~ N C9 i >, N 2] CD C9 ~ O • w N O O 7 ~ y ~ ' = ~ O~ N .O w ~ O w ~ O t1 ~~ C -O y o c ~ U ~ C O L O tll _ C9 C y O ~ O d O ~ C L . w tll ` y L . tll > o ai c to ~ co a .L. ~ v 'n ~ N w ~ ~ ~ w. w w H ca ~ ~ 0 0 N 0 0 O w L . . , to ~ -p t ~ O 'o ~ vf9i W Q' 0 . y 0 e ~ N O 0 ,.- ~ '~ ~- ,~ 7 N N t9 `a N O ~ O ~~ O C `~- ~ O C U O -OO .~. .D ~ C9 ~ C tp 'O ~ ~ >' a C 0 >O tll tll O N t4 ~ C O tll O N 7 0 y tll O• N~ •~ W O E ~ V~ w~ O C y y p O O t0 O ~ C _ . . . O_ C C U 0 7 fl. "-' ~ N y c9 Q W T U U O (D f0 - O w. C O -O ~ uJ O E w C t9 ~ U y y U O C R ~ y O O L U a c O J w C ' ~ ~ O~ tll > O O> ~ U 'D O .~ ~ O ~ . N ~ O ~ :~ ~6 •~ fll ~ ~~ ~ ~ O m ~ ~ .~ tll ~ ~ w tT ~ to a ~ 0 3 to c ~ ~ >. = o 0 ~ C C ~ U O ~ •~ ~ ~ o o y ~ ~ cv a~ - C C o Z :D v ~ d O to ~ ~p N tll 0 0 Q. U O p ' f0 > p C ~ U " ~ ~ ~ C O tll > tll . ~ y 0 Q "" O ,O L ~ w C ,O f0 Y ~ -O f9 'X ~ N L ° ~ a c ~ ~ ~ = ~ a O_ c ~ o ~ o o a w .` ~ c >, ~ ~ o a ~ "O in .~ ~ . .. LO •~ ° ~ -o ° ~ ~ "- ~ ~ C7 y 'O (6 t- ~ y f9 ~~ U m 0 ~ 0~ 0 C~ O~ j= O t` c .C V t` ~ Y O H U ~ .~ ~ ~ tv w ~ ~ c aci c~~v -o o ' ~ c a o ~ a~ g ~ ~ 'x .c ~ ~ y a~ >. c ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ o O Z ~ i o o O O Q ~~ t Q c O~ c o tya ~ w p a`> ~~ io ~ r ~~ aUi a t- to o E to m a ~ H U a ~ 3 a> E t- ._ ~ to = 3 U F- _ ° c~ tv y t13 0 ~ . ~ s ~ m ~ v°'i ~ • ~ co cD cn ' tri Sri U O w ~ .~ °' 3 O 4 tll ~ U m h U O o ° ' ,~ m n~~ v a~~~ ~ m ~~ ~ u. O °' t a ~ "_ o ~ ~ ~ ~ a= ~ °'` ° ~ o - ° o ~ ~ . °. ° c o ~ ° Q •L V ~ m W CD tti Z ~O WU ' W, Executive Summary )N 10-100278 2-14 May 24, 2000 Q Z ~ m ~ a~ •g ~ •~ ~ a~ a~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ co ca ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a a z E E O c c F o 0 Q ( ~ is m m ~ _ ~ _ •E _ •E ~ 0 0 Z Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .Q.~ ~° a_i a~i =.c~ °c ° ~ v ~ o ~ ` ' m m ~ ~ o~ ~ r ~ o ~a ~ c ° ° _ ~ c N o `° °~~~a ~,a t~~`~ i~ i ~ m ct o.~ a~ c,c:,c~ o=mro ~' a.~~ a~o ~" m~v . .3.c~co..,~ca ~i. a~m~ao~mm~~xm°oE a"i`°J a c`--,cooii~a~av~a~y a~ ~ ~ ~'00., o m "~ N ~ O o ..I Q 'p G D _ O ~ t LO °' Q"' •~ ~ ~~ ~ ~' .~ ~ is ~ c i ` ~ i ~LU~mN naiE,~c~ L.,,ya O a~ E a~ c a ~~ ~ o U O ~ R N .. i c =' ,,,.m m a c m L .c•m acoa ~~m ~°u aZ ac; ~ °1 .ca aw c ~ ~ v) O ~ = m m `" ~ a i 4 'Q O a~ x '•- c~ ~ c m a v v a a, '° o ' l0 _ ~: O . „ ~ ~~ ~ m 0 ~ O d C h m m~ c ... Q~ W ~. y o o : y F- V I m o ,~ m 4 o a ~ c~ c 4; °' c To c c m "a~w Qom 3 c m c c w c o.c m e Q- ~~ ,~ :, w ~a ~ y o o ~•-a a~.c Boa; ~ a ~ ~ i'o,~.~ a~~i~~ ~ ~~ ~~ h a~ W = W y o ~ . '~'~ 3 oin ~ ~ ° ~ m c°'i °' yw~ o .r ~ ~ •~ ~ y ~ ai ~ ~ m t ~`o ~ ~ c o ~ ~ ~ m 3 ~ ~ w ~ ~'~ a ~ ~ c ~ ~~ c ~ ~i °' ~~c: ~ ~ m E~ cca ma+~ ~ o:~ ~~°.my~-..: c~,y.y, ~ LL 3 U~~_ .., a~ U O W ~ W ~~ ~ ~ 4~ L N G N j~ h~ O C C~ t0 4 d N~ O~ Q m m> N~ G~ p W~ a~ Q a~ ~ ~ m .a m a~ W y ... y E ~ 2 ~ U h m~ ~ a O 'c L~ ~ _ N N N O~~ m 0 0 ~ w w Q m~~ ~ v ca ~ m m c F- ~ ~ ~ a0 ~_ Q ~_ ~ Q lC') _ ~ Q' ~ l!7 Z ~O LiJ U W JN 10-100278 2-15 Executive Summary May 24, 2000 1 1 r r~ 1 1 N ~~~~~ N c u> U a U ~ Q a ~ ~ o J O p p ~ H , O "' N U U Z O ~ ~~E°a U ~ ~ ~ L vi ~ • w _0 c9 ~ ui ~ _ ' '" ~ o co 'o Z ~ ~ a'~ -0 0 N p =°• '_a a ~ E y J _ .~ O U N C C ~ N y ~ ~ m Q ~ c ~. ~ m ~ O .,~~- ~ ~ a •Q m O o~~Em~o a~ Z ~ o coo a o ~ ~. ~ zs.~~ 3U j C (0 N O y O y p ~~ ~ ~ N~ U'~ U ~ ~ ca- of 3 y °a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d°' ~ o ~~, U N fl C O w _ ~ U 'j _ ~E a~nE~~c 3 ~'o ~ Q x a~ ~= ~ •° D a co ~ ~ .o.>_ o~~Lr ~ _ ~ Sri ~~ o ~~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~~ ~~ `~' ~ ~ W ~ ~~ ~ °~3a~> ~ ~ O ~ v ~ -J Z ~ .n a? c~ E ~ 3°'-oa~~y~ - o~ o U' ~N h O (DAN.. m (D ~ ' ~ O ~ ~ "~ m ~ ~ 7 ~ U ~ ~ 4) p d (D ~ C9 ~ ~ N N j ~~ ;~ _ E ~ ~ .r '~ ~ ~ O -_ ~ ~ ` X ~ ~ ~~ E Q~ o a~ ~ o O N ~ Z~ m O Z cD ~ ~ rn o ~ ~ ~ ~ iri ~ti Sri ~ O ~ >. C r y C ~ ~ w~ U c~ 0~ ~ j, d C C~ ~. ~ ~, m O tp G C ._ w . O ~ ~ = C . .C O ~C . ~ ' w .U U ~ ~ ~ ~ '" ~ ~ ... tD ~ y y ~ ~ N fp ~p 0! ; y Q E N N .'G.. C C ~ cD ~" ~ d o.~? " 3 0 o>QO~~ o o.. C ~ ~ Q.C o m o ~ ~ -~ O C .,; t0 y ~ G V. v V ~ ~ -p ~ ~ ~ N _ C GI rn O N ' ~ y ~D d ~ H v m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ G! c~ c ~ Q" ~> i y Q d + G ? ~ a~ n~ ~ ~ 3 E y E> C d Q y ~ p C D) E c=° c`o ~' ~~ ~ 3E~ym m~ i o`°`°~a °'°- - ' . ~ ~ a ~ y c s , . . ~„ s ~o ~ ~ G1 m ~O .~ > 01 ~ O ~ d N ~ Q tD O V '0 ~ Ol ~ v W C ~ O ~ cD ~ .gyp.. ~ Of a ~ C7 Q «~ ~~ ~ 3 y w .. ~ O~ ~ y~ V ~ Q V tq N N ~~ O ~ ~ iD Q h LL lC ~ ~ m rn ~ ~ ~ D D m ~ jp c0 c Q p r > Sri U in J U ~ Z ~O lJJ U W N ~ Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-16 May 24, 2000 .~ Q N ~ W ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ W ~ z E ~_ O F- ~ ~ Q1 ~ •o Z N tC) C O~.=v c ~ C ~~ =~ ~ i° ~ o ~ ~ ~ , ~ 'n E~Q~c •` Q ~_ J O - . ~mm y ~ - y U w O ~ .. ~ J Q ~ m .~ h o~ d V ~~ ~ O Q w > ~: ~o O?;v O C _~ v ~ ` G to N .Q ~ ~ 4 O . ~ O ~ ~ 3 O tq ~ y d ~ C N O ~ U ~n Z ~O W U W N ~ `~ ~ ° c m ._ ~ ~ ~ m E .O ~ U O ~ ~ ~ _ ~ N ~i ~ ~ N = N •V I~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ai c ~ ~ ~ •~ ~ ca 7 = 7 Q U N ~ (U (D C N +.: f6 ~ ~ (~ ~ ~ N C,O O U O.O(n fir' O U O C N ~ (n O ~ ~ ~ ~ (n .~? O p C9 ~ E •E wj ~ v m Z~ o Z~~riU2 Z M ~ ~ ~ ti ti ~ ~ ~ C y c U ~ v~ N~~ i C~ c a c~ c ~ O c m G 0 :. ~o ~ .. -o c o a c ~ ~ N c C C V1 C1 .: c~ ~ m 4+ t c m m y a~ ~ ~ ~ O . ~ Q~ Q~ ~ ~~: a d V O ++ ~1; a t O a ~, O v ~ tq y ~ ) y m E c ~ ~ 0 ~ _ ~ q ~ u O ~ am•- ~ ~; c~awoi cZaa • c Q .p ~ m ,Q G! ° ~a a~ m m d~"~ ` ~,=o o occ cm.a~°'ui'o c O a, .o ;;, w .: m e 0 cQwc,ch ~ ti O a a 0 c d v> ~ a ' = om ~ ` y t 1 ~. O J ~ 0 m x O O V Q ` ' O~~ N O h a 1Q V C ~-. Q O t7 G i ~- N G O~ O J Q a 6~ m a ow ;n ~...~~ c v Evi ~ y' r • aGi cW ~ v~b ~' .~ ~ ~ ~ 1~6 ~ ~ h ~ ~ m ~ H H v ~ y ~ y C e ~ ~ N ~' 10 y ~ A ~~ 4: ~ Q u m "" 4: t~.t O O~ t ~ o V o~~ ~ ,L ~. V p d c o ~, a,a ~ V ~ m ° ~ ma a+Qyai ~ ~ c ami w cy ~ E R n ~ °~' ~ m•°-'a: o ~ g awtq m c~~riC~2~ O E•~ c . ~ »mv~ ~o o. O N ~ ` G ~ O ~ R ~ m r Executive Summary , JN 10-100278 2-1 7 May 24, 2000 1 I > o ~ o I ~ ~03~ ' U a~ ~. ~ U Q Nmc a ° ~ Z °~ .Q ~ o E ~ m F a~ z ~a°a Q E ~ '~ v m •- o •- LL ~ c ~ a Z ~ 3 ~ vi ~ ~ O ` ~ ~ ~ U ° ~ ~ J C ~ ~ m O Q U `~ ~ ~ 'D ' ~ C 'O •~ m N ~ ~ ~ U ~ Q y ~ ~ d Y Z ° N _ ~ ~ Z ~ E m CO ..o a o c m .o .= o ~ a~ ~ ~ '~ •° ~° ` a~ ~ ~ v~ ` W m ~ ~ m m ~ ~ Sri a~i a`~i ' Q N ~ ~ Ll.) ~ ~ N ~ U Z o O ° ~ ° _o ~_ ~ ° ° ~ ~ ~_ .~ m ~ ~ Z ~ Z ~ U Z o ~ ~ ti r ~ ~ ~ m°L'aciw~ m~'o~~c`c~ca 3m mh ~y~ ..,..,~.~a ' 4 °' E<v c E E~ c a h h'~, v, o c h m z= a 4o aci ~ ma u u= m o °C7 ~' ~..; ° v, ~ ma ~, `4 0 ~ c ~"c m°~ ~~ vi o' c~ d W o a~ ~ o ~ aci c R `0 ~ ~~ R c a~° ti) ~ ro ~ ~~ c ~ ° ~ a,E c a~i ct ~ E E~aQ+y E ~m c ~ ° o~ ~' ~ C9.c~c3a' oUm+.~-.~3•°-+0 °' -°~'a'~•~~Eam=~ E m--E>~ ~ 3~c v oyi w nm ~ EU o v a oa ~ ~.,;°,~ 4. y = ° ~ m = o -- ° c ~a c ~-' c a 4 ~ c n c!.:. `° c ~o wa H ° .~ ~ ~a v ww : h m ? a o ° f9 cw ~' y•.-.. a m• cw ~ ~ d~ ~ v a o ° c ~; Qa ~ o y °' ~ o c oa=_,a aci o H o; w N •~'cm,ya`=W~ m~ ~ ~ nc ~ c ~ : Eg; d ~ _ °' o E~ ~ R~ E~ aci m ~ R a~= m ma ~~_ a=i ~ c a,m ~ v t c.:~ o= ayi n~ a~ ~, c ~, e.y~ o ~ E c~ m ~ ~ y =`.o ° V ~ ° °a.~n c ~ d a c 4c o ~, m~ c ;; c °' °° 4c a~ m m c ~.c 4 n o f ao ~~ c •c Ew. ~' o d E~ o o~ m .~~ ~ a~ o R a-o ~, E `L° o E o oa 4Q ~' 3 4a o -- m oC7aC7Q . 3 44 w -- o ~w uw : 3cv.a ~ C7 a°' cy tC ~ ~ W F ~ N_ ~ ~ 3 ~ O t ~ U ~ () Sri Z N ~ Z ' ~O W U N ~ N Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-18 May 24, 2000 ~. H U Q a z C7 1 1 1 W Q w Z O F- Q F a v h °, ~ = ~ ~ o U h o ~ ... .'gym cn oG,3~°' d-_ ~ O h h c Q ~ c = c~i ~ ¢ ~ ~' ~ ` ` ~ ~ O Q y Q ~ ~ A L w w 3 ~ O O ~ C - ~ O i ~ f9 U f4 .~' 'O U O L C O O C L O~ O U C a -a ~ c ~ o ~ ~ ca .` ~ •o •~ CU c~ E a~ ° ~ vi <n ~ c!) ~ ° co iv a ° a~ c ° °a ~ ~ co Y 3 a> .~ w ° ~ w c°a w v ~' O E ~~ o ~ cv~_ ~ °•c ° o a~ O ~ U~ =p ~~ 0 3~ ~ O O N O> m 0 tq ~`p cp co U -O O N' O ~ N~ ~0,, C9 J E •"'' ~ .C p ~ C T U ~ a 0- C~0 .~ '~j- ~ a ~ Z 3 ~ ass -o O~ c ° ~ ca a~'`~ ~ ° E ~ U o c ~ ~, w ~ °-a ° ~ ~ n ~ a~ ~ ~-°~ U~ ~ ~E o ~n ~ °' Lws~ O c . Z 'cn ~ ~ cn a a a, ~ cca ~ `° s aci ~ O 3 ,~ ` `° m~ a•~ n~f- E o v3 ca m =°~L~ acs°~ ~ ° Y aci ° ~ ~ c o -° v •~ ° U ~ O O "O N ,N '~ N Y "O U C O O ._ T~ t H ~ ~ ~ ~ a .n ~ ca o~ axi U ~. D ca cv W .~ (n N C OO lf7 O .~. ~ y N C~ f/j O N (6L O~O~ 0 0 ~~ o - U `~ ~ ~ ~° w U ~ ~ ° ~ L O co ~ c ~ O ~ h N cam ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~'U ~ ~Y a ~ o u°i iv c .o ~ U ~ ... E E m ~'o~~c~"o~-0~003 O N C~ V O L N ~~ N z o ~_ ~ ~ 3 °~ a"iNU ~ ~ .~ Q~~ c a? o rn~ c ca ~ o~~m E • ~' . ~ O y~ m U~ 7 fq C O E L O O C~~ O L O ~ Z d m aw aco 3U~I-._ f~ N M ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 Z ~O W U W N ~ c Y a~ vi c vi ~ i~ d o= c _w 3 > 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ j a ~ ~ coo m a ~ '° aci a a~ y '~ y c~ c~ o~ o O 3 i~~~ N D~ cD c h 'O Q O 0 0~ d ~ ~:ca c ~ o ~o m o ~: ~~ E O 3 ~~~~c°oiv~3c~i'~Ey.~ v co p~~ G lL ;,~ 4Gi c C c Q c ~ ~ > >. vOi V v ,h '„ ~` ~ O V ~ V H -~ c~~~ G 4 Q G Q~ N C N C a~ w w .c y~ E y~ .E O N c h ~ N O ~ J tf') G U ~~ ~w~~V ~p ya=. oo°~o°O`°4~~3 ~~~ o>c E o ~ oaai•O.3~~od°'~~ ~ o~ mQa~jc°'i~ a o a~ E coocm ~'o~ d ~ aa~•m _~aci v.s o ~,.. O E ~ t ° a .4 ~ a ~ ~ ~ m V 4 y V ~ 3 .. c ~,r ~ o c c a ~:~~ my c 3 C ~ m O~ 0~.~ v H vy H 10 cp t~ V N ~ O a a V c~ R c CO H O +> O N U~ G ~ t -. J f0 3 v~ ~ ~ y tq ~p ~~ .., F~- C M O ~ J to Executive Summary JN 1 0-1 002 78 2-19 May 24, 2000 1 t 1 1 L H U Q a ~_ F Z Q V u, z W J m Q 0 Q Q Z t 1 1 1 A W Q W Z O i- Q L~_ r ~ my N"- c c_ ~Q o f°•33m U O ~ U ~_ f~0 ~ N d V E ~. ~. o •° f9 o c o w ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~~ 0~3 m ~ •- ~_ m c ~ N vi O U N f9~ p C•V a co c fl-ao cp O CL•+. U U U_ c C U N O O 'D `~_ ~ ~ N p ~ O (q U Q'O O Y O ~ C (6 (9 Z•U ~ coinm ~vic ~~ acim°~~ O o ~• -o _ 3 ~ ~ ~ 3 C V ~ ~ ~. L O ~ 7~ • O N .~ N O O U U -p ` O ~~ O N N ~ y 7 U ..U_. U •V T j =p (9 (6 E U~ N f0 U 7 ~ 0 a> ~ ~ i= O ~ to ~ N ~ ~ • d, _O N O U U C 7 O ca ~ ~ O N CO U f0 Q. •~ ~ N ~ U to ~ ~ L c ~ - - ~ w c • 3 5 °~ c°o . c c o c o n U N (6 O "O uj •U CO ~I f0 LA O c 0 ~ ~ fl- p ~ O E Q' O U ~ Q L 4- ~O w ~ f6 U o Z 0 Z ~°'o F- E y ~ m~a~i Y$ s~ -o o.~ m m ~ op ao rn ~ Sri Sri v ~ ~ O 01 «+ U 'O +. - U y ~ ~ io c ,Q t ~ O bl w ~a ~~' ~~oE cn , ~. a H O t y v Q .y ~ a, a ~, ~ ,n ` O ~ d d ~ v O ~ a' O G ~9 i y O N m J m z° ~+ C m a .O a W C O v 7 O a` O z ~O W U W (n O p) U G ~ ~O w ~cc~a4Z~ ~~~~~~ 4 - ~~a~~i~~ww~~ C ~ ~ h ~ V V 0 0~~ ~;~ a eGo ~°imy'i:~`c~ a a~ Q~ 0_,3~!: Q•y~^ ~~y O D.y •o o ~•o ~~ ~ 3 e ~ C o R~ a t G Ca h • m O c~ O~ C y W ~'a °QOaU y a v Sri ~ j ~ ~ ~ O O O f0 .Q ~ V N +: o~c~o~cc~i °~' Q~ 0+., C1G~~0 U ~ ~ y ` ~ Q ~ O~ O O y R 3~~~~~c ~ ~ N y O ~ O a w °0~o;~3R~~= ~ ~ .~~ C01„ O-~ a ~ U U ~~ O t V m X 0 0 0 of ~ N d ~O ~, ,. aacy.~~C7 Q ca 7 ~ ~ ~ U ~ci ~ G ~ v c~ (n ], G G ~, ca:,.,~ ~Q~ O O~ m R .a mw °~:: ~ m~ ~~~~°~"O ~ a , t0 ~ ~ h ~ ~ ~ ~ d/ U ~ ~~ = O~ V E O ~ a' z O_ ~ o ~~ o c- o ~ 3~ o m ~..;~ ~"' ~ ~ U ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~j Q 3 o ~ c ,~ E o m m ~ ~ V `0 a i °~xvy~,~3 ~ 4~ U O O O ~l ~ av ~ ~ V ~ y~cm a i ~ ~ Z ~ ea R '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ G ~ V ac.com~n~oE ~ LL V C O C •o °' ` ~ ~ ~- a O ~ ri o> tCf ,~ Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-20 May 24, 2000 ~. W Q' a w Z O Q E- N F v Q a Z ~O WU W N ~o~mc~°°-'ayica~°i°~a~im~ ~~o ~~m°'~' ~~~V rna~ims UL ~ ~ °~ UL ~ ~ °~ ~ ~ ~ N m•- o•v ~ wU~=p N .~ ~ o: o may y~•--n,Lo-~n~oY~ aoi awl cccoc~on a~s~: ~noo cn N ~~ o N v~ o v, 3 m v~ o~ m o cLo ~ a~ c u~i ~ s o cn c" o c moo m"~ ~ E o "~':°. ~ °~ coT,=" ~ o c Uvoi~~~U~~~~aUiN`~'~aoi3°~c' ~°-U ao~io~~~ Ems n~o°~ ~~ Q L O Q ..L-. L ,,,., Q~ fo d E N C "~ C O Q C L C~ c~ -.o oc-'o c`~oCf9 m m ~~}' onv~o. ~ro'~~m` n o~ ~ `oa -v o ~ ~ n ~ w i `~ n : ~° m ~ ~ .°_- - ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a E' m not '~ c iri ~~ o-s"o ~~s o 3 ~ ~~ ~~ m OL ~.COC~ o f°~.~ani ~ .~ ~.~ o ~~ o m 0 ~ ~~ c o..~ c ~ o •3v N•3 rn~ 3 n o~3-o nc T'-' ~ m. .- c~ ~ ~ c o c ~ ~ c ~ c ~ ~~ g o 0 o m _m o « a~i~ o a~i -° cri g a' not o ° o0 v. c ~ 3 w n ~. •a.. v Ec~ ~C ~~ U ~~ N (U ~ Y U^ •-• U ~~ U O ~ N` N fn '.~ y a p L C 7 N O mcoia~iuoi~~coim~n~a~i~~voi~~~ °~~v ~a'icYO~~ 'c .c°-•`uoi nENOCL L (4 m~.=.~~ f6 mtn ,0 p>f6L~.-. "O~ ~ C L ~ '0 'O 6 ~..; N ~C QO o~ mm> ~~ m o > m~ om > >_ o ~ o o m °-'om~ ~ O';~ ~ a ~ ac°~ ~~ ~ co2L~v~ cot ~-a2 m~L-o~ ~ I-~ v a cn.fl o...- • • • D U ~ ~ r ~ N ~ ~ ~ T ~ ~ ~ ~ L. V C ~a~(~~ vim.. ~ ~ C O N ~ ~4 t ~ h w U ~;, y ~- ~~~ mad v h yN ~~a ~ o m ci w ~ CO V L y~ C t V .. U co~.-~=~ co ~ m ~~ ~ E ~t o m ~ ~ ~p m O .~'my w. .. ~ c acw'~ m eCa m vN ~ m o aka !~?~ R i`o v m•ia ~ oa c s: F- o •~ ~ a~a ~,c ~ Of } ~ V L C ~ y ~! ~ a G ~ co ~ h r H V H m .O ~ N a Q In Executive Summary )N 10-100278 2-21 May 24, 2000 F- z Q U Z (7 N J m Q 0 Q Z W ~ _ N Z O ' i= Q C7 H ~ ' v a a i~ z ~O W U W N =t ~ Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m A O O t O 3 t O O `~ N ~ O ~ N O ~ ~ V N ~ ~=- ~ J ~ ~L ~ ~ ro ~ y ~ ~ y O ~ y ~ m ,C U ~ '~ ,~ O O Q ~ , 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O C N 'D-~ h O > C > ~ 'D (n C > O 'O ro ~ ~ ro ~ 'O ro > ro 'o ro ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ca ~, .? ~ =O N ca ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ C >'~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N c ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ N O ~ N ° c ~ c ~ ~ y ~ ro ~ 3 y ~ ~ C ' - c ~ ro a ~ c ro c ~ s ~ ~ m ~ c ~ m c ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ ` ~ i ~ Q ~ ~ o a ~ co c ~ ~ ~ m o a ~ c a c ~ ~ o c a Uj ° c a ~ c ° > `° o o c~ a a oi c°a m o o ~ ro m m m c a ~ ' ~ 3 ~ ~ a~ ~ m c i x a ~ ~ ~ ~ x 3 0= ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' x 3 c ~ C LLJ ~ ~L ~ ~ .x ~ ~~ ~ ~ D o o ~ ~ ~_ ~ .x ~ c ~ ~ ~ p ~ ca ~ ~ ~ C D ~ ~ m ~ ° °' - o ~ j ~ , ~ •- ~ 3 , °' ca c Y .~ ~ o~v~ ~ ~ ~ o~v~ ~ ro ~ X22 o 3 m cat= cq o ro ~0 .I2 c O ~ v~ oC~= ~ a~ o >,•o:r o > Ca O L ° ca Y ~ ~ ~ _ ~ L O 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C7 m C 7 ~ cn . N c c ~, c o O_ ~ ro fp v it w ... ro c a=i ~w y ~w•oar ~ ~ ro ~~~o ~a:'~ a~ ° nay E E o E~ ...E 3 .+ .. c o h c c cc0i v ~ v v ~ a ~~ d ~,~ i'noEyv, ' Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-22 May 24, 2000 1 1 ~I ~0 ~ ~ N ' C`9 f9 O --~ a O- ~ d --~ --~ ~ C E ~ ~ (9 f6 C ~ ~ f0 f0 p ~ ~ i0 a ~ `o ~ ~ ~ W a~ ~ ~ a~ c ~ L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ W ` s ~ ,.- ~ ~ ~ c~~o ~ ° c~~a c~~o O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ co ~ c~ ~ ca C ~ ~ ~ m ~ ?.o ~ 3 y~ o, .. ~~~ o~~r o 0 0 0 o i~ 3 0 ~ 7a ~a N ', ~ ~ ~ - a> w cn ~~ `. - ~ "~ - m ~ is m ~ ~ W O H O 3 C~ C~ 'O C L m Z ~ C~ C C C C C 'D C L!J C C C C C C C .C C "6 C (n L C C C _v O~ c9 w~ O ~ 7 7 0~ (n d W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0`~ p O j~ 0 O ~~ O 7 O Z_ ~~ '~ O O Z ca ~ c m ~ a~ ~~ ~~~~_ ~ c >L~srss~~~ ~.~LSQ ~~r=s~°~"= ors C -° >, p` ~ ~ ~ co c~v ~ ~ ~ > p o E o 0 0 0 o cyv ~ ~ ca 0 0 .~ ~ o o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o __ _ a ~ g o co ~F- ~,~ww~ ~,i-Q ~,z ~,zzzcncnw~~~-zc~ c~-zcn ~,cnw~cn ~,E--zz , ~~ co o ~ m ~ 0 0 3 0 L co o iv U , N t17 U Q a ~i z ~ O ,~a l!J U W ' N Executive Summary , JN 10-100278 2-23 May 24, 2000 1 U a a ~_ t- z ' a U LL Z N W ~~ ~ ' ~ to L y L _ to ~ h W O ~ E O W ' C° L L w a, C O L O O L j > C O 0 0 O O ° c L L 7 p C C ~ O C (0 ° ` ~ C ~ C ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ C ~ (9 fti ~ ~ C fD ~ O Z ~ (0 _ ~ ~ C ~ L C L C` °~ t W C C C C ~~ 'D C C C 'D 3 C~ C C C C C "° t C~~ - W ~ _ • -G C C C .-. C (n C C • n° a ° ° ° 0 0 0~.a'o > > o Z ~ ~o W o o ° ° o o Z'_o' o o ~ ~ o cn W .m ~ o=° LL! ° a~°~° = Z . L ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z L .n .a ~ ~ ~ .V L .~ L t L ~ ~ ~ v ~ L .~ .D ~ N ~ •U ~ ~ ~ j `~ ~' ~m ~ N ~ ~ o ~' ~' ~ •~~~ ~~ ° ~ ~ 3 Q ia ia i OOa ~ooo>c oc vc omc oa i opoooc o a~ i~oom~ a iC]` ~°~°~-00 z ocncncn owww~~~~ ~cnww~~.`F-z ~ zzv~w~~-- ~,zcnww~ ~ ~w~ c~ ~ , ~, ~, ~ ° ~ > ~ ~ w > o > m ~ Y C7 «~ (~ I~ J N F- U a a ' n ~' ~~~ ~d WU W N Executive Summary )N 10-100278 2-24 May 24, 2000 1 1 N w Q W Z O H Q C~ ~_ ~ ~ _N ~ W N C ~ w C C ~ ~~ ~ ~ C ~ ~ > ~ ~ ~ ~ C C QJ '-' ~ C w C C C h - C f9 C (9 ~ ~ ` fD O (9 Q C ` fd ~ ~ L f9 ~ s ~~ c ELY E c~ ~tL a~ m0 ~ ~ 7(n-~ cp ~ 7~ Vj~C p~j•C > > L p'~ Z~ ~s~.~ ~ N ~ o ° ~ ~~~ r ~tiJ op m.~~L~ ~~ o ° ai -~ -o > ca o ~ -p 'p 'o ~~~W~ o E ~~ ~~ ~3 0 0 > > ~ ago ~ ~ ~ cNO °~ c p o o ~ coo co c m ~° ~ o o c`~o ~ aNi io o ~ a~i a~'i w~~ ozcn•cww a~~~~zcnww~ ~cnw~~ ~ .~ 3 p h ~ m d ~ O w L C (Vp C N '~ 0 ~ N 'O ~ "' ~ ~ ~ L CO ~_ •~ O L C~9 C C ' (D d 7 ~ L ~ N O O ~ - y~~ ~ C` C O -~ ~ C U 3 O L O O L f0 ~ Y ~ c f0 _ O (0 0 y C L!7 a N U m d o N ~~~ ~ Y ~ ~ ~ C ~ !~- ~ N v~ c ~ C ' ~ m a oYN ' ~ c dm ~ cNa•~U a ~ ~ ~. o c „ rn 0 0~ c ~ ~ ~ ;n ~ ~ o E m m a c o 0 ~ ° • ~ m > a Q c ~ ~ ~~ ~aH ~ a ~ o ' . ~ L •c o 0 o rn h ~ ° > y d o N N c o o ~~ O~ l0 cd d~ O~ ~ ~ c °' ~ ~ a E -° cv ~ ~ a i a ~E • _~ m o c ~ ~~p~° ~ _°~ _ 1 ~o~~~~' - do...~ o ~? ' ~o o o c ~ o. ~. E~ o a~~ c~ °' d ~ 3 O` ono w a~ c co 0 0 0 H.~U aiwC~~ FL-.~ ~°U c ~a o o~v ~~ , N Q1 ~ ' H U Q a z ~o W U W N LJ Executive Summary )N 10-100278 2-25 May 24, 2000 ~ U U U Q _ 3Z a a> ~' a ~ o ~ F -a ca ~~ U ~ ~ LL -p Z v ~ (9 ~ n~ ~ W N J m ~ N Q U ~ 0 0 ~ N ~ 'y U Z Q ~ ~ Z cn 7, ~- C b..'6 c4.?.:.m co ~ •- ~ ~ ~ c c Q 'b O .C :~ N _,O <A::b..~ O ~. rn ~ v ~ ~ co ~ ~ o ~ L ~ 'O ^tCf" C' ~~ ~ Vi b LL o ~ ~, ~ ._. ~ ,moo m ~ a~ Y ~ ~ o > _ -B ~ .~ o a ~ c ~ ~ o = o N m ~ ~ ~ 3 > cn ro ~ 0 ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ N ~ , rn ~ ~ _ Q N b ~,O C ~ ,,, . , `n v- -:, O O U '3 .D ~ L ~ ~ U 3 ~ ~, L ~ ~~- CN6 u-j - Via. O ~ ~.", E N -. ~ O b:LO = -gyp E = O. ~ O O ~ N ~ . N ~ N ~ ~ O C d d C. ~ (6 ~. ~+- N., L ~ L,. O N Y ~ N gyp` y Q ~ O ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ U L N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. ~ ~ m E ~ U' N ~ Q ~ a--' ~ ~.. L Q1 C (U . C .' . O o •~ r. o ._ . -a ' ~ ~ Z ~ m c C9 ~ a a > ~ ,Q o~~o O~~ ~ ~ a~ Q~ a ` - ~ m -o - o Qn ~~~ ~~;~~;~ ~= a~ m >o ocn o ~ ~ ~a~ a -oa O O o. ~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ m ~ O c9 ~ O ~ ~ .U V C ~ ~: N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > > y Q (7 ~ ~ ~ O ~ > fl. •"= v~ Q 'O t d ~ Z ` p ~ O y N ? ~ . N ~ > ,_,'. ~ ~ 0 U C ~ U ~ (B O O > . ~ O fl. ~ s ~ No aoi W >. a ~ o ~ 'c .~ ~ ~ ~~ ,~ Q --oa ~~ ? aci o m ~' ~ ' 0 ~ a U I-. L N ':~. ~ L C~ v~ U 42 3-. . .~ O} Q LL 'CII. • 1- .C w. (9 u? C~ 4 . •,; :•~~- .A~..: ..:~,. Q ~ 4?. ~` •~ N O ~ ~ m ~: r ~ v., `~ ~ O ~ ~ ... . E m O y m~ V F- °~ ti ~ a ~ °- ' .c ~ ~ E ~ O y Z Q ~ O U N ~ •~ ~1 w w O a m V ~ a ~ m o N ti _ tCi Z ~O wv w o r vi j Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-26 May 24, 2000 ~ y N O C ~ ~ O N U T O _ r_ ~O ~ d (~ Q. ~ ~ ~ O C O C O "' C N p~ 3 f9 'd :~., ~ ~ U O N O C U L ~_ ~ ~ c fl-ao c'9 ~ ~ ~ L ~ U N ~ C N to N ~ ~ ~ Y N ~ C O N a.~ W ~ N ~ c0 v m O O ~ p 0 O C 'O . ~ , N ~ G N U .C CO C m ~ (6 N ~ y Q N ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ , N ~ ~~~a~~ o ~~ L~~ '~ ~c c~ _ a~ ~ c n ~ cC a~i p ~ `~ ~ 3 ~ `~ .o ~ ~ c~ ~ ~ ti ~ ~ ~ Ly L L C .) ~ f0 C N ~ L C ~ O +0.. "O O C L ~ N (~ 'p ~ f6 ~ ~ ~ . ,O d CO O OU' C U . ~ L U N O ~ D tiscu~3~nai O~ O •> d~ '3 •n~~o caQ f6 w . Q O U O O > co,"~~ ~ W m 3 ~ o U o o mo o p ~ ~4 ii n c~~ o ~~ O ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •c~~~, ~ o L y ~ 3 O 3 7 ~_ ~~ N LL U y N T ~q L O O L L ~ Q ~ ' D U~. ~> O U Z Q O_ fQ > ~ O ~ C O L .C y~ ~ N .~ _ C~ r 0 0 C (O f4 .~.. .O U ~ a _ ~ ~ .~ ~ LL f~ •~~°~~~'~~ N N N ~ N -~°-o~ow~ O is ~ C •D ~ O C L~ o~~ O a C O O C a U L N • U ~ ~. F' _ ~ N~ _ Q __ O O Y~ ~~ ~ O L~ 0 L `~ (9 O L O p 0 ~~ 'D N~ U d L ~ O U. N N N O` N ~. 0. LL7 C d O :~-.. ~ Q f- ~ O Q' ~ C i O X LL .~ c9 :... Q N CO U Z C •D 11J. ~-: cp; ~ (V M ' ~ O ~..• O O r ~ ~ ~ o ~ L.. ui,coooo c ~ c o ~~+ w 3 m _~,Ra-~cooc ~~ ui c is c~~ .o~~ac o V C d~ -• ~ ~ O y C ~+ ~ O d ~ O ,~ c b d p Q Q ~ c co a> :. a '~ w 4 H ~, w y ar 4 = y v. ~ O •~ ~ ~ c ~ = ` ° ~ ~ " c ~J~ 3a ~ ~ c h= ago c `y o' ~ .c 3 c a i V ~i:e~~O'k ~~a3~cayiv~ E °~maki''~Jy~ o • a o, o ~h a o ~ c c ~ o = maw °~v~°. a n .-, m~~ ~ = o. R w ~ ~ c o w ;;, c<pb~.,.,vc ' = -e c a m EQm~o r.bNVi d o- O c c i _E~-Eea ac>yy O : ~ O O O t w t0 U O O U V O ~ V •. .. ~Q w h R O h m N i y~ N y N a a d a' t O O~' C7 r O N 4 c y~ ~~ O~ Ol ~ w d V V = Id a O N y~ Q 1: = 4 v aJ o,4b u m ;? ~ m °ya io«~~ i c E a c vh ~ Cv a H d V (y O M ~ O t O O a r ~i V N r Sri z ~o W U W N 1 1 i 1 1 [1 1 1 1 Executive Summa 1 jN 10-100278 2-27 May 24, 2000 1 y U Q a ~_ z Q ' U Z (7 y W J 0 Q ZI ' w p m ~ 0 ~ iv V~ O ~= N f0 T O ~ ~ C6 L ~ C ~ ~ O N ^ ~ ~ 7 ~ fD f0 .O-. ~ ~ tp U C ~ Q VOi 7 ~ O ~ ~ ~tN `~ p '~ •N m a~ _ Q ~ ° a ~ ~ ~ ca C ~ ~ ~~ m ~ m a w ° ~° o c~ _~ O ~ ~ y 'O ~ ~ U U O L C O O O ~ ~ ~ • Q ~ ~ (p (9 ~ C ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ d ~ ~ °ro ~ N ~ c ~ .~ ~ y 3 ' W ~ v3, w a~ w ~ ' ~ m a~ a~ w c ~ 3 0 0~ o~~ c p a ~ • ca ° L _ ~ c a~ a o~ o 0 3 O c c °~ U° co o Q '~ 'x o ~° m~ -o v ' Q p t4 O ~ C tq ~ rp w9 O O O C ~ a ~ ~ N ~ ~ p) p d (0 O N CO ._~ d p, ' a a E O C 'V O~ V O E c6 ~ ~ h 0 U- F •~ c.. O O ._ O 0 7 0 L 0 0~. Z Z C~ a~ 'D Q a> .~ ~ C O C ~ fn CO ~ tf7 cv ~ CO CD p O O O T r ~('~ O v ~.U °' U c °' ~ h m ~ ° ,~ p~ ., '~ ca v~.. 4 is ~m°a3i.~?~ y$ ~vci~~` °-mmoyvi:~wN~~~y y F- ~~ .a c c x N ~ ~ m O N C G1 y_ a a m ~ a~ y L Vi ~ m e ~ c .m c ~ c o, a, O~> Cf ~ y~ ~0 p) +:• m N ~~ 3 E C V i V d O J ~°m V- ow,,~> m >, O ..1 ocoU 0 U y ,Z,+ Zj Etc a~~ 3 ~~~ ~ ~' V Q a a~ O O ai ~ v 4. o c~ o ea ~E" c co N. E c ui ~ co = y~ ~ ~C '~ O w d °-o-'w i~~~+v ca a~i a, ' ~ p~ c U O V v.: Q V w C A N V w; ~~ y O h ~~ v~ ,;C "' y ~+ ~"' Q~ ~~ m~ ~ v~ ~ 3 c~' cvo ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ y Q 3 y a' N m 3 ° ` v ~ v ~ ~ o ~ o o ~ y o J ~ ~ ~ti ~ ~ci z ~O LU U ' W (n ' Executive Summary )N 10-100278 2-28 May 24, 2000 1 1 ~I ml ' ~ ~ a o Z - ~ c U ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ Z Q o co ~ _~ a i a i a i ~ : ~ ~ ~ cn ~ ~ .o n o caw ~ ~ a ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ m °- a~ o ~ ~° m ~ ~' a i ~ ~ o~ ;~ w ~' U .` ~ a . ~ m E o ~ :~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w c X o U N ~ n ~v ,, c c o n~ 0 roo-~ `°oc~ i a 3 m a oc~n ~ a c ~ o o cv ~ o- N m ca °~ U ~~o ~3 -aci - '~ ~ O ~ao~ o r ` > . c ~ ~ - N ~ ~ ~ a vi c ~ o .` ~ N o co a ~ ~ ~ ~ c° ~ n vi (n ~ a ~ vf0i ~ Q ~ c? :.. '.' a~ .c ~ 'c c ~ '~ (n ~ ~ U w ~ c > c o - Q ~- ~ ,D ~ ca _N ~ ` ' ' 3 ~ p a ~ = m aa ip_•c a~cm~• o c ~ cn m °a > 3~a~c~ w cv E °~ a~ - °- a~ v~cc~~~ so>, ~ c y N a c° te ~a~~~L ~ °~ ' OZ c s o ~ ~v .c? ti ~ ~ .3 vi ~ ~ ~ ~ m a> ~ c r a - a a~ °~' a ~ °' ~ ~ y '3 vi m . m io o -° ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ 'c N ~ ~ °: ~ N ~ O o ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ > ..~ • p c o ~ :~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c0 '~ . ~ w 'r-X. ui ~ o . m ~ o. c 3 E ~ cc o ~ r a ~ 3 °' c °- c ~ a> ~ o ~ >' E u' c is ~ > ~~ U cn m ~ v a> o N ~ .a vi ~ ~ . a . o o .~ c . ~ a~ ~ c c a > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 o a s . F- cv ~ 3 3 a> ~ E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ O '~ co ~ o o a a~ s o ~ s m ~ H v cn 3 ~ E ~ -~ ~~ ~ iv n ~ d U 3 .. ,~ ... y ~ ~ ca a ~ ~ r~ w ~ ~ ' o _o _0 0 0 .- 0 .- u-i Sri Sri Sri cri Sri ~~ ~° ~~ ~~m~~~~ c ~~ k v Q~~~ y ~~ ~~~~~~ k~ Q • 3 ~ ~ O~ a ~ ~ 4= ~ Q ~ y ONi H ~ a~ ~ h G ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ` O d ~ fp ~ ~~~~ Gv ~ NCO ~~ G Hawes ~ o E a~ oin ror 3 0 ° p + . E ~ o ,ro,= 3~Q ~ . ~ . .p ... ' a ;; ~ ~ ~ cGO m °1 y O> ~. c c 3 cGO m y~ v V Q ~ ~ o ~ ~ vc0 > ~ ~ ~ o c 4 ~ h o ami t `~ ~ 3 ~ 3 .~iocc°'n+aGio3y~ Em`~c~eoaGio roG y C O ~ ~ ~.. ~ w w ~ V N '~ ~ m . G ~ ~ .p ~ ++ "~' +~ V ?.~ ~ ~ E ~ C y m ~ O~ ~ :: a i d Oi ~ 5 ~ E ~ N N a~ °.~ 3a ~ E ~ y•in ' m y r~ p ~ ~ O' ~ ~ l9 ~ ~ l1') Z ' ~O w U W ' Executive Summary )N 1 0-1 002 78 2-29 May 24, 2000 1 ' a U LL J U ~ L ~ >+ m C °? m~ c o ° O> O O Q1 ~ .5 ~ = C ° 3 w ~ ~ C fn O L ~ ~ ~ fn C >+ ~ c a~ c ~ c .L.. ~ E ._ ~° N > o ~ io '~ Y~mo o E '= ~ m-o C9o~~ LcLin°~ E a i c ~~ •~`° o ' ~'~ cC9 T am. ~> ai.-. o = ~~ 3 c"- f4 ... co°a~ E ~ c > 3~ N E ~ a ~ .a ~ ~ c ° ~ ~ co 3 a ~ o O °c' w a> ~a N o - ~ • U U ~ ~ m W Q) ~ Lf') a C W ~ ~ p (0 >' ~ ~ ~ N co N c0 m ~ > L C '~ O '~ O . O Q> ~ U C o~ c~ 3 C ~ ~ '~ C 3 hi ~ c~ ,.- ~ C - O .5 c c o O ~ ~ X a~ 3° c a~ ~ o .~ U° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O L '~ U io U E ~ to `-° ~ m_ ~ ~- r O 3 h 3 ~ E c O N N t4 0 >, °~ o > ~ L 41 > ~ ~ ~~? m ~'~~ 3 a>-~~ ? O ~ ~ L a>> C N lJJ d - ~ . ^ 7 C_ w= .~ ~ _ . ~ . ~ L > ~ _ E O C ~ Z a m ~ ~ ~ a~ c 3 > °: ~ co °' ~ o co ° 3 c E ~ o - c a ° ' O H Q ~ o °c' L ~ a~ ~ a ~ m v co ° 3 w 'o a i ~ ~ ~ -~ a~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ a~ L 3 ° L ~ ~ ~ . - ~ ~ ~ a a i ~ °~ ° -o ~ a co a~ o ~ U ~ w w cco a3i m ~ cco ~' o .~ o X 3 _ U .C ~ N 3 L F L U i1 a 0 V E ~ ~ N L M O N O ~ C - ~ o o `o- ~ ~ ~ ~'co-° ~ ° u°i v3i'~~ a~ ~ E o~ E a o co cco ~ ~ Qa~i~ ~~ a-'~ a _ ~ L o c ~ ~ a °: ` ~i Q x c c c 3 ° ~ ~ ~ ° ~ - . o E cxo c co ~ E ~ ~ ~ o ~ v°i ' o F-~ a i c L a > ~cnacnE~°~a c a c o w.~a~~C9~a v i ~ o ~co. cn - ~ a~ ~ - s Uav~mcoa~-EEav~co._~a ~ • 1 1 n H U Q a r. z ~o ' wv w Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-30 May 24, 2000 1 ~i m Q 0 O W N Q w Z 0 Q _~ (n F- U Q a z ~O iL U W N ~ 4? m C) ." .C O t y ~ t ~ y w y w L O a~. ~ F' O k w Q O A R ~~ y v 'gyp ~ ~ ~ O U~JQ,V O ~ ~ J o ~oE~c ~ ~ ~; ~ ~ v v ~ ~ p U ~ ~ ~ y ~ ~ ~ ~ V ~.~(A y~ tpA 4~ C1~C ~ w Q.~ ~ O 3 E.c _o eCe = c y~ ~aa, Q +.. C1 y~ ~.. h V: ~ d y O o ~ N is •V V ~ Qf ~ y G p) ~ v p~ d> N C oi'o~t~aimnch33 ~ ~ •o 0 v~ Sri .~ ._ ~ ~ a~ i i a t0 (0 ~ ~ ~ O . O . ~ ~ z Z o _o _o Sri u~i c ~ v, c a~~. C "' .~ O~ V~ = C ~p O= c~ h a~ i G w G `2 C c~ O~ h ro p _ ~ ~p ~~ r- ~ N a H C~ ~•E 01 .p ~ y ~` C O >. ~ -p N ~ O U a C ~ ro 3 ' ~, ~ ~ O ~ Ea o ~, ~ c ~, ~ k ~, ~ : ~o •• w m a a, v c ~ ~~ ~ ~ c .~ c ~a ~ co c m . ~_~ ~~ I~ 1 O O w w E . ~ ~ ~O H O~U ~ p.arv C ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~a~ N O O ~ O p O . .V ~ ~ J i d d 6 - C N G) N G iq Gi .C ~ :. G p G> ~ Q y h ~p •X V~ ~p O w ~. C1 ~ N .= N ~ Q O M ~ (p y y~ v ~~" V y ~ U U .O N~ w V C~~ ~~ U ~~ U N~~ C •~ ~ V v p> O ~ .~ ' b +. c ~0 ~~ a v. ~ O U U ¢~ ~ .~ G h U N Q! O O ~ O ~ c o r- ~ m o ~ ' o w Sri Z Sri 1 C 1 _i Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-31 May 24, 2000 ai L ~ m ~ co - a o ~ v_i N ~ °~~ O ~ ''' co ~ o ao» U ~ ~ c O i a Qyj C N •,~ U O •C ~ ~ f9 _N d. N - ~ w N O U :U ~ O N _ ~ ~p to ~ f0 L O N O~ co ~ ~ °- ~ t o ~ U ~ ~ G ~ ~ ~ ~o c ~ o a i _ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ .o o ~ ~ .fl- .o 3- O ~ C9 Q U C ~q O N _O C~ 0 7 N~~ O O C O O ~9 'O O (9 C~ U~ d N ~ (d ._~ O~ ~ ~ ' `~ (9 N N~ ~` ~ • C _ a m U c` O w • N O N ~ > V O ~ c '~ c N y N O ~ M m ~ o ° 3 i ca a o0 - a .~ ~ rn _0 0 Sri u-i 1 N H U Q i a ~_ ~ z Q U Z (_~ N W J m Q ~ _ O Q Z N W a ' W Z 0 £ ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~ ~ w w y G ~ aGi ~ w Ed 4v~. tip ~ i w ~E ~o~o h v ~ ` _ O ~ t~i~C9 y y U w ~ V ~ ~ y k y ~ a a, ~ ~ S ~ 3 o _ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~E y ~w+:. w h y C = ~ y V ~ X i J Q ~ v a J z ~O wv w m .~ Q to C9 N C O .~ .~ 0 z 0 ~ ~ w~,0= C a a _X ~ ~, •_ G a, a ~~ O Q y G o a C~ O .~ O G ~ d ~ O ~,~L ~0 C ~L ~ Q ~ L 3a~" ° ma~ i1 - ~ ~ ~a ~ ~J ~ ~ o N ~~~•c Cie ~ y ~ a~ d° w f. V ~ ~ t m h E_~~~~~'~~ Q a o•' °•O a~~ ~ v k E ~ a°~immc~o>aady o~~°oy€ssy 5 o t ~ d O S ~ v ~ ri ~ a> .j Q ca 7 N f0 C O ~E 0 z o_ u-i C .U ,~ ~~ Qt V t0 V O C ,.., N G ~~ :..~ C Q.v ~1v ~C ~ ~ N ,U O C w ~ y ~ ~ ,~ ~ = cyB ~ c ~ G ~ C ~ m ~ Qcoy'o v d ~'~ ~ p'c~0 0 ~~ O a~ V O O O ~~ N ~~ ~~ G w m .~ ~ a ~, ,G ~ y a~i y ~•o ~= ~ m~ ao~ m ~' ai E~`0 ~~ h~ ~ 3 0 3 C.V ~>; •C y~ J w d a. • ~ G~ ~ y~ E y ~> a U c=a h° 4 axi J Q V~~ m M O ~i ' Executive Summary JN 10-100278 2-32 May 24, 2000 r~ ' GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 2.3 SUMMARY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6, Section 7.0 of this EIR, describes a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project which could feasibly attain the basic project objectives, while evaluating the comparative merits of each alternative. The following is a summary of the description of each alternative analyzed in Section 7.0. ' "NO DEVELOPMENT" ALTERNATIVE Implementation of the "No Development" Alternative would disregard the proposed project application and retain the existing land use and zoning designations for the project site. This alternative assumes that no new land uses (including infrastructure improvements) would be added to the project site. Portions of the project site currently under agriculture production would remain and crop rotation practices would continue. "NO PRO ECT" ALTERNATIVE 1 1 1 As required by Section 15126 (d)(4) of the State CEQA Guidelines, a "No Project" Alternative has been included in the EIR. With the "No Project" Alternative, the project area would be developed to the maximum intensity allowed under the existing land use designation. Implementation of this alternative would consist of development on 64.58 acres of a mix of light industrial, service industrial and heavy industrial land use designations. In addition, development of 91.84 acres would develop under the heavy industrial designation and 14.48 acres would develop under the service industrial designation. "REDUCED DENSITY" ALTERNATIVE The "Reduced Density" Alternative results in the elimination of the Low-Medium Density Residential development proposed for the southwest portion of the project area. Therefore, this alternative considers development of two separate development pockets , consisting of the proposed Low Density Residential and General Commercial pockets, which would requirean amendmenttothe Land Useand Circulation Elements of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan with concurrent zone change. One development site consists of 64.58 acres, requiring a general plan amendment from Light Industrial, Service Industrial and Heavy Industrial to Low Density Residential. The second development site consists of 14.48 acres, requiring a general plan amendment from Service Industrial to General Commercial. JN 1 0-1 002 78 2-33 Executive Sum May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR °~ "OFF SITE" ALTERNATIVE G~ The "Off-site" alternative assumes the development of the project within another area of the City of Bakersfield or within it's sphere of influence. According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, approximately 82 percent of the General Plan Study Area is undeveloped land inagricultural/open space and/or mineral/petroleum use. Therefore an adequate amount of available land exists which may be used as off-site alternative site. Impacts would vary depending on the site location and surrounding uses. As the , proposed project site contains no substantial site constraints that would preclude development, any project would be expected to have similar impacts. No alternative sites were suggested by potential ly effected agencies, as part of the early consultation process. It should also be noted that development of the project on a different site would not preclude development of the proposed site in accordance with the existing General Plan. "ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR" ALTERNATIVE CEQA Section 15126(d)(2) indicates that if the "No Project" Alternative is the - "Environmentally Superior" Alternative, then the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. The "No Development" Alternative (Existing Conditions), in this case, would not result in the environmental impacts associated with construction of the proposed residential and ~, commercial projects to be less than the proposed project. Among the other alternatives assessed in this EIR, the "Reduced Density" Alternative would when compared to the proposed project, result in reduced environmental impacts, while meeting to some '~~ degree the project objectives and not increase the significance of anticipated impacts. The "Reduced Density" Alternative would result in reduced noise and air pollutant emissions, would generate a reduced number of average daily trips, and would require less of a demand on public service and utilities. As a result, the "Reduced Density" Alternative may be considered an Environmentally Superior Alternative. 2.4 AREAS OF CONTROVERSY/ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED In accordance with Section 15123 of CEQA, the City has identified a potential issue of controversy due to the proximity of proposed residential uses to existing industrial operations to the east of the project areas. A comprehensive safety analysis contained in Section 5.6 of the EIR has concluded that impacts can be mitigated to levels less than significant. Executive Summary )N 1 0-1 002 78 2-34 May 24, 2000 i [' 1 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION r 1 1 f 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~' 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING ~' The project area involves approximately 171 acres located in the northwest portion of .' the City of Bakersfield, within Kern County, California (refer to Exhibit 1, Regional Vicinity). The project area is located in the southern San Joaquin Valley, approximately ~~ two miles north of the Kern River at an elevation of approximately 425 feet. Regional access to the project is provided via State Route 99, which extends near the northeastern border of the project area. The proposed project involves the ~; development of three noncontiguous sites generally bounded by Olive Drive on the north, Rosedale Highway on the south, State Route-99 on the east and Fruitvale on the west (refer to Exhibit 2, Site Vicinity). More specifically, the three proposed project sites are described as follows: • Approximately 14 gross acres situated immediately north of the ~, proposed Hageman Road alignment, between the proposed Knudsen Drive alignment and the existing Landco Drive alignment (as this site is proposed for general commercial (GC) uses, hereinafter, this site will be ~' referenced as the "GC Site"); 1 1 • Approximately 65 gross acres situated immediately northwest of the intersection ofthe proposed Hageman Road alignment and the proposed Knudsen Drive alignment (as this site is proposed for low density residential uses (LR), hereinafter, this site will be referenced as the "LR Site"); and • Approximately 92 gross acres situated at the southwest intersection of Krebs Road and Mohawk Street (as this site is proposed for low-medium density residential uses, hereinafter, this site will be referenced as the "LMR Site"); EXISTING CONDITIONS ON-SITE Overall, the project area is relatively flat and has in the past been extensively used for agricultural and petroleum production (since the 1930s-1940s). Certain areas have recently been cultivated for cotton and alfalfa. The existing conditions on each of the project sites are described as follows: • GC Site: The North of River Sanitation District No. 1 offices and facilities are located at the northeastern corner of this site. The remainder of the site consists of vacant land overgrown with shrubs and Project Description JN 10-100278 3-1 May 24, 2000 1 DUCOR O ~ CALIFO U U ~ ! Q HOT SPF ZIJ Y ~ ,F _I__TULARECO_ _ _ _ - ____ _______ TULARECO. KERN CO. DELANO KERN CO. 15 GLENVILLE Cake Woollomes 155 WOODY MCFARLAND wnsco 99 43 SHAFTER BUTTON WILLOW TUPMAN DUSTIN ACRES VALLEY Buena Vista ACRES Aquatic Recreation Area BAKERSFIELD LOMA ROSEDALE 58 PARK 58 EDISON KERN MAY CITY FAIR 184 GREENFIELD LAMONT OLD DI GIORGIO RIVER ARVIN rAFT 99 - j MARICOPA ~~ 166 o' ~Io m'z o u, JAY ~~ 5 GRAPEVINE -- _~_ 33 ~~ L--- aml~ --~- LEBEC m I > ~('.astaC Cake _ _ KERN CO. _ KERN CO. ______ _ _ ___ L _----"-"~ 1 LOS ANGELES CO. VENTURA CO. Subject Site Not to Scale CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Regional Vicinity \` ~~ `I~obet? Bei~,~lliam `TTost ~~ssociates j oz/00 JN to-100278 i Exhibit 3-1 1 '~ 1 I 1 1 l 1 1 ~~ r MORRIS RD DR: MORRIS RD. vQ ~ ~ ~ R o 0 Ts ~ ~ U ~ ~ OLIVE DR. > Q Q a ~ ` ~ S~ ~`---_ 1 ~ '~T z o ~ F I ~ ~ '~o j a ~ ,~..-------_ i ' ~ ~ ri ~ HAGEMAN ~ ,, ~ j C RD. _ _ _ t e KREBS RD '4L C~~'~ cc . S r T ~ j BRITT,q~ s~Q,2 '4~F 'A ~ MEANY AVE i t ~ ~ i t 1 M RADA DOWNING i ~ GILMOR ~ DR. AVE. ~ ~ ~ AVE. ~ ~ ~ O Q SILL~ BUCK Q f g ~ OWENS BLVD. cZ. ROSEDALE (SR-58) HWY. t= rn Not to Scale `7~oberT Beitt,~lliam `Flbst~dZ~ssociates ~ 02/00 JN 70-100278 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Site Vicinity Exhibit 3-2 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR weeds. One active oil well is located in the southeastern corner of this site. • LR Site: This site consists of vacant land overgrown with shrubs and weeds. Oil recovery operations have been conducted on this site with approximately seven active and two abandoned oil wells scattered throughout. Unpaved roadways traverse the site providing access to the oil pumping units. • LMR Site: This site is currently utilized for agricultural and oil recovery operations. Approximately seven active and one abandoned oil wells are scattered throughout the site. Unpaved roadways traverse the site providing access to the of I pumping units. One groundwater monitoring well is located in the northwestern portion of the site, adjacent to the western boundary. The Southern California Edison Power Line Easement traverses the northernmost portion of the site, parallel to Krebs Road. Additionally, an irrigation canal, constructed to bring additional water to the agricultural fields, traverses this site in an east/west direction. SURROUNDING LAND USES/CONDITIONS Overall, the project area is surrounded by a mix of land uses including agricultural, industrial, residential, commercial and institutional, as well as undeveloped and vacant lands. Land uses to the north, along Olive Drive, include several commercial uses (i.e., restaurants, a gas station with amini-market and commercial strip mall) and single- family residential uses between Victor Street and Fruitvale Avenue. Land uses to the south, along Rosedale Highway, include industrial uses, (i.e., machinery repair shops, an asphalt and concrete recycling center) and undeveloped areas. An extension of the BN & SF Railroads is situated to the southeast, oriented in anortheasterly/southwesterly direction. Industrial uses and vacant land are situated to the east, while recently constructed residential tracts are situated to the west, along Fruitvale Avenue. Other features in the area include an irrigation canal which extends from the northeast portion of the project area, to the southwest, then proceeds to the west, traversing the mid portion of the LMR site. A Southern California Edison power line easement extends in an east-west direction across the southern portion of the project area. Table 3-1, Surrounding Land Uses, provides a general description of the area surrounding the project sites. Project Description JN 1 0-1 002 78 3-4 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 1 f 1 1 Table 3-1 SURROUNDING USES Land Use Element Zoning ` 'Existing Location Designation District -Land Use North SR, P & SI City R-1 (10,000). Residential, fire County R-S, E, training facility and A &M-2 vacant South SI County A, M-2 & M-3 Vacant & service industrial East SI & HI County M-3 Treatment plant, service industrial & vacant West SR, SI & HI City R-1. Residential & vacant County R-S-2.5A, M-2 & M-3 .~' The following is a more detailed discussion of the land uses and conditions surrounding each of the three project sites: • GC Site: Land uses surrounding this site include vacant land and commercial establishments to the north (i.e., a gas station and restaurants), an irrigation canal and vacant land to the south and east, and the LR Site to the west (undeveloped land overgrown with shrubs and weeds and of I recovery operations). • LR Site: Land uses surrounding this site include the Kern County Fire ~, Training Facility, the Kern County Department of Public Works Equipment Facility and vacant land to the north, vacant land to the south, the GC Site (historically used by the North of River Sanitation ~, District) to the east, and residential uses to the west. • LMR Site: Land uses surrounding this site include vacant land and residential uses to the north, industrial uses to the south, vacant and agricultural uses to the east, and industrial uses to the west. ~~ Project Description JN 10-100278 3-5 May 24, 2000 .~ ,~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 3.2 BACKGROUND AND HISTORY The project area has been primarily utilized for oil and gas production, as well as agricultural operations. The North of River Sanitary District has owned the subject site and surrounding property for several decades. The North of River Sewage Treatment Plant, located adjacent to the east of the site, has been in operation since 1942. The District has constructed a new treatmentfacility west of Bakersfield and has been in full operation as of the summer of 1999. The new facility has resulted in the closure and abandonment of the treatment plant. The District negotiated a sale of the property to Mr. Kyle Carter who is seeking to annex 504.33 acres into the City of Bakersfield. A concurrent application for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change (GPA/ZC P99-0482) was submitted to the City of Bakersfield on May 21, 1999. The City determined that the application is subject to the provisions of CEQA and an EIR would be required. The Notice of Preparation for the project, which was circulated between August 16, 1999 and September 22, 1999, identified the project area for the EIR analysis as 304 acres. This included 276.8 acres of residential uses, asix-acre park, a 14-acre school site, 75.5 acres of roadways and 7.2 acres dedicated to railroad operations. During preparation of the Administrative Draft EIR in December, 1999, the project applicant submitted a revised project description resulting in the reductions in project acreage and elimination of the park, school, and railroad uses. 3.3 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS The project is an amendment to the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan with concurrent zone change on three noncontiguous sites which total 170.9 acres (refer to Exhibit 3-3, Land Use Plan and Table 3-2, Land Use and Zoning Summary). The project sites form part of the larger 504.33-area proposed for annexation. Proposed Land Use Element changes would require changes from industrial to residential and commercial. More specifically, the General Plan Amendments to the three proposed project sites are described as follows: GC Site: General Plan Amendment from Service Industrial (SI) to General Commercial (GC). Several existing District No. 1 structures (i.e., concrete structures, basins, and tanks) would be demolished with project implementation. The District offices and truck shed would remain on- site. 1 1 1 I D 1 1 i Project Description ~~ )N 1 0-1 002 78 3-6 May 24, 2000 ~~~~ m wp ~~ ~~ Z wW ~~ ~ ~ J ~~ O. j~ ~ _ `~ Qp W Z ~`~ ~' .~.. ~; J. ~~ s " - i~ ~ & b °~ ~ ~ & ~ T ~ ~i ~ ° ~v Z W W J k~ g$ ~ tl ' 1 w w CC ~~w ~~ ~a 6°~ ~~ a ~. ~ ^d o~ ~ F o ~ U ~ W 0.. U N d a M .w A O O q~ ~ b d m e a~ x~ a, GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 3-2 LAND USE AND ZONING SUMMARY Existing' Proposed.' Existing Proposed Acres County 'City'- General General. Proposed (Net Zoning Zoning Plan 'Plan Use Acres) M-1, M-2 & R-1 LI, SI & HI LR SFR 64.58 M-3 (218 DU) (48.44) M-3 R-2 HI LMR MFR 91.84 (509 DU) (68.88) M-1, M-2 & C-2 SI GC GC 14.48 M-3 (116,800 SF) (11.68) Total 170.90 (129.00) Notes: Sf K =Single tamily residential. DU =Dwelling unit. MFR =Multi-family residential. GC =General Commercial. LR Site: General Plan Amendment from Light Industrial (LI), Service Industrial (SI) and Heavy Industrial (HI) to Low Density Residential (LR). 1 1 1 _~ 1 1 i LMR Site: General Plan Amendment from Heavy Industrial (HI) to Low Medium ,~ Density Residential (LMR). Additionally, zone district amendments would be required as follows: GC Site: From County M-1, M-2, and M-3 PD to City Regional Commercial (C-2); ~I ~~ ~~I LR Site: From County M-1, M-2, and M-3 PD to City One Family Dwellin (g R_1); and ~. LMR Site: From County M-3 PD to City Limited Multiple-Family Dwelling (R-2) The proposed Circulation Element changes would delete Mohawk Street as an Arterial ~~ north of Hageman Road to Olive Drive, change Hageman Road from a Collector to an Arterial between Mohawk Street and Knudsen Drive/Landco Drive, along with ;~ modifying the alignment with an extension north a few hundred feet, and to establish a Col lector segment for Hageman Road between Knudsen Drive/Landco Drive to State g districts from the M 1 (Light Industrial), M 2 (General Manufacturing), and M-3 Route 99/State Route 204. The proposed zone changes would consist of changing the zonin - _ Project Description '~ JN 10-100278 3-8 May 24, 2000 ~' GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR '~ (Heavy Industrial) to R-1 (One Family Dwelling), R-2 (Multiple Family Dwelling), and C-2 (Regional Commercial). The annexation would incorporate 504.33 acres into the ' City of Bakersfield. The project proposes a decrease of the current industrial designations in the area which would in turn reduce the concentration of industrial uses within the annexation area. - The uses would transition from the existing industrial designation to proposed residential at Hageman Road and Mohawk Street, which would extend to the westerly project boundary. The 156.42 acres of residential uses includes densities ranging from 4 to 10 dwelling units per acre. A total of 75.5 acres of roadways would be provided. ~~' 3.4 PROJECT OBJECTIVES ~~ The objectives for the proposed project include the following: • Reduce the acreage of industrially designated property; `~ • Create tanned residential an p d commercial development; • Accommodate new development that is sensitive to the natural environment and accounts for environmental hazards; and ~, • Provide a local street network that contributes to the quality and safety of residential neighborhoods. ~' 3.5 PHASING Development of the proposed project would occur in incremental phases based largely on economic considerations, infrastructure improvements, market demands and other planning considerations. For the purposes of the EIR analysis, the phasing and exact ,~ nature of development would be determined in conjunction with more detailed levels of project planning, such as tentative tract maps. 3.6 AGREEMENTS, PERMITS AND APPROVALS The City of Bakersfield is the Lead Agency for the project and has discretionary authority over the primary project proposal which include the following: • Environmental Review: The EIR requires a certification recommendation by the Planning Commission and is then presented to the City Council for certification; Project Description )N 10-100278 3-9 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR •'• r tin General Plan Amendments: The applicant is eques g amendments to the Land Use Element and Circulation Elements of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan; ~~ • Zone Change: The applicant is requesting a zoning ordinance amendment to change the City of Bakersfield Zoning Map; • Tentative Parcel, Tract Maps and Master Plans: Individual tentative parcel or tract maps and master plans may also be processed at a future time for smaller parcels having particular development characteristics or ~' needs; • Conditional Use Permifs: Approval of future uses which are conditionally permitted under the proposed zoning would be subject to ~` the review and approval of the City; ~- • Grading Permifs: Future grading for development within the project '; site would be subject to the review of plans and approval of grading permits by the City; ;r • Site Plan Review: Individual site plans within the project site would be subject to the review of plans and approval of site plans by the City; and • Building Permits: Future construction of structures within the project site would be subject to the review of plans and approval of building permits by the City. The EIR will be used most immediately for the proposed General Plan amendments ,)~ and zone change and will be reviewed/used in conjunction with subsequent discretionary approvals by the City. ,~ Project Description )N 10-100278 3-10 May 24, 2000 ~~ 1 1 1 4.0 BASIS FOR CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS 1 t N i w 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 A 1 1 1 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 4.0 BASIS FOR CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS Section 15355 of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, as amended, provides the following definition of cumulative impacts: "Cumulative impacts refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable, or which compound or increase other environmental impacts." Pursuant to Section 15130(a) of the aforementioned Guidelines, "An EIR shall discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the project's incremental effect is cumulatively considerable, as defined in Section 15065(c)." The Initial Study Checklist provided as part of Appendix 15.1 indicates that the proposed project may yield potentially significant cumulative effects. As a result, Section 5.0 of this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) provides a cumulative impact assessment for each applicable environmental issue, and does so to a degree which reflects each impact's severity and likelihood of occurrence. As indicated above, a cumulative impact involves two or more individual effects. Such effects can be internal to, and confined solely to, a proposed project itself, or also be attributable to other external projects, producing related or cumulative effects. Per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15130, the discussion shall be guided by the standards of practicality and reasonableness. The following elements are necessary in an adequate discussion of cumulative impacts: 1. Either: a. A list of relevant past, present and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, if necessary, including those projects outside the control of the Agency, or b. A summary of projections contained in an adopted General Plan or related planningdocument, or in apriorenvironmental documentwhich has been adopted or certified, which described or evaluated regional or area-wide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact; 2. A summary of the expected. environmental effects to be produced by those projects with specific reference to additional information stating where that information is available; 3. A reasonable analysis of the cumulative impacts of the relevant projects. An EIR shall examine reasonable feasible options for mitigation or avoiding the project's contribution to any significant cumulative effects; and Basis for Cumulative Analysis JN 10-100278 4-1 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 4. With some projects, the feasible mitigation for cumulative im acts ma involve !~ p Y the adoption of ordinance or regulations rather than the imposition of , conditions on aproject-by-project basis. Table 4-1, Cumulative Projects List, identifies related projects and other possible development in the area determined as having the potential to interact with the .~ proposed project to the extent that a significant cumulative effect may occur. The location of these projects are also indicated in Exhibit 4-1, Cumulative Projects Location Map. Information integral to the identification process was obtained from the City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, and a review of several secondary data sources. The resulting related projects include primarily only those determined to be at least indirectly capable of interacting with the GPA/ZC P99-0482. In addition, this Section of the EIR also presents the status of all subdivision activity to date within a 3-mile radius of the project site boundaries. The City of Bakersfield determined that a 3 mile radius would adequately cover cumulative conditions as they relate to the proposed project. Table 4-1, Cumulative Projects List, summarizes the related projects according -~ to location, type and acreage. It should be noted that quantification of cumulative impacts is difficult and often times requires speculative estimates of impacts includin but not limited t th f ll i '~ g, o, e o ow ng: the geographic diversity of impacts in the Northwest Planning Area (impacts of future development may affect different areas); variations in time of impacts (many of the project's future impacts, especially the short-term construction related impacts, would ,r occur at different times, and would be reduced or removed before other short-term impacts occurred); complete data is not available for all future development; and data for future development may change during subsequent approvals. However, every attempt has been made to provide a qualitative judgement regarding the combined effects of, and relationship between, the different land uses. Basis for Cumulative Analvsis JN 1 0-1 002 78 4-2 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 4-1 CUMULATIVE PROJECT LIST No: Jurisdiction Project Name Section Township/Range Acres Lots (D.U.s) _ Zone 1 County TT 5772 01-29/27 66 329 R-1, R-2 PD 2 County TT 5222 05-29/27 20 9 E 2.5 RS 3 City TT 5921 7-29/27 56 183 R-1 4 City VTT 5920 8-29 63 235 R-1 lots OS, R-1 5 City VTT 5917 8-29/27 78 5 R-1, R-2, C-1 R-l, R-2, C-1 6 County TT 5930 10-29/27 21 79 R-1 7 County GPA#5/ZC#24/ PCD#15 15-29/27 6.5 N/A CO PD 8 County TT 5938 15-29/27 44 145 R-1 Susp. 9 City VTT 5915 17-29/27 74.5 5 R-1, R-2 R-1, R-2 10 City VTT 5916 17-29/27 135 5 R-1, O-S OS, R-1 11 City TT 5363 17-29/27 20-29/27 557.8 5 Recorded 6 Tentative R-1, R-3, OS, C-1 12 City VTT 5932 18-29/27 20 15 R-1, 2 CH R-1, R-1CH 13 City VTT 5596 18-29/27 40.4 133 R-1 14 City VTT 5658 18-29/27 80.7 274 R-1 15 City TT 5620 21-29/27 82 9 C-2, R-1, M-1 16 City TT 5621 21-29/27 58.5 214 R-1 17 City VTPM 10554 26-29/27 19 8 C-2 18 County TT 5481 30-29/27 10 20 E 1/4 Susp. 19 City RVTPM 9630 32-29/27 21.2 7 C-2 TT = Tentative Tract VTT = Vesting Tentative Tract TPM = Tentative Parcel Map VTPM = Vesting Tentative Parcel Map Ext. = Extension of Time RTT = Revised Tentative Tract RVTPM = Revised Vesting Tentative Parcel Map Susp. = Zoning in Suspense Basis for Cumulative Analysis JN 10-100278 4-3 May 24, 2000 0 ~~ ~~ 1°°"D T2eS 827E T2DS , , rt2eE a ~ . T245, R27E T29 E 6 S O 4 3 2 1 i O scow soao wESi auw cw~o[ tAOV ~ d~rM Ctt~oE Loon O O Y 7 __ 4 5 ~ ovYt dbrc 9 O ~ 7 la t2 ~ n 1U is 8 1 ~ 13 ~ w~twnaao 1s 1a 1 14 11 ^ ~ ~~ 1~16 ^ '~ y ~ ~ ~ . 19 ~ ~ 20 21 22 2S J ~ 24 ` 19 ^ f105EDAlL S!) ~ ^ ^ ~~ ~ J 17 ~4n~ sr. p..v. »e) :x~ ~ s tom. ^1 18 ~ ~ ~ 2S t c 29 aw RlM INEM!( ~~ ~ ~ CMXORIgn ~wEUUf E. ~ ~ .WEENIE 19 3/ 32 34 ~ 36 ~ 31 ~ ~ 32 slOrxnus np*otr T29S, 827E ernslowce wrt T295, R2EE • ' ~REEINT Se 6 5 4 3 i s 6 CITY LIMITS ~ ~ ~ AS OF 6-2-99 N.O.R.S.O. PROJECT SITE 15 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS Not to Scale CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Cumulative Projects Location Map ~ I~ ~~g ~obert Beirt.`William `T"ost 6Z~ssociates J( ~j~!! ozioo ~N ~o-~ooz~a w- Exhibit 4-1 u w C 1 w r 5.0 DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 1 1 A 1 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 5.0 DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, A IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 5.1 AESTHETICS/LIGHT AND GLARE Visual resources information for this Section was complied from site photographs and site surveys conducted by Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates (RBF) in June and September 1999. In addition, this discussion is based upon reference data from the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan dated March 1990 and associated Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The purpose of this Section is to describe the existing aesthetic environment on the project sites and in the vicinity, and analyze potential project impacts to the aesthetic character of the sites from project implementation. Consideration of public scenic views, impacts to scenic resources, and the introduction of new sources of light and glare, are also included in this Section. ^ EXISTING CONDITIONS ^ AESTHETICS/VIEWSHED The project area consists primarily of vacant land utilized for agricultural and oil production activities. Views across the project area from perimeter locations are mostly unobstructed. Exhibit 5.1-1, Project Area Photographs, depicts a consistent viewshed of vacant land with off-site residential and industrial uses visible in the background. Topography Topography for the majority of the City of Bakersfield can generally be described as \ flat, with average slopes in the 0-5 percent range. Exceptions to this occur in the northeast portion of the city where slopes regularly exceed 20 percent and are not readily adapted for development. According to the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR, these areas are to be left in their natural state, to be used as scenic backdrops or for recreational purposes. The proposed project site, which is located in the northwest portion of the City of Bakersfield is relatively flat with no steep slopes in the general vicinity. Kern River One of Bakersfield's most significant scenic resources is the Kern River. The Kern River has been described as the single most valuable visual resource in the southern San ' Joaquin Valley. According to the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR, the river provides many aspects for the area including a visual relief to the relative flatness Aesthetics/Light and Glare JN 10-100278 5.1-1 May 24, 2000 ~1 ~ ; `; ~ ~ a ~~:: ~~ m , J L U t O bA c O ~O - J +-+ C/') J `a-- O A L L a--~ ~ ~ Q ~~ W ..~ L 2~ 0 a~ nA c O J N L U s 0 ~o c O O J s x W ----, --~ .p~ ~! --- ~-~L \~ >< <_~ 11J 4 Y, ~ .: ~ ILA p ~ !A Jws N ~ a. Qo ~ m ~ ~ LL ~ ~~ °~s ~ ° O. U rn ~ ~ V a cn U c~ 3 O +~ bA C O O~ ~" J N ~_ :J') C J O L ('~ L ~1--~ O L Q N v c 0 0 J O O a GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR of the Valley, prime habitat for several forms of wildlife and moisture for riparian vegetation. The Kern River Plan Element was prepared by both the City and the 1 County was established to protect the Kern River area. As the project site is located approximately 3 miles to the north of the Kern River, the proposed project would not impact the Kern River. Scenic Resources Figure 2-31, Scenic Resources, of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan EIR, identifies the areas throughout the city where scenic resources occur. The resources identified include scenic viewsheds, scenic recreational areas, scenic views from highways and scenic vantage points. All of these resources are located within the northeast portion of Bakersfield. Since the project site is located in the northwest portion of the city, implementation would therefore not create an impact to any of these scenic resources. Scenic Highways There are three areas within the City of Bakersfield, which are eligible to become ,~ County-designated scenic routes. The three areas the EIR identifies are as follows: • Bakersfield-Glennville Road, beginning at the junction of James Road and the Bakersfield-G lennville Road and extending north to the northern boundary of Bakersfield; • Highway 178 east of Alfred Harrell Highway to the eastern boundary of Bakersfield; and • The Alfred Harrell Highway east of Panorama Drive and extending to Highway 178, then jogging south along Comanche Drive to Highway 58. According to the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR, upon official designation as a Scenic Highway, a local government body may eliminate and/or prevent unsightly development to occurwithin the corridor through a program involving the reasonable exercise of its power. The project site is bounded by Olive Drive to the north, State Route-99 on the east, Rosedale Highway 58 on south and Fruitvale Avenue on the west. The areas which have been identified as scenic highways are not in the vicinity of the project site. The segment of Highway 58 which may be considered a scenic highway is located in the _ southeast portion of the City of Bakersfield. Aesthetics/Light and Glare JN 10-100278 5.1-3 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR LIGHT AND GLARE , On-Site , Thecurrent North of River Sanitary Districtsewagetreatmentfacilityproducesminimal amount of light and glare to the project area. Aside from the wastewater treatment '~ operations, no other uses exist onsite which emit or cause light and glare effects. Off-Site Minimal lighting and glare effects are emitted from the land uses surrounding the project sites. The primary source of light in the project vicinity includes the industrial ~_ uses to the south and east and the commercial uses to the north of the project sites. Along the eastern border light and glare is caused by car headlights and streetlights associated with State Route-99. IMPACTS Significance Criteria Appendix G, Initial Study Checklist, of the California Environmental Quality Act ~ (CEQA) Guidelines includes checklistquestions relatingto aesthetics. A project would potentially create a significant aesthetic impact if it caused one or more of the following to occur: • Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista; • Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway; • Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site w and its surroundings; and/or • Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. ~ The evaluation of aesthetic impacts can be termed a subjective exercise due to widely varying personal perceptions. Nevertheless, replacement of undeveloped land with residential and commercial uses would permanently alterthe appearance of the project area. Potential impacts are categorized below according to topic. Mitigation measures at the end of this Section directly correspond to the numbered impact statements below. '~ Aesthetics/Light and Glare JN 10-100278 5.1-4 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR SHORT-TERM AESTHETIC IMPACTS 5.1-1 Construction activities on the proposed project sites may temporarily alter the ~! visual appearance of the sites. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Impacts are considered to be short-term; would cease upon completion of construction activities and would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of required mitigation measures. Project construction activities would disrupt views across the sites from surrounding areas. Graded surfaces, construction debris, construction equipment and truck traffic would be visible. Soil would be stockpiled and equipment for grading activities would '~ be staged at various locations throughout the sites. These impacts would be short-term and cease upon project completion. With the implementation of required mitigation regarding location of stagingareas and screening, short-term impacts would be reduced '~ to less than significant level. In addition, construction activities would be required to be consistent with the permitted hours of construction as set forth by the City of 1 Bakersfield. LONG-TERM AESTHETIC IMPACTS ~~ 5.1-2 Project implementation may permanently alter views of and across the site. Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. The visual analysis of any project must consider the actual visual quality of the area. Visual sensitivity is a factor in a visual analysis. Visual sensitivity is defined by public views of the project, the number of viewers and the duration of the view. Therefore, a project located on a site of high visual quality with high sensitivity would have the most significant impact. The project sites are considered to be in an area of moderate visual quality, due to the open space/vacant nature of the project sites. Although portions of proposed on-site structures would be visible from surrounding land uses and roadways, they would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista since the project site is not designated as such. Additionally proposed on-site structures would not substantially degrade scenic resources (i.e., trees, rock outcroppings, historic buildings) along a State designated scenic highway since one is not located in the project vicinity. Further, project planning design, height and architecture would be subject to design review by the City to ensure conformance with ~~ applicable City of Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 17.08 and Section 17.10. Implementation of the proposed project would permanently alter the nature and appearance of the sites from agriculture and vacant land to developed conditions. This alteration of appearance is permanent and would continue throughout the life of the ~, project. Views of the agricultural fields which comprise the LMR Site are currently available for a limited number of existing residents in the project area. The proposed Aesthetics/Light and Glare )N 10-100278 5.1-5 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR residential uses would be similar in character and density as surrounding off-site uses and can be considered visually compatible with existing surrounding land uses. Views from these areas are unobstructed, thus, the change in visual character from vacant to ,~ developed conditions would be a distinct visual alteration of the project sites. However, edge treatments (e.g., landscaping, setbacks, etc.) in accordance with City standards along the perimeter of the project sites would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. The proposed residential uses would be similar in character and density as surrounding off-site uses, therefore, would be considered visually compatible with existing surrounding land uses. LIGHT AND GLARE 5.1-3 Development of the proposed project may introduce additional light and glare on-sitebeyondexisting conditions. Significance: Potentiallysignificantimpact. Compliance with applicable City codes would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. The proposed project may create light glare impacts to off-site uses and introduce new sources of lighting into the project area. These sources include lighting for street lights, entryway lights and interior building lighting. On-site light sources may also create spillover light impacts on surrounding land uses. ~. Light sources from on-site residential and commercial sites may have a significant impact on adjacent residential areas. Street light illumination from the proposed residential areas would be comparable to existing nearby residential developments to the north and west of the project site. Compliance with applicable City Codes and the use of directional lighting techniques would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. Title 17.58.060 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code requires that the lighting of parking lots (GC Site) be designed and arranged in such a manner such that light is reflected away from adjacent residential properties and streets. The types/location of lighting fixtures/poles would be reviewed by the City during the site plan review process. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 5.1-4 Project development, together with cumulative projects may result in greater urbanization in the project area. Significance: No significant impacts beyond the analysis contained in the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General P/an EIR would occur. This impact was previously identified as a significanf unavoidable impacf in the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan E/R. Aesthetics/Light and Glare JN 10-100278 5.1-6 May 24, 2000 1 A 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Construction of currently approved and pending projects in the vicinity would permanently alter the nature and appearance of the area through the loss of open space/vacant areas. Security and street lighting would introduce light and glare potential to the area. Impacts are typically mitigated separately for each project. Cumulative impacts can be mitigated to less than significant levels with use of building materials that are consistent with the general character of the area, landscaping design, and proper lighting techniques to direct light on-site and away from adjacent properties. It should also be noted that visual impacts associated with the conversion of land to urban uses was previously analyzed in the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR. The EIR concluded that the permanent replacement of undeveloped property with urban uses was a significant and unavoidable aesthetic impact. As such, the City's General Plan EIR adopted a Statement of Overriding considerations for visual impacts associated with the conversion of vacant property (the site is currently designated for industrial uses by the General Plan). MITIGATION MEASURES The following mitigation measures directly correspond to the identified impact statements in the Impacts Subsections. SHORT-TERM AESTHETIC IMPACTS 5.1-1a Construction equipment staging areas shall be located away from existing residential uses and appropriate screening (i.e., temporary fencing with opaque material), shall be used to buffer views of construction equipment and material, when feasible. Staging location shall be indicated on project Final Development Plans and Grading Plans. 5.1-1 b Hours for construction shall be consistent with the City of Bakersfield Construction Noise Standards. LONG-TERM AESTHETIC IMPACTS 5.1-2 No mitigation measures are required. LIGHT AND GLARE 5.1-3 No mitigation measures are required. Aesthetics/Light and Glare JN 10-100278 5.1-7 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 5.1-4 No mitigation measure are required. LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCEAFTER MITIGATION No significant impacts related to Aesthetics/Light and Glare have been identified following implementation of mitigation measures and/or compliance with applicable standards, policies and/or City of Bakersfield codes. Aesthetics/Light and Glare )N 10-100278 5.1-8 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 5.2 AIR QUALITY The Air Quality Section evaluates potential short-term air quality impacts, associated with construction activities as well as long-term local and regional air quality impacts associated with project development. References include guidelines and information provided by the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, the California Air Resources Control Board, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Refer to Appendix 15.2, Air Quality Data, for the assumptions used in this analysis. EXISTING CONDITIONS SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR BASIN The State of California is divided into multiple air basins which are grouped into geographical areas with similar climate, topographical and meteorological conditions. The project site is located in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (Air Basin) which encompasses the Counties of San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare and the western and central portions of Kern County. The topography of the ~' Basin includes foothills and mountain ranges in the east, west, and south, and a relatively flat valley floor. Climate Temperature/Rainfall. The climate within the southern section of the Air Basin may be characterized by warm, dry summers and cool, moist winters. The average regional temperature is 65 degrees Fahrenheit (F), with daily temperatures in the summer months averaging 95 degrees F while winter lows average 45 degrees F. Temperatures in the immediate vicinity of the sites average 65.5 degrees F annually, ranging from average December low temperatures around 46.9 degrees F to average August high temperatures around 81.2 degrees F (Bakersfield Airport Monitoring Station). Rainfall in the project area averages 5.72 inches annually (Bakersfield Airport Monitoring Station) and occurs predominantly from September to April. Winds. Daytime winds in the Air Basin are general) from the northwest with avera e Y g wind speeds of 5.3 miles per hour (mph) during the winter to 7.3 mph during the summer. Temperature Inversions and Smog. Local meteorological conditions are also affected by atmospheric conditions and topographical features. The surrounding mountain ranges and light winds create areas of high pollutant concentrations by hindering the dispersal of airborne pollutants. Temperature inversions especially hamperdispersion by trapping air pollutants in the air near the ground. During the summer's longer Air Quality JN 10-100278 5.2-1 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR daylight hours, sunshine promotes photochemical reactions between nitrogen oxides (N03) and reactive organic compounds (ROC) to form ozone (03). Because it takes a long time for 03 to form in the atmosphere, 03 patterns are most affected by transport patterns. With westerly and northwesterly winds occurring on most days, the most frequent 03 transport route into Bakersfield originated from populated areas to the northwest and west. Ozone precursor pollutants emitted in Bakersfield are most likely , to contribute to 03 levels in areas to the southeast and east of Kern County. AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND STANDARDS Criteria air pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the Federal and State governments have established ambient air quality standards, or criteria, for outdoor concentrations in order to protect public health. These pollutants include ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NOz), sulfur dioxide (SOz), fine particulate matter (PM,o), and lead. The Federal and State standards have been set at levels above which concentrations could be generally harmful to human health and welfare. l As previous y mentioned, the City of Bakersfield is located in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin and, jurisdictionally, is governed by the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and the California Air Resources Board (GARB). `~ Under the provisions of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), the Environmental Protection ^ Agency (EPA) was required to classify each air pollution control district with respect to attainment or non-attainment status. Areas that violate Federal or State ambient air , quality standards are referred to as "non-attainment areas" forthe respective pollutants. The Kern County portion of the Basin is designated as anon-attainment area for 03 (State and Federal standards) and PM,o (State and Federal standards). The area is classified as attainment for the State CO standard, State NOZ standard and as unclassified/attainment for Federal NOZ standards. Kern County is designated as attainment for both State and Federal SOZ standards, and State lead (particulate) standard (there is no NAAQS for lead). The Federal CAA was amended in November 1990, primarily to overhaul the planning provisions of those areas not currently meeting the Federal ambient air quality standards. The Federal CAA identifies specific emission reduction goals, requires both a demonstration of reasonable further~progress and an attainment demonstration, and incorporates more stringent sanctions for failure to meet interim milestones. The 1988 California Clean Air Act (CCAA) re wires that all air districts in the State q endeavor to achieve and maintain CAAQS for 03, CO, S02, and N02 by the earliest practical date. The CCAA specifies that districts focus particular attention on reducing the emissions from transportation and area-wide emission sources. The Act also gives districts new authority to regulate indirect sources. Each district plan is to achieve a five percent annual reduction (averaged over consecutive three-year periods) i n district- - Air Quality ~. JN 10-100278 5.2-2 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR wide emissions of each non-attainment pollutant or its precursors. Any additional development within the region would impede the "no net" increase prohibition, in that further emissions reductions must be affected from all other airshed sources to fit any project development mobile source emissions increase. Pursuant to the CAA and subsequent amendments, the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD, the agency with jurisdiction over air quality in the Air Basin, prepared its 1993 Rate of Progress (ROP) Plan. The 1993 ROP Plan, which was submitted to the CARB for inclusion in the California State Implementation Plan (SIP), outlined how the APCD proposes to reduce 03 forming pollutants by providing a 15 percent reduction in emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) between 1990 and 1996. Other APCD SIP submittals include the Post-1996 ROP Plan, which proposes to reduce emissions of VOC and/or NOx by an additional 9 percent from 1990 levels, and the Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan, reached by 1999. Following revisions a few of these Plans, they were all approved by the EPA in March 1996. ~ San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Air Quality Attainment Plan - To reach attainment of the State standards for 03, the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD published its 1991 San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Air Quality Attainment Plan (AQAP) (adopted on January 30, 1992). Besides commitments to carry out all feasible control measures, the governing board also committed to other requirements of the CAA for ' severe non-attainment areas, including: 1) implementation of a permit program (New Source Review, Rule 2201) designed to achieve no net increases in emissions of non- attainment pollutants; 2) implementation of best available retrofit control technology (BARCT) measures for existing stationary sources and implementation of transportation control measures; 3) development of a strategy or transportation control measures (TCMs) to reduce vehicle trips, uses and miles traveled; 4) increase average vehicle ridership to 1.5 persons per vehicle during commute hours by January 1, 1999; 5) reduce population exposure to non-attainment pollutants by 25 percent by December 31, 1994; and 6) develop indirect and area source programs that include the Enhanced ~. District California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Participation, the Air Quality Elements, and the New and Modified Indirect Source Review programs. The AQAP could not demonstrate that emissions would be reduced by five percent a year from 1987 levels in any target year shown in the Plan, therefore "every feasible measure" was included in the AQAP for maximum compliance. Stationary Source Control Program. The APCD's Stationary Source Control Program provides both existing and new control technologies to reduce emissions from stationary and area-wide sources of air pollution. The objective of the Stationary Source Control Program is to achieve no net increases in emissions of non-attainment pollutants, ortheir precursors, from all permitted new and modified stationary sources. Air Quality )N 10-100278 5.2-3 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Indirect Source Control Programs and Mobile Source Emissions Control Measures. The APCD's Mobile Source Control Program includes three programs that address emissions from transportation sources. These programs include Indirect Source Review, Transportation Control Measures (TCMs), and Smoking Vehicles programs. The Indirect Source Control Program will establish aland-use framework that will reduce the need for the automobile. TCMs will encourage the use of public transit, , ridesharing,andotheralternativestosingle-occupancyvehicles. The Vehicles and Fuel Management (VFM) measures will evaluatethe implementation ofalternative fuels and low-emission vehicles. Public Education Pro rg am. The APCD's Public Education Program is designed to change public attitudes about air quality by encouraging individuals to actively participate in achieving emissions reductions. Although the Public Education Program will not result in any direct emissions reductions, the level of success of other AQAP measures depends upon the effectiveness of this Program. AMBIENT AIR QUALITY The San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (APCD) is the regional agency with jurisdiction over the control of air quality in the air basin. The APCD ~~ operates several air quality monitoring stations within the Basin. The Bakersfield - CaliforniaAvenue Monitoring Station is the nearest air quality monitoring station to the project site. The California Avenue Station was moved from its former Chester Street location in May 1994. The data collected at this Station is considered to be representative of the air quality experienced on the project site. Air quality data from 1994 to 1998 for the Bakersfield-California Avenue Station is provided in Table 5.2-1, Local Air Quality Levels. The following air quality information briefly describes the various types of pollutants. Ozone 03 is a colorless toxic gas that can irritate the lungs and damage materials and vegetation. Levels of 03 exceed Federal and State standards throughout the Air Basin. Because 03 formation is the result of photochemical reactions between NOx and reactive organic gasses (ROG), typically produced by combustion sources, peak concentrations of 03, occur downwind of precursor emission sources. The entire Air Basin, including Kern County is designated as anon-attainment area for State and Federal Os standards. Carbon Monoxide CO is an odorless, colorless toxic gas; produced almost entirely from combustion sources. This pollutant interferes with the transfer of oxygen to the brain and it is Air Quality )N 10-100278 5.2-4 May 24, 2000 ~i GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR generally associated with areas of high traffic density. Certain urban areas in the Air Basin, including Metropolitan Bakersfield, have been designated as unclassified for ,Federal CO standard. However, the area is classifies as attainment for the State CO standard. Nitrogen Dioxide NOz, often used interchangeably with NOx, is a reddish-brown gas that can cause breathing difficulties at high levels. Peak readings of NOz occur in areas that have a high concentration sources (e.g. motor vehicle engines, power plants, refineries, and other industrial operations) in the vicinity. The entire Air Basin, including Kern County, is designated as attainment for State NOz standard and as unclassified/ attainment for Federal NOz standards. 1 Fine Particulate Matter On July 1, 1987, the EPA replaced the total suspended particulate (TSP) standard with a new particulate standard known as PM,o. PM,o includes particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter (a micron is one millionth of a meter). Sources of PM,o include agricultural operations, industrial processes, combustion of fossil fuels, construction and demolition, and windblown dust and wildfires. The entire Air Basin, including Kern County, is designated as non-attainment for State and Federal PM,o standards. Particulate substantially reduce visibility and adversely affectthe respiratory tract. Reactive Organic Gases Organic compounds consists primarily of carbon and hydrogen. Motor vehicle emission and evaporation of organic compounds produce hydrocarbon emissions and can affect plant growth. Many hydrocarbon species react in the atmosphere to form photochemicals smog. Sulfur Dioxide and Lead t Sulfurdioxide (SOz), often used interchangeably with sulfuroxides (SOx), and lead (Pb) levels in all areas of the Air Basin do not exceed Federal or State standards. Kern County is designated as attainment for both State and Federal SOz standards. There is no NAAQS for lead. The entire Air Basin is in attainment for the State PB (particulate) standard. As indicated in Table 5.2-1, Local Air Quality Levels, some exceedances of State standard for 03 and PM,o occurred at the Bakersfield -California Avenue Monitoring Station from 1994 through 1998. The State 03 standard was exceeded from 14 to 66 Air Quality JN 10-100278 5.2-5 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.2-1 LOCAL AIR QUALITY LEVELS (As measured at Bakersfield-California Avenue Air Monitoring Station) Pollutant California Standard Federal ' Primary Standard Year "'M1laximum' Concentration Days (% Samples) State/Federal Std.Ezceeded .1994 Carbon 20 ppm 35 ppm 1995 9.0 0/0 Monoxide for 1 hour for 1 hour 1996 8.0 0/0 1997 1998 1994 6.7 0/0 9 ppm 9 ppm 1995 6.4 0/0 for 8 hours for 8 hours 1996 7.7 0/0 1997 4.0 0/0 1998 3.9 0/0 1994 0.12 25/0 Ozone 0.09 ppm 0.12 ppm 1995 0.13 59/2 for 1 hour for 1 hour 1996 0.13 66/3 1997 0.12 14/0 1998 0.12 29/0 1994 0.08* 0/0 Nitrogen Dioxides 0.25 ppm 0.053 ppm 1995 0.11 0/0 fort hour annual average 1996 0.09 0/0 1997 0.08 0/0 . 1998 0.08 0/0 Fine Particulate Matter 1994 97 16/0 50 ug/m' 150 ug/m' 1995 130 36/0 for 24 hours for 24 hours 1996 153 28/0 1997 94 2110 1998 NM NM 0.14 ppm for 24 hours 1994 0.02' 0/0 Sulfur Dioxides 0.25 ppm for 1 or 1995 0.03 0/0 hour 80 ug/m' (0.03 1996 0.01 0/0 ppm) annual 1997 0.01 0/0 average 1998 NM NM Sources: Data obtained from the California Air Resources Board Summary of Air Quality Data. 1994 to 1998 ppm =parts per million ug/m' =micrograms per cubic meter N/M =not measured * Less than 12 months of monitoring NOTES 1. Maximum concentration is measured over the same period as the California Standard. 2. Ambient Air Quality data measured at Bakersfield-California Avenue Monitoring Station Air Quality JN 10-100278 5.2-6 May 24, 2000 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR days a year over this period. The Federal 03 standard was exceeded a total of 13 times during this period (3 times in 1996 and 2 times in 1995). The State PM,o standard was exceeded numerous times each year from 1.994 to 1997. Sensitive Receptors 1 1 Sensitive populations are more susceptible to the effects of air pollution than are the general population. Sensitive populations (sensitive receptors) who are in proximity to localized sources of toxics and CO are of particular concern. Land uses considered sensitive receptors include residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, athletic facilities, long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, and retirement homes. Residential uses are located centrally on the project site immediately east of Mohawk Street. However, these residential units are anticipated to be removed upon buildout of the proposed project. Single-family residential uses are located adjacent to the north and west of the project site. Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) The San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD implements TAC controls through Federal, State and local programs. Federally, TACs are regulated by EPA under Title III of the CAA. At the State level, the ARB has designated all 189 Federal hazardous air pollutants as TACs, under the authority of Assembly Bill (AB) 1807. The Air Toxic Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act Assembly Bill, AB requires inventories and public notices facilities with "significant risks" to prepare a risk reduction plan. The San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD also regulates source-specific TACs. Refer to Section 5.6, Human Health/Risk of Upset, for additional information regarding toxic uses on- site. ! IMPACTS 1 1 Significance Criteria Significance thresholds in this Section are based on the CEQA Appendix G Environmental Checklist Form and the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD as indicated below. CEQA Appendix G Thresholds A potentially significant impact to air quality would occur if the project caused one or more of the following to occur: • Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; 1 Air Quality JN 10-100278 5.2-7 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Violation of any air quality standard or substantial contribution to an existing or projected air quality standard; • 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); • Exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; and/or • The creation of objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. San )oaquin Valley Unified APCD Thresholds In addition to CEQA significance thresholds, criteria for determining whether the potential air quality impacts of a project need to be analyzed in an EIR have been determined by the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD. Quantitative emission thresholds recommended by the District are shown in Table 5.2-2, APCD Air Quality Thresholds. Table 5.2-2 APCD AIR QUALITY THRESHOLDS Pollutant Operational Emissions Threshold Reactive Organic Compounds (ROG) 10 tons/year Oxides of Nitrogen 10 tons/year Carbon Monoxide Generation of CO hot spots that exceed 20 ppm for 1-hour and 9 ppm for 8-hour CO concentrations ppm =parts per million The APCD separates construction emissions from operational emissions when determining significance. Construction projects that emit more than the thresholds listed in Table 5.2-2 would normally be considered significant. Emissions from project operations should be calculated separately for comparison to the thresholds. Localized concentration modeling for CO should be accomplished for projects leading to change in level of service (LOS) from D to E or from E to F on major roads. 1 1 1 1 Air Quality JN 1 0-1 002 78 5.2-8 May 24, 2000 ~' GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Air quality impacts from the project site are categorized below according to topic. Mitigation measures at the end of this Section directly correspond to the identified ' impact statements. SHORT-TERM AIR QUALITY IMPACTS 5.2-1 Significant short-term air quality impacts may occur duringsite preparation and project construction. Significance: Significant before and after mitigation for NOx emissions from construction equipment exhaust. Significant before mitigation for PMio fugitive dust. Implementation of mitigation measures would reduce PMio emissions to a less than significant level; impacfs would ' be less than significant for other pollutants. Short-term air quality impacts would occur during grading and construction activities associated .with implementation of the proposed project. These temporary impacts would include: • Particulate (fugitive dust) emissions from clearing and grading activities on-site; • Exhaust emissions and potential odors from the construction equipment used on-site as well as the vehicles used to transport materials to and ' from the site; • Off-site air pollutant emissions at the power plant serving the site, while temporary power lines are needed to operate construction equipment and provide lighting; and • Exhaust emissions from the motor vehicles of the construction crew. The above described power plant and vehicle emissions are generated during construction activities. However, emissions from these sources would continue after project completion as a result of long-term electricity consumption and traffic ' generated by the proposed land uses. Project-related power plant and motor vehicle emissions are further analyzed in the long-term impacts portion of this Section. It should be noted that emissions produced during grading and construction activities are "short-term" in nature as they endure only for the duration of construction. Fugitive Dust Emissions Construction activities are a source of fugitive dust (PM,o) emissions that may have a substantial, temporary impact on local air quality. In addition, fugitive dust may be Air Quality )N 10-100278 5.2-9 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR a nuisance to those living and working in the project vicinity. Fugitive dust emissions are associated with land clearing, ground excavation, cut and fill operations, and truck travel on unpaved roadways. Dust emissions also vary substantially from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific operations, and weather conditions. Fugitive dust from grading and construction is expected to be short-term and would , cease following project completion. Additionally, most of this material is inert silicates, rather than the complex organic particulates released from combustion sources, which are more harmful to health. Dust (larger than 10 microns) generated ' by such activities usually becomes more of a local nuisance than a serious health problem. Of a particular health concern is the amount of PM,o (particulate matter smaller than 10 microns) generated as a part of fugitive dust emissions. As previously ' discussed, PM,o poses a serious health hazard, alone or in combination with other pollutants. The URBEMIS7G computer model calculates PM,o fugitive dust as part of the site grading emissions (referto Table 5.2-3, below). Control measures required and enforced by the APCD under Regulation VIII would help to control these short-term emissions to a less than significant level if a limited number of acres is disturbed at any one time. The following three APCD Rules apply to the proposed project. Rule 8010: Fugitive dust administration requirement for control of PM,o; , Rule 8020: Fugitive dust requirement for control of PM,o from construction, demolition, excavation and extraction ac tivities; and ' Rule 8070: Fugitive dust requirements for control of PM,o from vehicle and/or equipment parking, shipping, receiving, transfer, fueling, and service areas one acre or larger. In addition, the project would be subject to the following local zoning regulations. , • Water sprays or chemical suppressants. must be used in all unpaved areas to control fugitive emissions; and • All access roads and parking areas must be covered with asphalt- concrete paving. Compliance with the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Regulation VIII, the local ' zoning code, and additional mitigation measures recommended in this Section would reduce PM,o fugitive dust emissions to a less than significant than significant level. Air Quality , JN 10-100278 5.2-10 May 24, 2000 1 l 1 1 [] GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Construction Equipment and Worker Vehicle Exhaust (Significant after mitigation for NOx emissions) Exhaust emissions from construction include emissions associated with the transport of machinery and supplies to and from the project site, emissions produced on-site as the equipment is used ,and emissions from trucks transporting excavated materials from the sites and fill soils to the site. Emitted pollutants would include CO, ROG, NOx, SOx, and PM,o. Table 5.2-3, Construction Emissions, present exhaust emission factors fortypicaldiesel- powered heavy equipment. Exhaust emissions would vary substantially from day to day. The numerous variables factored into estimating total construction emissions include: level of activity, length of construction period, number of pieces and types of equipment in use, site characteristics, weather conditions number of construction personnel, and amount of materials to be transported ,on/off site. Table 5.2-3 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS Emissions Pollutant (tons/year)' Source ROG NOx CO PMio Unmitigated Emission2 8.51 84.61 3.68 88.37 SJVUAPCD Threshold 10 10 NA NA Is Threshold Exceeded Before Mitigation? No Yes NA NA Mitigated Emissions 8.18 80.50 3.68 38.09 Is Threshold Exceeded After Mitigation? No Yes NA NA ROG =reactive organic gases NOx =nitrogen oxides CO =carbon monoxide PMio =fine particulate matter NOTES: ' Emissions calculated using the URBEMIS7G Computer Model as recommended by the SJVUAPCD. z Calculations include emissions from numerous sources including: demolition of several on-site structures, site grading, construction worker trips, stationary equipment, diesel mobile equipment, and asphalt off-gassing. s Refer to Appendix 15.2 for assumptions used in this analysis, including quantified emissions reduction by mitigation measures. Air Quality JN 10-100278 5.2-11 May 29, 2000 i GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ' As indicated in Table 5.2-3, emissions associated with construction equipment within , the project area are anticipated to exceed the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD NOx threshold of 10 tons per year. Although mitigation measures are recommended to ' reduce the significanceof short-term construction emissions (including NOxemissions), NOx emissions would remain significant following mitigation. LONG-TERM OPERATIONAL IMPACTS 5.2-2 The project may result in an overall increase in the local and regional pollutant ' load due to direct impacts from vehicle emissions and indirect impacts from electricity and natural gas consumption. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact for ROG and NOx emissions; less than significant for emissions of , other pollutants. Long-term airquality impacts would consist of mobile source emissions generated from project-related traffic and stationary source emissions generated directly from the natural gas consumed and indirectly from the power plant providing electricity to the project site. Emissions associated with each of these sources are discussed and calculated below. Mobile Source Emissions: Regional Impacts (Significantfor ROG and NOx emissions) Mobile sources refer to emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporative emissions. Depending upon the pollutant being discussed, the potential air quality impact may be of either regional or local concern. For example, ROG, NOx, SOx, and PM,o are all pollutants of regional concern. (NOx and ROG react with sunl fight to form 03 or photochemical smog, and SOx and PM,o are readi ly transported by wind currents). However, CO tends to be a localized pollutant, dispersing rapidly at the source. Long-term impacts to regional air quality levels are analyzed below. As previously discussed, the Bakersfield area is anon-attainment area for Federal and State air quality standards for 03 and PM,o. Nitrogen oxides and ROG are regulated 03 precursors. (A precursor is defined by the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD as, "a directly emitted air contaminant that, when released into the atmosphere, forms or causes to the formed or contributes to the formation of a secondary air contaminant for which an ambient airquality standard has been adopted..."). Project-generated vehicle emissions have been estimated using URBEMIS 7G model from CARB. This model predicts CO, NOx, and PM,o emissions from motor vehicle traffic associated with new or modified land uses (refer to Appendix 15.4, Air Quality Evaluation, for model input values used for this project with the model output). Project trip generation rates were based on the Project Traffic Study (refer to Section 5.9, Traffic and Circulation, and Appendix 15.2, Traffic Study). Table 5.2-4, Long-Term Project Emissions, presents regional mobile emissions anticipated with project buildout. Air Quality )N 1 0-1 002 78 5.2-12 1 1 1 n May 24, 2000 1 1 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.2-4 LONG-TERM PROJECT EMISSIONS' (Project Buildout) Pot{utant (Tons/Year) ROG NOS CO PMto GPA/ZC Project (unmitigated) • Area Source Emissions 40.54 7.65 40.80 5.06 • Vehicle Emissions 41.84 75.63 332.25 26.00 Total Unmitigated Emissions 82.38 83.28 373.05 31.06 APCD Threshold 10 10 NA NA Is Threshold Exceeded? (Significant Impact?) Yes Yes NA NA 1. Based on URBMIS7G modeling results for opening year 2002 and trip rate data provided in the project Traffic Study. 2. The San Joaquin Valley APCD does not have an annual t hreshold for CO or PMto. ROG =reactive organic gases NOx =nitrogen oxides CO =carbon monoxide PMto =fine particulate matter As shown in Table 5.2-4, emissions generated by the project at buildout would result in criteria pollutants exceeding the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD's thresholds for ROG and NOx. ' Area Source Emissions The proposed project would generate electrical demand and heating demands resulting ' in natural gas combustion. Electrical demand would result in electrical generation emissions from local power plants. As indicated in Table 5.2-4, Long-Term Project Emissions, stationary source emissions generated directly from the natural gas ' consumed and indirectly from the power plant providing electricity to the project site at buildout would result in criteria pollutants exceeding the San Joaquin Val ley Unified APCD's thresholds for ROG and NOx. ' Total Project Operational Emissions G As shown in Table 5.2-4, the mobile source and area emissions associated with the proposed project would generate pollutant emissions in excess of SJVUAPCD thresholds. Thus, implementation of the proposed project would create a significant and unavoidable individual project impact from ROG and NOx emissions. In addition, Air Quality )N 10-100278 5.2-13 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR as the Basin is in non-attainment for 03 and PM,o air quality standards, and as the proposed project would exceed established ROG/NOx and PM,o thresholds, the project would create a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact to regional levels of these pollutants (refer to cumulative discussion below). Localized CO Emissions As identified in the Significance Criteria discussion, localized concentration modeling for CO should be accomplished for projects leading to a change in level of service (LOS) from D to E or from E to F on major roads. In these instances, a localized CO hotspot (i.e., an exceedance of established State and/or Federal standard) may be created at specific. intersections. According to the project Traffic Study (refer to Tables 5-1 and 5-2 for opening year 2001 and Tables 5-3 and 5-4 for year 2020 in the project Traffic Study), several intersections may experience a change in LOS from D to E or from E to F under unmitigated conditions with the project. However, as indicated on these tables, implementation of~recommended mitigation measures would improve these intersections to within acceptable LOS and not exceed the aforementioned significance criteria. As such, the project is not anticipated to create a significant localized emission of CO or create significant localized impacts to nearby sensitive receptors in this regard. CONSISTENCY WITH AIR QUALITY ATTAINMENT PLAN 5.2-3 The proposed project would not be consistent with the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD'S Air Quality Attainment Plan. Significance: Significant and unavoidable impact; mitigation measures are not feasible. The San )oaquin Valley Air Basin is designated as non-attainment for both 03 and PM,o (both State and Federal Standards). The CCAA requires non-attainment districts with severe air quality problems to provide for a five percent reduction in non-attainment emissions per year. As previously discussed, the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD prepared an AQAP for the San )oaquin Valley Air Basin in compliance with the requirements of the CCAA. The Plan requires best available retrofit technology on specific types of stationary sources to reduce emissions. The CCAA and the AQAP also identify TCMs as methods of reducing emissions from mobile sources. The CCAA defines transportation control measures as, "any strategy to reduce vehicle trips, vehicle use, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle idling or traffic congestion for the purpose of reducing motor vehicle emission." The AQAP for the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin identifies the provision to accommodate the use of bicycles, public transportation and traffic flow improvements as TCMs. Project-generated emissions of ROG and NOx (which react to form 03) and PM,o would exceed the District's threshold levels. The Traffic Impact Study prepared forthe project Air Quality J N~ 1 0-1 002 78 5.2-14 1 1 1 1 May 24, 2000 , GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR recommends mitigation measures, such as street improvements or traffic signals, for intersections and street segments which fall below an acceptable LOS due to the - impact of future traffic. The study allocated a proportionate share of the mitigation t measures to the project. The proposed mitigation measures are traffic flow improvements which are recognized TCM's in compliance with the AQAP. ' Although TCMs would be implemented, the project proposes a General Plan amendment to allow residential uses as opposed to industrial uses (the current General ' Plan land use designation). As such, the residential population generated by the project was not original ly included in the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. These project-related population increases were also not anticipated in the San)oaquin ' Valley Unified APCD's AQAP. Since pollutant emissions from this additional population were not anticipated in eitherthe General Plan orAQAP, the project would be inconsistent with both of these documents. This inconsistency would be a ' significant project impact. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ' S.2-4 Impacts to regional air quality resulting from development of cumulative projects may significantly impact existing air quality levels. Significance: ' Impacts would be significant and unavoidable for ROG, NOx and PM,o emissions. ' The annual short-term and long-term emissions associated with the cumulative projects indicated in Section 4.0, Cumulative Projects, would be dependent on the phasing of ' each project. Adherence to S)VUAPCD rules and regulations would help to alleviate these impacts. However, the build out, sale and occupancy of the dwelling units and other uses would be controlled by market demand. Emission reduction technology, ' strategies and plans are constantly being developed. These include the AQAP, PM,o Attainment Demonstration Plan, Bakersfield Metropolitan Area 2010 Plan Land Use and Conservation Elements, Air Quality Guidelines for General Plans and Energy ' Aware Planning Guide. As discussed in Impact Discussion 5.2-3; above, since the Basin is non-attainment for ' 03 and PM,o air quality standards (both State and Federal standards), additional emissions of ROG and NOx (precursors to 03) and PM,o would be considered significant and adverse cumulative impacts. ' MITIGATION MEA RE SU S ' The following mitigation measures directly correspond to the identified impact statements provided in the impacts Subsection for the proposed project: 1 ' Air Quality JN 10-100278 5.2-15 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ' SHORT-TERM IMPACTS 5.2-1 a Prior to the approval of a grading plan for any residential tract, multiple ' family project, and commercial project, the project applicant shall submit a letter to the City of Bakersfield Planning Department from the S)VUAPCD stating the dust suppression measures that shall be ' completed during construction activities in order to comply .with S)VUAPCD Regulation VIII. At a minimum, these measures shall include: the replacement of ground cover in disturbed areas quickly; ' proper maintenance of construction equipment; watering of haul roads two times per day; reduced speeds on unpaved roads of 15 miles per hour or less; and the use of low volatile organic compound asphalt. ' 5.2-1 b Prior to the approval of a grading plan for any residential tract, multiple family project, and commercial project, the project applicant shall , submit a letter to the City of Bakersfield Planning Department from the S)UAPCD stating the measures that shall be completed during asphalt ,. paving in order to comply with S)VUAPCD Rule 4641. 5.2-1c The construction grading plans shall include a statement that all ' construction equipment shall be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacture's specifications. 5.2-1 d The construction grading plans shat l incl ude a statement that work crews ' shall shut off construction equipment when not in use. LONG-TERM IMPACTS ' 5.2-2 The project applicant shall incorporate the following in building plans: ' • Solar or low-emission water heater shall be used; ' • Central water heating systems shall be used; • Double-panned glass shall be used in all windows; and • Energy efficient low-sodium lighting in parking areas shall be , used. CONFORMITY WITH AIR QUALITY ATTAINMENT PLAN ' 5.2-3 No mitigation measures are feasible. Air Quality , )N 1 0-1 002 78 5.2-16 May 24, 2000 , GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 5.2-4 Mitigation measures beyond those contained in applicable plans and ' policies would be implemented on aproject-by-project basis. No additional mitigation measures are required. LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION ' The following air quality impacts would remain significant and unavoidable following mitigation: • NOx emissions from construction activities; • ROG and NOx emissions from project operations; • The project would be inconsistent with the San Joaquin Valley Unified ' Air Quality Attainment Plan; and • Cumulative development would also result in significant and unavoidable impacts to regional air quality levels of ROG, NOx, and PMio. ' If the City of Bakersfield approves the project, the City shall be required to cite their findings in accordance with Section 15091 of CEQA and prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations in accordance with Section 15093 of CEQA. n ' Air Quality JN 1 0-1 002 78 5.2-17 May 24, 2000 1 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 5.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The purpose of this Section is to identify existing biological resources in the project area, analyze potential project-related impacts to these resources (including sensitive species) and recommend mitigation measures to reduce the significance of impacts which are identified. Information in this Section is based on the Project Biological ~,( Resources Technical Report prepared by BonTerra Consulting, January 20, 2000. The Study is included as Appendix 15.3. This Section describes the biological character of the project area in terms of vegetation, flora, wildlife, and wildlife habitats. This information has been reported in accordance with accepted scientific and technical standards which are consistent with the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife ,~, Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), as well as local laws and policies. EXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEY METHODS The data provided in the Biological Resources Technical Report was collected from biological surveys conducted on January 5, 2000 by Sandra J. Leatherman, Senior Biologist, and Amber S. Oneal, Ecologist, of BonTerra Consulting. In addition, existing documentation pertinent to the biological resources within or in the vicinity of the project sites was compiled and reviewed. This documentation included a review of taxa currently listed as Threatened or Endangered, proposed for listing by the CDFG and USFWS, and those listed by the California Native Plant Society (GNPs). BonTerra Consulting conducted a search of the available literature to identify special status plants, wildlife, or habitats known to occur in the vicinity of the project sites. The California Native Plant Society's Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular ~~ Plants of California (GNPs 1999) and the CDFG's California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) were reviewed. The Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan (MBHCP) and the Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley, California (USFWS 1998) were also reviewed. General Plant Surveys General plant surveys were conducted by Ms. Leatherman and Ms. Oneal. The purpose of the surveys was to describe the vegetation present on the project sites and evaluate the potential of the habitats to support special status plant species. All plant species observed were recorded in field notes and are listed in Table A-1, Flora Compendia, of Appendix 15.3, Biological Resources Technical Report. Plant species were identified in the field or collected for later identification. Plants were identified using taxonomic keys in Hickman (1993), Munz (1974), and Abrams (1923, 1960). t Biological Resources )N 10-100278 5.3-1 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR General Wildlife Surveys A general wildlife survey was conducted simultaneously with the general plant survey. This survey included active searches for reptiles and amphibians including lifting, overturning, and carefully replacing rocks and debris. Birds were identified by standard visual and auditory recognition. Surveys for mammals included searching for and identifying diagnostic sign, including scat, footprints, scratch-outs, dusting bowls, burrows, and trails. All wildlife species which were observed were recorded in field notes and are listed in Table A-2, Fauna Compendia, of Appendix 15.3, Biological Resources Technical Report. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ,, This section describes the biological resources that either occur or potential ly occur on the project sites or within their immediate vicinity. Vegetation types, wildlife populations and movement patterns, special status vegetation types, and special status plant and wildlife species, either known or potentially occurring within the project sites, are discussed below. Vegetation Types Three vegetation types occur on the project sites: disturbed/ruderal, ornamental, and . agriculture (Refer to Exhibit 3, Biological Resources, of Appendix 15.3, Biological Resources Technical Report). Disturbed/Ruderal. The majority of the vegetation on the project sites consist of disturbed/ruderal. These areas have been previously farmed or graded and presently contain minimal amounts of non-native plant species. The species present in these areas includetelegraph weed (Heterothecagrandiflora), ripgutgrass (Bromus diandrus), ,~ annual bunveed (Ambrosia acanthicarpa), foxtail chess (Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), and London rocket (Sisymbrr'um irio). I areas occur surroundin the existin Sanita District Ornamental. The ornamenta g g ry buildings and a patch of ornamental vegetation in the agricultural fields. The vegetation present surrounding the buildings consists of orange trees and Chinaberry (Melia azedarach). The small patch of ornamental vegetation in the agricultural field consists of California fan palms (Washingtonia filifera). Agriculture. The agriculture in the project area consists of one large field comprised of rows of crops. The crop present during the survey was carrots. The only other vegetation present in these areas was ruderal (i.e., non-native) plant species directly adjacent to the roads and surrounding the pumps. Species present in these areas included Russian thistle, London rocket, flax-leaved horseweed (Conyza bonariensis), ,~ annual burweed, cheeseweed (Malva parviflora), common groundsel (Senecio Biological Resources jN 10-100278 5.3-2 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR vulgaris), red-stemmed filaree (Erodium cicutarium), shepherd's purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris), and Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon). Wildlife Fish. The canal which extends through the LMR site appeared to be frequently cleared ~; and maintained and contains only sparse ruderal vegetation. Due to the disturbed nature of the canal and the potential for pesticide and herbicide run-off, very few fish species are expected to occur on the LMR site, however, the western mosquito fish (Gambusia affinis) may be present (Baskin pers. comm. 2000). ;~ Amphibians. Amphibians require moisture for at least a portion of their life cycle and many require standing or flowing water for reproduction. Terrestrial species may or may not require standing water for reproduction. These species are able to survive in dry areas by remaining beneath the soil, in burrows, under logs, or under leaf litter, emerging only when temperatures are low and humidity is high. Many of these species' habitats occur in association with water, and many emerge to breed after the rainy season begins. In addition, moisture in soil can remain high within certain habitats depending on factors such as amount of vegetation cover, elevation, slope, and aspect. °' The canal on the LMR site contained little vegetative cover, however, may provide limited suitable habitat for the western toad (Bufo boreas), Pacific slender salamander ,~ (Batrachoseps pacificus), and Pacific tree frog (Hylla regilla). These species may occupy areas immediately adjacent to the canal, areas adjacent to pumps in the agricultural fields, and wet agricultural fields. .~ Reptiles. Reptilian diversity and abundance typicallyvarieswithvegetationassociation type and character. Many species prefer only one or two vegetation associations, ~~ however, most will forage in a variety of habitat types. Most species occurring in open areas use rodent burrows and various objects lying on the ground surface for cover, ~~ protection from predators, and refuge during extreme weather conditions. No reptile species were observed during the survey, most likely due to the cold ~; temperature. However, common reptile species expected within. the project sites include the side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), southern alligator lizard (Gerrhonotus multicarinatus), and gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus). Birds. Birds were the most widely observed vertebrate taxon occurring within the ;~' project area. Species observed include rock dove (Columba livia), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), Say's phoebe (Sayornis saya), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), American pipit (Anthus rubescens), savannah ~,1 Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5.3-3 May 24, 2000 l~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis),white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), A elaius hoeniceus western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta), ~' red-winged blackbird (g p ), Brewer's blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus), and house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus). ~~ Habitats within the project sites provide moderate quality foraging habitat for a variety of raptors (i.e., birds of prey). The American kestrel (Falco sparverius) was the only raptor observed on the project sites during the biological surveys. However, the white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), and red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) would also be expected to occasionally forage at the project sites. With the exception of the American kestrel, which may nest in ornamental palm trees, raptors would not be expected to nest on the project sites due to lack of suitable habitat. ~' Mammals. Rodents are among the most diverse and widespread mammals and several species are expected to occur within the project sites. Burrows of the California ground squirrels (Spermophilus beechey-~ were observed on the project sites. Other rodents that potentially occur within the project sites include the introduced house mouse (Mus musculus) and Botta's pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae). ~- Medium to large-sized mammals observed or expected to occur on the project sites :~ include the desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii), Virginia opossum (Didelphis " virginiana), and coyote (Canis latrans). Wildlife Movement Wildlife corridors link together areas of suitable wildlife habitat that are otherwise separated by rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, or human disturbance. The fragmentation of open space areas by urbanization creates isolated "islands" of wildlife habitat. Corridors mitigate the effects of this fragmentation by: (1} allowing animals to move between remaining habitats, thereby permitting depleted populations to be replenished and promoting genetic exchange; (2) providing escape routes from fire, ` n isturbances thus reducin the risk that catastro hic events, predators, and huma d g p such as fire or disease, will result in population or local species extinction; and (3) serving as travel routes for individual animals as they move in their home ranges in search of food, water, mates, and other necessary resources. Wildlife movement activities usually fall into one of three movement categories: (1) dispersal (e.g., juvenile animals from natal areas, or individuals extending range distributions); (2) seasonal migration; and (3) movements related to home range activities (e.g., foraging for food or water, defending territories, or searching for mates, ~~ breeding areas, orcover). A numberof terms such as "wildlife corridor", "travel route", "habitat linkage",and "wildlife crossing" have been used in various wildlife movement studies to refer to areas in which wildlife move from one area to another. To clarify the Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5:3-4 May 24, 2000 ' GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~~ meaning of these terms and facilitate the discussion on wildlife movement in this ' analysis, these terms are defined as follows: • Travel Route: A landscape feature (such as a ridgeline; drainage, - canyon, or riparian strip) within a larger natural habitat area that is used frequently by animals to facilitate movement and to provide access to ,~ necessary resources (e.g., water, food, cover, den sites). • Wildlife Corridor: Apiece of habitat, usually linear in nature, that connects two or more habitat patches that would otherwise be fragmented or isolated from one another. Wildlife corridors are usually ,~ bounded by urban land areas or other areas unsuitable for wildlife. • Wildlife Crossing: A small, narrow area, relatively short in length and generally constricted in nature, that allows wildlife to pass under or through an obstacle or barrier that otherwise hinders or prevents movement. Crossings typically are manmade and include culverts, underpasses, drainage pipes, and tunnels to provide access across or under roads, highways, pipelines, or other physical obstacles. ~, Since the project sites are currently open space, it probably does allow for some wildlife movement. However, the project sites are not expected to support a substantial amount of wildlife movement since it is surrounded by urban development. ,~ In addition, the project sites do not provide adequate vegetative cover for many of the larger wildlife species and the canal does not function as a regional wildlife corridor. However, large areas of agricultural land are located in close proximity to the project sites and could be accessed by using the canal and railroad tracks that run near the project sites so it may be used as a local wildlife corridor. These agricultural areas and oil fields in the area could be also be used to reach the Kern River or other natural open space areas. The project sites are approximately two miles north of the Kern River. The Kern River does function as a wildlife corridor connecting larger areas of natural open space to the northeast and southwest of the project sites. Therefore, although the project sites themselves do not function as wildlife corridors, .the railroad and canal on, and adjacent to, the project sites could be used to access the wildlife corridors or larger areas of open space in the project vicinity. METROPOLITAN BAKERSFIELD HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN (MBHCP) The proposed project is located in an area covered by the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and, therefore, is covered underthe MBHCP. The City and County developed the Habitat Conservation Plan to acquire incidental take permits, which would allow take of federal and state listed species included in the MBHCP. The t~ permits acquired include a permit under Section 10(a)(1)(B), hereafter referred to as a 10(a) permit, of the United States Endangered Species Act and a permit under Section ~~ Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5.3-5 May 24, 2000 0482 PROGRAM EIR C P 9 / - GPA Z 9 2081 of the California Endangered Species Act. The MBHCP is designed to offset horization of otherwise impacts resulting from loss of habitat incurred through the aut lawful activity. The goal of the MBHCP is to acquire, preserve, and enhance native habitats which support special status species while allowing development to proceed asset forth in the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. The study area covered - by the MBHCP contains both the City of Bakersfield and Kern County jurisdictions. ~~, The MBHCP will result in the incidental take of some species, generally through the destruction or displacement of individuals of the species and from loss of open lands incidental to development. The state and federal permits would make this take lawful as long as it is in accordance with the conditions of the permit as described in the MBHCP. The permits issued by each authority cover the following species: San `~ Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica), blunt-nosed leopard lizard (Gambelia sila), , Tipton kangaroo rat (Dipodomys nitratoides nitratoides), giant kangaroo rat _ (Dipodomys ingens), San Joaquin antelope squirrel (Animospermophilus nelsoni), ,~~ Bakersfield cactus (Opuntia basilaris var. treleasei), California jewelflower (Caulanthus californicus), San Joaquin woolly-threads (Lembertia congdonii), Hoover's woolly-star (Eriastrum hooveri), Kern mallow (Eremalche kernensis), Tulare pseudobahia ~'~ (Pseudobahia piersonii), striped adobe lily (Fritillaria straita), and Bakersfield saltbush (Atriplex tularensis). ~ The MBHCP program is funded through the collection ofone-time mitigation fees paid on all new construction taking place within the Bakersfield 2010 General Plan Area. Upon payment of the mitigation fee and receipt of City or County project approval, a i~, development permit applicant is al lowed the "incidental take" of special status species in accordance with state and federal endangered species laws. The mitigation funds collected are deposited into a trust fund and are administered by the Implementation 'i. Trust, which is composed of representatives from the City of Bakersfield and Kern County trustees, USFWS, CDFG, and members of the public as advisors. The ~~.. mitigation fees provide for the acquisition and/or enhancement of natural lands and restorable lands for the purpose of creating preserves. The MBHCP provides for reduction of take within the developed areas through relocation or displacement of ,~'~ individuals in areas affected by development. In addition, the MBHCP also provides for monitoring of the quality of habitat within the reserves, status of special status species, and habitat restoration and enhancement programs, which are used to indicate the success or failure of the plan. '~~ SPECIAL STATUS BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The following section addresses special status biological resources observed, reported, or having the potential to occur on the project sites. These resources include plant and wildlife species that have been afforded special status and/or recognition by federal and state resource agencies, as well as private conservation organizations. In general, the principal reason an individual taxori (e.g., species, subspecies, or variety) is given such ~\ Biological Resources JN 1'0-100278 5.3-6 May 24, 2000 ~~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR recognition is the documented or perceived decline or limitations of its population ~~` size, or geographical extent, and/or distribution resulting, in most cases, from habitat loss. Table 5.3-1, Special Status Plant Species, and Table 5.3-2, Special Status Wildlife Species, provide a summary of each special status plant and wi Idl ife species potentially occurrin on the ro'ect sites including information on the status, known g p 1 presence/potential habitat for each, and definitions for the various status designations. ,~, In addition, special status biological resources include vegetation types and habitats that are either unique, of relatively limited distribution in the region, or of particularly high wildlife value. These resources have been defined by federal, state, and local government conservation programs. Sources used to determine the special status of biological resources are as follows: ~' Plants: Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (GNPs 1999). California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, ;~, California; California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB), 1999. List of special plants. Heritage section, California Department of Fish and Game. Various Federal Register notices from the USFWS regarding ' listing status of plant species. - Wildlife: California Wildlife Habitat Relationships Database System (CDFG 1991); California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). 1999. Heritage section, California Department of Fish and Game. Various Federal Register notices from the USFWS regarding listing status of ~, wildlife species. • Habitats: California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). 1998. Heritage section, California Department of Fish and Game. ~' Definitions of Special Status Biological Resources . ~ecial Status Habitats. Vegetation types, associations, or subassociations that support concentrations of special status plant or wildlife species, are of relatively limited ' distribution, or are of particularvalue towildlife (CDFG 1995). Although special status habitats are not afforded legal protection unless they support protected species, potential'impacts on them may increase concerns and mitigation suggestions by resources agencies. ~~ Federally Endangered Species. One facing extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its geographic range. Federally Threatened Species. One likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. The presence of any federally Threatened or Endangered species on a project site generally imposes ,~, Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5.3-7 May 24, 2000 severe constraints on development, particularly if development would result in "take" GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR '~ of the species or its habitat. The term "take" means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, '~ shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or attemptto engage in such conduct. Harm, in this sense, can include any disturbance to habitats used by the species during any portion of its life history. Proposed Species. Those officially proposed by the USFWS for addition to the federal Threatened and Endangered species list. Since proposed species may soon be listed `~ as Threatened or Endangered, these species could become listed prior to or during implementation of a proposed development project. State of California Endan eg red Species. Considered as one whose prospects of survival and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy. State of California Threatened Species. One present in such small numbers throughout its range that it is likely to become an Endangered species in the near future in the absence of special protection or management. State of California Rare Species. One present in such small numbers throughout its ~' range that it may become Endangered if its present environment worsens. Rare species - applies to California native plants. State Threatened and Endangered species are fully protected against take unless an incidental take permit is obtained from the wildlife agencies. Federal Species of Concern. Species (a "term of art" for former Category 2 candidates) with an informal designation by the USFWS for some declining species that are not federal candidates for listing at this time. +r California Species of Special Concern. An informal designation used by the CDFG for some declining wildlife species that are not state candidates. This designation does not '~ provide legal protection, rather signifies that these species are recognized as special status by the CDFG. California Full Protected and Protected. Those s ecies rotected b s ecial le islation ~~` Y p p Y p g for various reasons, such as the mountain lion and white-tailed kite. Fully protected \~ species may not be taken or possessed at any time. California Protected Species. Those species that may not be taken or possessed at any time except under special permit from the department issued pursuant to Sections 650 and 670.7 of the California Code of Regulations or Section 2081 of the Fish and Game Code. Special Status Plants Three special status plant species are known to occur in the project region. A brief description of the special status plant species known from the vicinity are listed below Biological Resources ,~.- )N 10-100278 5:3-8 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR alphabetically according to their scientific name (refer to Table 5.3-1, Special Status Plant Species). `~ California Jewel-Flower (Caulanthus californicus). This species is a federal and state Endangered species and a CNPS list 1 B that typically blooms February through May. This annual herb grows in sandy soils in chenopod scrub, pinyon juniper woodland, ,~ and valley and foothill grassland. It is known to occur in Fresno, Kern, Santa Barbara, and'San Luis Obispo counties. It historically occurred in Tulare, Ventura, and King counties. The jewel flower is known to occur in Rosedale in the project vicinity. ' There are small areas of disturbed chenopod scrub adjacent to the project sites, however, there is no suitable habitat on the project sites for California jewelflower. ,., ,~' San Joaquin Wool-threads (Lembertia con dg onii). San Joaquin woolly-threads is a federal Endangered species and a CNPS list 1 B that typically blooms February through May. This annual herb grows in sandy soils in chenopod scrub, and valley and foothill grasslands. It is known to occur in Fresno, Kern, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, King and San Benito counties. It historically occurred in Tulare County. The woolly-threads ~~ is seriously threatened by agriculture, energy development, urbanization, grazing, trampling and vehicles (CNPS 1999). The woolly-threads are known to occur by Seventh Standard Road in the project vicinity. There are small areas of disturbed ~', chenopod scrub adjacent to the project sites, however, no suitable habitat on the project sites for San Joaquin woolly-threads. ~, Bakersfield Cactus (Opuntia basilaris var. treleasei). Bakersfield cactus is a federal and state Endangered species that typically blooms in May. This succulent shrub grows in sandy soils in chenopod scrub, and valley and foothill grasslands. This cactus is known ~~ to occur in Kern County. It is threatened by energy development, agricultural conversion, grazing, vehicles, and urbanization. The Bakersfield cactus is known to occur north of the County Airport in Oildale and by Seventh Standard Road in the ;~ vicinity of the project sites. There are small areas of disturbed chenopod scrub adjacent to the project sites, however, there is no suitable habitat on the project sites. ~~ Special Status Wildlife A total of 33 special status wildlife species are known to occur within the project region, including eight species listed as Endangered, or Threatened, or proposed for ^ listing by the USFWS or CDFG, or both. In addition, the project sites are also within the known range of several special status wildlife species that are not listed as Threatened or Endangered by state and/or federal resource agencies.. A brief description of the special status wildlife species known from the vicinity are listed below (refer to Table 5.3-2, Special Status Wildlife Species). Biological Resources JN. 10-100278 5.3-9 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR TABLE 5.3-1 SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES KNOW TO OCCUR IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT SITES .Status' Likelihood for Species 'USFWS CDFG CLAPS Occurrence Caulanthus californicus FE FE List 1 B No Potential California 'ewel flower Lembertia congdonii FE - List 1 B No Potential San Joa uin wooll threads Opuntia basilaris var. treleasei FE CE List 1 B No Potential Bakersfield cactus Status Definitions' USFWS FT: Species designated as Threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act. Threatened = "species likely to become an Endangered species in the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range." FE: Species designated as Endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act. Endangered = "any species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range." FPT: Proposed for federal listing as Threatened. FPE: Proposed for federal listing as Endangered. SOC: Species of Concern CDFG SR: Rare = "a species is rare when, although not presently Threatened with extinction, it is in such small numbers throughout its range that it may become Endangered if its present environment worsens." ST: Threatened = "a species that, although not presently Threatened with extinction, is likely to become an Endangered species in the foreseeable future in the absence of the special protection and management efforts required by this Act (California Endangered Species Act)." SE: Endangered = "a species is endangered when its prospects of survival and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy from one or more causes." SSC: Species of Special Concern. CLAPS 1A Plants.Presumed Extinct in California 1B Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and Elsewhere 2 Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California But More Common Elsewhere 3 Plants About Which We Need More Information- A Review List 4 Plants of Limited Distribution - A Watch List Biological Resources '~~, JN 10-100278 5.3=10 May 24, 2000 . GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR t A 1 1 1 1 1 t Table 5.3-2 SPECIAL STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES KNOWN TO OCCUR IN THE REGION OF THE PROJECT SITES 'Species USFWS CDFG - Potential to Occur on Project Sites WILDLIFE Invertebrates Helminthoglypta callistoderma SOC - Very low; limited suitable habitat Kern shoulderband Amphibians Scaphiopus hammondi SOC SSC/P Very low; limited suitable habitat Western spadefoot toad Reptiles Clemmys marmorata SOC SSC/P None; no suitable habitat Western pond turtle Gambelia sila FE SE/FP Very low; limited suitable habitat Blunt-nosed leopard lizard Phrynosoma coronatum frontale SOC SSC/P Very low; limited suitable habitat California horned lizard Anniella pulchra pulchra SOC SSC Very low; limited suitable habitat Silvery legless lizard Birds Elanus leucurus - FP Moderate; suitable foraging habitadno nesting White-tailed kite habitat Circus cyaneus - SSC Moderate; suitable foraging habitat/no nesting Northern harrier habitat Accipiter striatus - SSC Low; limited foraging habitat/no nesting habitat Sharp-shinned hawk Accipiter cooperii - SSC Low; limited suitable foraging habitat/no nesting Cooper's hawk habitat euteo swainsoni - ST Very low; suitable foraging habitat/no nesting Swainson's hawk habitat euteo regalis SOC SSC Very low; limited suitable foraging habitat/no Ferruginous hawk nesting habitat Falco co/umbarius - SSC Low; suitable foraging habitadno nesting habitat Merlin Falco peregrinus - SE/FP Very low; suitable foraging habitat/no nesting Peregrine falcon habitat Falco mexicanus - SSC Low; suitable foraging habitat/no nesting habitat Prairie falcon ,~; Biological Resources )N 10-100278 5.3-11 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.3-2 ~~ SPECIAL STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES KNOWN TO OCCUR IN THE REGION OF THE PROJECT SITES (continued) Species ', USFWS CDFG Potential to Occur on Project Sites WILDLIFE Charadrius montanus FC SSC Very low; limited suitable habitat/no nesting habitat Mountain plover Numenius americanus - SSC Very low; limited suitable habitat/no nesting habitat Long-billed curlew Asio flammeus - SSC Very low; limited suitable habitat/no nesting habitat Short-eared owl Athene cunicularia hypugea SOC SSC High; potentially suitable foraging and nesting Burrowing owl habitat Lanius ludovicianus SOC SSC Observed; suitable foraging habitat habitat/no Loggerhead shrike nesting habitat Eremophila alpestris actia - SSC Moderate; suitable foraging and nesting habitat California horned lark Toxostoma lecontei - SSC None; no suitable habitat Le Conte's thrasher Agelaius tricolor SOC SSC Low; potentially suitable habitat for foraging/none tricolored blackbird for nesting Mammals Sorex ornatus relictus SOC SSC None; no suitable habitat Buena Vista Lake shrew Antrozous pallidus - SSC Low; potentially suitable foraging habitat/no pallid bat roosting habitat Myotis yumanensis SOC SSC Moderate; potentially suitable foraging habitat/no Yuma myotis roosting habitat Animospermophilus nelsoni SOC ST None; believed to be extirpated San Joaquin antelope squirrel Dipodomys ingens FE SE None; outside of known range giant kangaroo rat Dipodomys nitratoides brevinasus SOC SSC None; outside of known range short-nosed kangaroo rat Dipodomys nitratoides nitratoides FE SE Moderate; potentially suitable habitat Tipton kangaroo rat Perognathus inornatus inornatus SOC - High; potentially suitable habitat San Joaquin pocket mouse Onychomys torridus tularensis SOC SSC Moderate; potentially suitable habitat Tulare grasshopper mouse 1 1 1 1 1 1 Biological Resources ~- )N 10-100278 5:3-12 May 24, 2000 1 1 1 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.3-2 SPECIAL STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES KNOWN TO OCCUR IN THE REGION OF THE PROJECT SITES (continued) ....Species USFWS CDFG Potential to Occur_on Project Sites.. .WILDLIFE Vulpes macrotis mutica FE ST High; potentially suitable habitat San Joaquin kit fox LEGEND Federal (USFWS) State (CDFG) FE Endangered SE Endangered FT Threatened ST Threatened FC Candidate Species SC Candidate Species SOC Species of Concern SSC Species of Special Concern FP Fully Protected P Protected Invertebrates 1 1 Kern shoulderband (Helminthog_IXpta callistoderma). The Kern shoulderband is a federal Species of Concern. This species of snail is known only from the Kern River and occurs on vegetation near the water's edge. Little is known about this species which was last observed in Oildale in 1916 (CNDDB 1998). The potential forthe Kern shoulderband is considered to be very low due to lack of suitable vegetation and the disturbed nature of the canal. Amphbibians Western spadefoot toad (Scaphiopus hammondi). The western spadefoot toad is a federal Species of Concern, a state Species of Special Concern, and a California protected species. This species inhabits grassland, coastal sage scrub, and other habitats with open sandy gravel soils. The western spadefoot toad is primarily a species of the lowlands, frequenting washes, floodplains of rivers, alluvial fans, and alkali flats (Stebbins 1985). This species is rarely seen outside of the breeding season. The species breeds in vernal pools and temporary ponds. The project sites provide limited amounts of suitable habitat for the western spadefoot toad; however, since the project sites are disturbed, its potential for occurrence is considered very low. Reptiles t Western pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata). This species is a federal Species of Concern, a state Species of Special Concern, and a California protected species. The western pond turtle occurs primarily in freshwater rivers, streams, lakes, ponds, vernal ,~, Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5.3-13 May 24, 2000 ~~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR pools, and seasonal wetlands, and requires basking sites such as logs, banks, or other suitable areas above water level. The western pond turtle occurs from Monterey Bay south through the Coast Ranges to northern Baja California (Holland 1991). The current range is similar to the historic range, however, populations have become ,1, fragmented by agriculture and urban development. The western pond turtle is not -- expected to occur on the project sites due to lack of suitable vegetative cover in the canal. Blunt-nosed leopard lizard (Gambelia sila). The blunt-nosed leopard lizard is a federal and state Endangered species and a California fully protected species. The leopard ,_ lizard is known to occur in valley and foothill grassland, saltbush scrubland, and iodine, bush grassland. The lizard prefers areas of relatively sparse ground cover of ~ a roximatel 15 to 30 percent bare ground, however, a site with 50 percent or more ~ pp Y bare ground may not be suitable for this species. Blunt-nosed leopard lizards use existing small mammal burrows such as those of kangaroo rats, ground squirrels, pocket gophers, and pocket mice, especially in large washes and arroyos (City of ~-- Bakersfield 1994). The project sites provide a limited amount of suitable habitatforthe blunt-nosed leopard I izard in the disturbed/ruderal vegetation types on the project sites, ~~ however, since the project sites are disturbed, its potential foroccurrence is considered very low. Q California horned lizard (Phrynosoma coronatum frontale). The California horned lizard is a federal Species of Concern, a state Species of Special Concern, and a ,~ California protected species. It is a small, spiny, somewhat rounded lizard that occurs primarily in open or sparse scrub and chaparral vegetation types. This species prefers loose, friable soil for burrowing. Three factors have contributed to its decline: loss of habitat, overcollecting, and the introduction of exotic ants. In some places, especially ~~ adjacent to urban areas, the introduced ants have displaced the native species upon which the lizard feeds (Hix 1990). The project sites provide limited amounts of alifornia horned lizard in the disturbed/ruderal ve etation ~~ suitable habitat for the C g types on the project sites, however, since they are disturbed, its potential for occurrence is considered very low. Silvery legless lizard (Anniella pulchra pulchra). The silvery legless lizard is a federal Species of Concern and a state Species of Special Concern. It is a small, secretive ,~ lizard that spends most of its life beneath the soil, under stones, logs, debris, or in leaf litter. The silvery legless lizard inhabits areas with moist sandy soil, including dry washes, woodlands, riparian, and scrub vegetation types at elevations ranging from sea ~~ level to about 5,000 feet above msl (Stebbins 1985). The project sites provide a r. limited amount of suitable habitat for the silvery legless lizard in the disturbed/ruderal vegetation types on the project sites, however, since they are disturbed, its potential ~~ for occurrence is considered very low. Biological Resources ~~ )N 10-100278 5.3-14 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Birds White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus). The white-tailed kite is a California fully protected ,~. species. This species is a year-long resident and a local nester on the edge of Kern County (Garrett and Dunn 1981). Kites typically nest in oaks, willows, and sycamores, and forage within grassland and scrub vegetation types. White-tailed kites show strong ~, site fidelity to nest groves and trees. The most abundant prey species of this raptor include California vole, western harvest mouse, and house mouse. Limited suitable foraging habitat and no suitable nesting habitat is present on the project sites. Therefore, the white-tailed kite has a moderate potential to forage, however, no potential to nest, on the project sites. Northern harrier (Circus cyaneus). The northern harrier is a state Species of Special Concern. It can be expected at any month of the year and can be seen foraging in =~ agricultural fields and grassland, scrub, and riparian vegetation types. While once a - relatively common species during fall, winter, and spring in undeveloped areas of the County, the northern harrier population is now greatly reduced and localized in distribution (Garrett and Dunn 1981). Limited suitable foraging habitat and no suitable habitat is resent on the ro'ect sites. Therefore the northern harrier has a nesting p p ~ , moderate potential to forage, however, no potential to nest, on the project sites. Sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus). The sharp-shinned hawk is a state Species of Special Concern. This species is a common fall transient, however, becomes much ~, scarcer in winter months with most wintering occurring in northern South America (Garrett and Dunn 1981). This species prefers woodland vegetation types, however, can also be found in virtually any habitat as it passes through the area during migration. Oak and riparian areas are preferred habitats. Limited suitable foraging habitat and no suitable nesting habitat is present on the project sites. Therefore, the sharp-shinned hawk has a low potential to occur on the project sites to forage, however, no potential to nest, on the project sites. Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii). The Cooper's hawk is a state Species of Special Concern. This species is generally a transient and winter visitor in Kern County, although permanent residents may also occur in the County (Garrett and Dunn 1981). Wintering Cooper's hawks are often seen in wooded urban areas and native woodland vegetation types. Preferred nesting habitats are oak and riparian woodlands dominated by sycamores and willows. Cooper's hawks in the region prey on small birds and rodents that live in woodland and occasionally scrub and chaparral vegetation types. Limited suitable foraging habitat and no suitable nesting habitat is present on the project sites. Therefore, the Cooper's hawk has a low potential to forage, however, no potential to nest, on the project sites. Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni). The Swainson's hawk is a state Threatened species. This species is an uncommon transient through Kern County (Garrett and ,~. Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5.3-15 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Dunn 1981). This species is present in the summer, although there are a few records of Swainson's hawks wintering in southern California Clark and Wheeler 1987). The - Swainson's hawk forages over the grassland and ruderal vegetation types during migration to and from South America, primarily feeding on small rodents, reptiles, and ~, some insects in these habitats. Limited suitable foraging habitat and no suitable nesting habitat is present on the project sites. Therefore, the Swainson's hawk is not expected to occur on the project sites for foraging or nesting, however, it may occur as a rare migrant. Ferruginous hawk (Buteo reg_alis). The ferruginous hawk is a federal Species of i~ Concern and a state Species of Special Concern. This species is a fairly common winter visitor to grasslands and agricultural regions in Kern County (Garrett and Dunn 1981). Ferruginous hawks occur in Kern County from mid-fall through early spring, v and forage over grasslands and the ecotone between coastal sage scrub and grasslands. Their main prey is ground squirrels and jackrabbits, however, ferruginous hawks sometimes take other mammals and birds. Limited suitable foraging habitat and no ~~ suitable nesting habitat is present on the project sites. Therefore, the ferruginous hawk has a very low potential to forage, however, no potential to nest, on the project sites. ~, Merlin (Falco columbarius). The merlin is a state Species of Special Concern. In Kern , County, merlins are uncommon fall transients and rare winter visitants present from late September through early March (Garrett and Dunn 1981). The merlin prefers vast open space areas such as estuaries, grasslands, and deserts where it hunts small merlin has a low potential to forage, however, no potential to nest, on the project sites. flocking birds such as sandpipers, larks, sparrows, and pipits. Limited suitable foraging habitat and no suitable nesting habitat is present on the project sites. Therefore, the Pere tine falcon (Falco Pere rinus). The Peregrine falcon is a state Endangered species and a California protected species that, due to recent population gains, has been recently delisted by the USFWS. No such delisting has been proposed by the state. This species is primarily a rare fall transient and winter visitant along the coast, and is even rarer in the interior (Garrett and Dunn 1981). Peregrine falcons prey almost exclusively on birds and use a variety of habitats, particularly wetlands and coastal areas. They nest on cliff faces within range of foraging areas, such as estuaries. The project sites provide suitable foraging habitat, however, no nesting habitat. Therefore, ,~ the prairie falcon has a very low potential to forage, however, no potential to nest, on the project sites.- ~~ Prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus). The prairie falcon is a state Species of Special ) g , where prairie falcons can be consistently observed. Preferred foraging habitat includes Concern. This species is an uncommon resident that breeds locally in Kern County (Garrett and Dunn 1981. Due to whiter and Westin habitat loss few areas remain or rocky outcroppings adjacent to the open, ar~d valleys needed for foraging. The grasslands, scrub vegetation types, and estuaries, while nesting habitat consists of cliffs - Biological Resources ~- JN 10-100278 5.3=16 May 24, 2000 t GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR project sites provide suitable foraging habitat, however, no nesting habitat. Therefore, the prairie falcon has a low potential to forage, however, no potential to nest, on the project sites. Mountain plover (Charadrius montanus). The mountain plover is a federal Candidate species and a state Species of Special Concern. The mountain plover is a fairly ~, ~ common and local winter resident of plains and valleys of interior southern California (Garrett and Dunn 1981). Wintering habitats include short-grass plains and agricultural areas with freshly plowed fields. Although the agricultural fields of the project sites provide suitable foraging habitat for this species, the urban development in the area has substantially reduced the potential for this species' occurrence. Therefore, the mountain plover has a very low potential to forage, and no potential to nest on the project sites. ,~ Long-billed curlew (Numenius americanus). The long-billed curlew is a state Species of Special Concern. This species is a rare transient in Kern County (Garrett and Dunn 1981). The preferred winter habitats of the curlew are large coastal estuaries, upland ~~ herbaceous areas, and croplands. Small numbers of non-breeders remain on the coast in the summer, and larger numbers remain during some years in the Central Valley (Garrett and Dunn 1981). The project sites provide limited amounts of suitable habitat ~; for the long-billed curlew, however, since the project sites are disturbed, its potential for occurrence is considered very low. ~~ Short-eared owl (Asio flammeus). The short-eared owl is a state Species of Special Concern. This species is a rare fall transient and winter visitant in Kern County (Garrett and Dunn 1981). The short-eared owl prefers open areas with few trees, such as ~~ annual and perennial grasslands, prairies, dunes, meadows, irrigated lands, and saline and fresh emergent wetlands. This species has declined over most of its range in recent decades due to destruction or fragmentation of grassland and wetland habitats, and grazing (Zeiner et. al. 1990). The project sites provide suitable foraging habitat, however, no nesting habitat. Therefore, the short-eared owl has a very low potential to forage, however, no potential to nest, on the project sites. Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia hypugea). The burrowing owl is a federal Species of Concern and a state Species of Special Concern. This species is a resident in open areas of lowlands over much of the region. In Kern County, this species is generally scarce and decreasing (Garrett and Dun 1981). A burrowing owl was observed in close proximity to the project sites: south of the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad, - between Calloway Drive and Coffee Road, approximately three miles west of Bakersfield in 1987(CNDDB 1999). Breeding and foraging habitat forthis owl consists ~_ ; of grasslands, preferably on flat to low rolling hills, in treeless terrain. The agricultural fields, disturbed/ruderal areas, and canal on the project sites provide suitable foraging and nesting habitat for this species. In addition, a depression near the North of the River Sanitary District offices provides suitable foraging and nesting habitat for this Biological Resources )N 10-100278 5.3-17 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR species. Although the urban development in the area has substantially reduced the potential for this species' occurrence, the burrowing owl has been observed in close -- proximity to the project sites (CNDDB 1999). Therefore, the burrowing owl has a high potential to occur and nest on the project sites. '~ Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus). The loggerhead shrike is a federal Species of Concern and a state Species of Special Concern. This species is a fairly common resident of lowlands and foothills in southern California (Garrett and Dunn 1981). Shrikes inhabit grasslands and other dry, open habitats. They can often be found perched on fences and posts from which prey items (e.g., large insects, small mammals, lizards) can be seen. Shrikes nest on stable branches in adensely-foliaged ~' shrub or tree, usually well-concealed. Several individuals of the loggerhead shrike were observed foraging on the project sites, however, would not be expected to nest on the project sites due to lack of appropriate habitat. California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia). The California horned lark is a state r! Species of Special Concern. This species is found along the coast of northern California, in the San Joaquin Valley, in the coast ranges south of San Francisco Bay, and in southern California west of the deserts. In southern California, this subspecies is a fairly common breeding resident in grasslands and other dry, open habitats. The horned lark builds grass-lined nests on the ground in the open. The project sites ;~ provide potentially suitable foraging and nesting habitat forthis species. Therefore, the California horned lark has a moderate potential to occur on the project sites. ., Le Conte's thrasher (Toxostoma lecontei). The Le Conte's thrasher is a state Species of Special Concern. This species is an uncommon and local resident in low desert scrub ~ through much of Kern County and in the southwestern corner of the San Joaquin Valley ~ (Garrett and Dunn 1981). The Le Conte's thrasher occupies primarily open desert washes, desert scrub, alkali desert scrub, and desert succulent scrub habitats. The ~ project sites do not provide adequate habitat for the Le Conte's thrasher. Therefore, ^ the Le Conte's thrasher is not expected to occur on the project sites. Tricolored blackbird A elaius tricolor . The tricolored blackbird is a federal S ecies N of Concern and a state Species of Special Concern. This species is generally common and breeds in the Antelope Valley (Garrett and Dunn 1981). These colonially-nesting birds prefer to breed in marsh vegetation of bulrushes and cattails and have also been _ recorded nesting in willows, blackberries, and mustard (Beedy et. al. 1991). During winter months, they are often found foraging in wet pastures, agricultural fields, and seasonal wetlands. Tricolored blackbirds are nomadic, wandering during the nonbreeding season and occupying colony sites intermittently (Unitt 1984). Limited suitable foraging habitat exists on the project sites. The tricolored blackbird has a low _ potential to forage, however, no potential to nest, on the project sites. Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5.3-18 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Mammals Buena Vista Lake shrew (Sorex ornatus relictus). The Buena Vista Lake shrew is a ~~ federal Species of Concern and a state.Species of Special Concern. The Buena Vista Lake shrew is a subspecies of the ornate shrew. This subspecies is restricted to marshes and sloughs around the perimeter of Buena Vista Lake in Kern County, and may also ~, occur in the Tulare Basin and at Kern and Pixley National Wildlife Refuges (Zeiner 1990). The Buena Vista Lake shrew is not expected to occur on the project sites due to lack of appropriate habitat (Vanherwig pers. com. 2000). ~_~, Pallid bat (Antrozus pallidus). The pallid bat is a state Species of Special Concern that most commonly occurs in mixed oak and grassland habitats. This large bat roosts in rock crevices and in cavities of trees, especially oaks. The project sites provide limited suitable foraging and no roosting opportunities. As a result, the potential for occurrence of the pal I id bat on the project sites is considered to be low for foraging and none for breeding. ;~ Yuma myotis (Myotis yumanensis). The Yuma myotis is a federal Species of Concern and a state Species of Special Concern. This species is a relatively small bat that occurs statewide. This species is closely associated with water and wooded canyon bottoms '~ throughout its range. Caves and old buildings are preferred roosting habitats, with roosts used by up to 2,000 individuals. The project sites provide limited suitable foraging, however, no roosting, opportunities. As a result, the potential for occurrence ~; of the Yuma myotis on the project sites is considered to be moderate for foraging and none for breeding. San Joaquin antelope squirrel (Animospermophilus nelsoni). The San Joaquin antelope squirrel is a federal Species of Concern and a state Threatened species. The San ~; Joaquin antelope squirrel is presently known to occur on the San Joaquin Valley floor along the Valley's eastern edge north to Tipton in Tulare County (CDFG 1990). The San Joaquin antelope squirrel is found in flatto sloping terrain with loam or sandy loam soils in the Tulare Basin in association with saltbush scrub, non-native grasslands, and valley sink scrub (City of Bakersfield 1994). This species is believed to be extirpated from the vicinity of the project sites (Vanherwig pers. com.2000). Therefore, the San Joaquin antelope squirrel is not expected to occur on the project sites. Giant kangaroo rat (Dipodomys ingens). The giant kangaroo rat is a federal and state Endangered species. The giant kangaroo rat is presently known from only five areas in the vicinity of the Elk Hills petroleum fields in Kern County and the Elkhorn Plain of San Luis Obispo County. This species prefers open areas that are flat to gently sloping consisting of fine sandy loams with annual grasses and herbs (CDFG 1988; City of Bakersfield 1994). The project sites are out of the current known range of this subspecies (Vanherwig pers. com.2000). Therefore, the giant kangaroo rat is not expected to occur on the project sites. Biological Resources ~• JN 10-100278 5.3-19 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-04'82 PROGRAM EIR Short-nosed kangaroo rat (Dipodomys nitratoides brevinasus). The short-nosed kangaroo rat is a federal Species of Concern and a state Species of Special Concern. The short-nosed kangaroo rat is a subspecies of the San Joaquin kangaroo rat. This subspecies is presently known to occur from the west side of the Antelope Valley near ~~ the mouth of Panoche Creek and Mendota, south to the Antelope Plains, west of the Lost Hills, and along the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley. It also occurs in the Panoche and Cuyama valleys and on the Carrizo Plain. This subspecies is found in flat to gently rolling terrain with friable soils, which are often highly alkaline, with saltbush scrub, desert scrub, and grassland (City of Bakersfield 1994). The project sites are out ~~ ~ of the current known range of this subspecies (Vanherwig pers. com.2000). Therefore, _ the short-nosed kangaroo rat is not expected to occur on the project sites. ~~ Ti ton kan aroo rat Di odour s nitratoides nitratoides . The Ti ton kan aroo rat is ~ ~ Y N ~ a federal and state Endangered species. The Tipton kangaroo rat is a subspecies of the San Joaquin kangaroo rat. This subspecies is presently known from limited to scattered populations clustered near Lemoore and Hanford in Kings County; west of Tipton, Pixley and Earlimart in Tulare County; between the Kern National Wildlife Refuge and _ Delano in Kern County; the Kern River Corridor west of Bakersfield; and other scattered populations in Kern County (City of Bakersfield 1994). None of the publically owned parcels known to support low to moderate densities of Tipton kangaroo rat are believed to be sufficiently large enough to ensure the genetic viability of the species (CDFG 1990). Conservation biologists bel ieve that the enti re Kern River Corridor west of Bakersfield, especially undeveloped fallow sites, should be considered potential ~ Tipton kangaroo rat habitat (City of Bakersfield 1994). fihe Tipton kangaroo rat prefers ~ alluvial fans and floodplains which include highly alkaline fine sands and alkaline sandy loams with alkali sink scrub and saltbush scrub. These vegetation types provide a habitat of sparsely scattered shrubs and ~a scant to moderate groundcover of grasses and forbs. Although, the disturbed nature of the project sites has substantially reduced the potential for this species occurrence, the Tipton kangaroo rat has been observed \~ inclose proximity to the project sites (City of Bakersfield 1994). Therefore, the Tipton kangaroo rat has a moderate potential to occur on the project sites (Vanherwig pers. com.2000). San Joaquin pocket mouse (Pero~nathus inornatus). The San Joaquin pocket mouse is a federal Species of Concern. This species is presently known to occur in the Sacramento Valley from Tehama County southward and in the San Joaquin Valley to Rose Station near the mouth of Grapevine Canyon. It is recorded from the Panoche Valley, in the upper Kern River drainage basin, and from areas in the Tehachapi Mountains such as the Walker Basin and Tehachapi Pass (City of Bakersfield 1994). The habitat requirements of the San Joaquin pocket mouse are not well known. This species has been observed in flat to steep terrain with friable soils and in areas of _ alluvial sand soils and wind-drifted sands. This species occurs in grasslands, blue oak savannahs, alkali sink scrub, and in saltbush scrub. The project sites provide potentially suitable habitat forthis species. Therefore, the potential forthe San Joaquin ~- -- !~. Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5.3-20 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR pocket mouse to occur on the project sites is considered high (Vanherwig pers. com.2000). ~' Tulare rag sshopper mouse (Onychomys torridus tularensis). The Tulare grasshopper mouse is a federal Species of Concern and a state Species of Special Concern. The Tulare grasshopper mouse is a subspecies of the southern grasshopper mouse. Currently, this subspecies is known to occur in these areas: along the western margin of the Tulare Basin, including western Kern County; Carrizo Plains Natural Area; and along the Cuyama Valley side of the Caliente Mountains, San Luis Obispo County; and the Ciervo-Panoche Region, in Fresno and San Benito counties. This subspecies inhabits arid shrubland vegetation types in hot, arid grassland and shrubland associations. Specific habitat requirements are unknown, however, may include blue oak woodlands, alkali sink and mesquite associations, and grasslands (California State University, Stanislaus Foundation 1999). The project sites provide potentially suitable `~ habitat for this species. Therefore, the potential for the Tulare grasshopper mouse to occur on the project sites is considered moderate (Vanherwig pers. com.2000). San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica). The San Joaquin kit fox is a federal Endangered and state Threatened species. Currently, the San Joaquin kit fox is confined to the foothills and interior coast range valleys of Kern, Tulare, Kings, San Luis Obispo, Fresno, and Monterey counties, particularly in the Elk Hills, Elkhorn Plain, and Carrizo Plain. Prior to the introduction of irrigated agriculture in the valley, the prime habitat for the San Joaquin kit fox is thought to have been valley saltbush scrub, alkali sink, and grasslands vegetation types. Currently the kit fox still inhabits these vegetation types, however, has been found to disperse through various types of disturbed habitat including agricultural fields, oil fields, highways, aqueducts, canals, ~, and railroad tracks (Kato 1982; City of Bakersfield 1994). The project sites, provide potentially suitable habitat forthis species. Therefore, the potential forthe San Joaquin kit fox to occur on the project sites is considered high (Vanherwig pers. com. 2000). IMPACTS Althou h the ro osed zone Chan e would not result in an direct im acts on g P p g Y p biological resources, the implications of changing the zoning of the project sites would result in construction of residential and commercial uses. Therefore, the determination of impacts is based on the construction resulting from the zone change and assumes grading and development of the project sites in their entirety. All construction ~~ activities, including staging and equipment areas, are assumed to be contained within the limits of the project sites. Both direct and indirect impacts on biological resource have been evaluated. Direct impacts are those that involve the initial loss of habitats due to grading and construction activities (e.g., noise, dust). Indirect impacts are those that would be ,~ Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5.3-21 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR related to disturbance from construction activities (e.g., noise, dust) and use of the project sites. Biological impacts associated with the proposed project were evaluated with respect ~~ to the following special status biological issues: • Federally- or State-listed Endangered or Threatened species of plant or , wildlife; • Streambeds, wetlands, and their associated vegetation; • Habitats suitable to support afederally- or state-listed Endangered or Threatened species of plant or wildlife; • Species designated as California Species of Special Concern or federal Species of Concern; • Habitat, other than wetlands, considered special status by regulatory agencies (USFWS, CDFG) or resource conservation organizations; and • Other species or issues of concern to regulatory agencies orconservation organizations. Significance Criteria The criteriafordeterminingsignificantimpactsonbiologicalresourcesweredeveloped in accordance the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines. Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines contains the Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form which includes questions relating to biological resources. The issues presented in the Initial Study Checklist have been utilized as thresholds of significance in this Section. Accordingly, a project may create a significant environmental impact if one or more of the following occurs: If the project has 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 Game and Wildlife Service. • If the project has 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 U.S. Fish and Game and Wildlife Service. Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5.3-22 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR • If the project has 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 pol, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means (refer to Section 10, Effects Found Not To Be Significant). • If the project interferes substantial ly with the movement of any native or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. • If the project conflicts with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance (refer to Section 10, Effects Found Not To Be Significant). ~ If the project conflicts with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Section 15065(a), Mandatory Findings of Significance, of the CEQA Guidelines states that a project may have a significant effect on the environment if "...the project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop belowself-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminateaplantoranimalcommunity, reduce the number or restrict the range of an Endangered, rare, or Threatened species..." An evaluation of whether an impact on biological resources would be substantial must consider both the resource itself and how that resource fits into a regional or local context. Substantial impacts would be those that would diminish, or result in the loss of, an important biological resource or those that would obviously conflict with local, state, or federal resource conservation plans, goals, or regulations. Impacts are sometimes locally adverse, however, not significant. Although they would result in an adverse alteration of existing conditions, they would not substantial ly diminish or result in the permanent loss of an important resource on a population- or region-wide basis. Section 15380 of CEQA indicates that a lead agency can consider anon-listed species to be Rare or Endangered for the purposes of CEQA if the species can be shown to meet the criteria in the definition of Rare or Endangered. For the purposes of this ,~ discussion, the current scientific knowledge on the population size and distribution for each special status species was considered according to the definitions for Rare and Endangered listed in Section 15380 of CEQA, and mitigation measures are recommended where appropriate. ~. Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5.3-23 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR The actual and potential occurrence of these resources within the project vicinity was correlated with the previously identified significance criteria to determine whether the impacts of the proposed project on these resources would be significant. Potential impacts are grouped below according to topic. The numbered mitigation measures at the end of this section directly correspond with the numbered impact statements. SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITY 5.3-1 Project implementation may have a substantial adverse effect on a sensitive natural community. Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. Vegetation A total of 170.6 acres of disturbed/ruderal, ornamental, and agriculture would be impacted by implementation of the proposed project. These areas are discussed below, summarized in Table 5.3-3, Vegetation Impact Acres, and illustrated in Exhibit 5.3-1, Biological Resources. Table 5.3-3 VEGETATION IMPACT ACRES "Vegetation Type..... Total Impact (acres) Disturbed/Ruderal 142.0 Ornamental 9.7 Agricultural 18.9 Total 170.6 Native. No direct impacts to native vegetation types would occur as a result of the proposed project. Non-Native. There would be 142.0 acres ofdisturbed/ruderal, 9.7 acres of ornamental, and 18.9 acres of agriculture impacted by construction of the proposed project. These areas contain non-native vegetation that have low biological value and impacts would not be considered biologically significant. Biological Resources JN 1 0-1 002 78 5.3-24 May 24, 2000 U~ f ~ r~~ _~ ..,~ ~, ~ ~,~>R rarQUOr fOt IXAII Gar PROrEarr ~r/ •¢ • 0 EXISTING INDUSTRIAL Ib~T7 Ac. Gros -4 ~ ¢t •~ as ~ •¢' ~\ \~ ~_ ;~~r f7eSTM+G LANOCO dL/E AtJ(}IYENT • MW f MVA ~ '~ EXISTING INDUSTRIAL 83.88 Ac Orou 11W ~ I6 Ac}Grow Symbols Legend ABANDONED WELL "+" (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) ACTIVE WELL ~ GROUND WATER MONRORING WELL MJJW~ ~, jT IRRIGATION WELL ~~ O.U. DINEWNG UNIT Biological Resources Legend ® Disturbed ! Ruderal 142.0 Acres ~~~ Ornamental 9.7 Acres ® Agriculture 18.9 Acres ~~~ Study Area Boundary Study Area Total 170.6 Acres __ Not to Scale CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Biological Resources ~ ~obelt Beir~,~lliam `73'ost (,8~,~` ssociates ovoo ~Nlo-loo2~a Exhibit 5.3-1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Wildlife Impacts For purposes of assessing impacts on wildlife, the total impact on a given vegetation type that provides habitat for each taxon was evaluated. Exhibit 5.3-1 illustrates the vegetation types, representing wildlife habitat, that would be impacted due to implementation of the proposed project. The following discussion of wildlife impacts focuses on the common species occurring on the project sites. Construction of the proposed project would result in the loss of approximately 170.6 acres of non-native habitats that provide limited nesting, roosting, foraging, and denning opportunities for a wide variety of wildlife species. Removing or altering habitats within the project sites would result in the loss of small mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and other animals of slow mobility that live in the habitats within the proposed project's direct impact area. More mobile wildlife species now using the project sites would be forced to move into remaining areas of open space, consequently increasing competition for available resources in those areas. This situation would result in losing individuals of the wildlife population that cannot successfully compete. Although the loss of 170.6 acres of non-native habitats and its associated wildlife is considered to be an adverse effect, it would not substantially diminish habitat for wildlife in the region. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant and no mitigation would be required. Noise Impacts Noise levels at the project sites would increase substantially over present levels during construction activities and upon the project's operational phase. Construction noise has the potential to disrupt foraging, nesting, and denning activities for a variety of wildlife species. Since the project sites are currently in agricultural use surrounded by urban land uses, these effects are considered less than significant and no mitigation would be required. ~ - . Urban Pollutants Impacts on biological resources could occur from changes in the quality of runoff into the canal on the project site following the proposed project since they are tributaries to the Kern River. The Kern River is approximately two miles south of the project site and is known to support several special status species. Urban runoff from the project site containing petroleum residues from either improperdisposal of petroleum or runoff ,~ from residential areas could adversely affect water quality and, in turn, affect populations of aquatic species and species that use riparian areas, including special status species that use the canals or the Kern River. Water quality could also be adversely affected by runoff of nutrients from landscaped areas. These impacts could occur both on the project site and downstream of the project site. Permits required by the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), Regional Water Quality Control Board Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5.3-26 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR (RWQCB), and CDFG will ensure that impacts are mitigated to less than significant levels. Therefore, no mitigation will be required. ' Night lighting Lighting of the proposed development would indirectly affect the behavioral patterns of nocturnal and crepuscular (i.e., active at dawn and dusk) wildlife at the project sites. Of greatest concern is the effect on small ground-dwelling animals that use the darkness to hide from predators. Currently, the project sites are surrounded by urban development. Although development of the proposed project would increase night lighting, the change would not be substantially different than the current conditions in the surrounding area. Therefore, this impact would be considered less than significant and no mitigation would be required. Human Activity Human disturbance could disrupt normal foraging and breeding behavior of wildlife remaining in the surrounding area. Development of the proposed project would increase the human activity on the project sites. However, since the project sites and surrounding areas currently experience active agriculture and oil drill ing activities, and are surrounded by urban development, this change would not substantially change the human activity in the surrounding areas. Therefore, this impact would be considered less than significant and no mitigation would be required. CANDIDATE/SENSITIVE/SPECIAL SPECIES 5.3-2 Project implementation may adversely affect special status vegetation types, plants, and wildlife species. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Mitigation in the form of focused surveys and payment of fees would reduce impacts to special status species to a less than significant level. Special Status Vegetation Types No special status vegetation types are expected to occur on the project sites. Therefore, no significant impacts would be incurred on special status plants as a result of the proposed project. Special Status Plants No special status plant species are expected to occur on the project sites due to lack of suitable habitat. Therefore, no significant impacts would be incurred on special status plants due to construction of the proposed project. ~, Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5.3-27 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Special Status Wildlife 't Of the 33 special status wildlife species occurring in the region, eight are listed as Threatened or Endangered or are proposed for listing. The San Joaquin antelope squirrel and the giant kangaroo rat are not expected to occur at the project sites since it is outside of their current known range. The blunt-nosed leopard lizard has a very low potential to occur on the project sites due to lack of suitable habitat. Impacts on these three species would not be considered significant and no mitigation would be required. The project sites provide potentially suitable foraging habitat for the Swainson's hawk and peregrine falcon. However, these species are only expected to occur as rarities in the region based on their current known distributions. Project implementation would result in an incremental loss of non-critical foraging habitat for these raptors. This is considered an adverse, however, less than significant impact, and no mitigation would be required. In addition, project implementation would result in the loss of agricultural fields that potentially provide foraging habitat for the mountain plover. However, the encroachment of urban development in the vicinity of the project sites has substantially reduced the potential forthis species' occurrence. As a result, project implementation would result in an incremental loss of non-critical foraging habitat that is considered adverse, however, not significant for this species. Therefore, no mitigation would be required Two federal and State listed species are expected to occur on the project sites: the Tipton kangaroo rat and the San Joaquin kit fox. Potentially suitable habitat is available forthese species, and they are known to occur in the project vicinity. Impacts on these species would be considered significant. However, these impacts would be mitigated to a level of less than significant through implementation of the specified mitigation measures required in order to comply with the MBHCP. Specifically, these measures would involve payment of the MBHCP mitigation fee and conducting a focused survey for the San Joaquin kit fox. Of the remaining 25 special status wildlife species, four of these species are not i' expected to occur on the project sites: the western pond turtle, Le Conte's thrasher, - Buena Vista Lake shrew, and short-nosed kangaroo rat. Thirteen species have very low ~~ to low potential to occur on the project sites: the Kern shoulderband, western spadefoot toad, California horned lizard, silvery legless lizard, sharp-shinned hawk, Cooper's hawk, ferruginous hawk, merlin, prairie falcon, long-billed curlew, short-eared owl, tricolored blackbird, and pallid bat. Eight of these species have a moderate to high potential to occur on the project sites: the white-tailed kite, northern harrier, burrowing owl, loggerhead shrike, California horned lark, Yuma myotis, San Joaquin pocket mouse, and Tulare grasshopper mouse. Due to the low sensitivity of Biological Resources )N 10-100278 5.3=28 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR these species (i.e., not listed as Threatened or Endangered), potential impacts on these species would be considered adverse, however, not significant. Although the burrowing-owl is not formally listed, its population does fit the criteria listed in Section 15380 of CEQA. Therefore, any impacts to the burrowing owl would be considered significant. Implementation of mitigation in the form of a focused survey to determine the presence of this species on the project sites would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. ~, Project implementation would remove potentially suitable nesting and foraging habitat for raptor species. The loss of these habitats would contribute to an ongoing regional and local loss of foraging habitat for these species. These cumulative impacts are considered to be adverse, however, not significant, since they would not substantially reduce the amount of foraging habitat available for these species on a regional or local basis. The American kestrel and the burrowing owl have the potential to nest on the project sites. Any impacts on an active nest of either a common or a special status raptor species would be considered significant. The loss of an active raptor nest is a violation of the California Fish and Game Code 3505.5. Implementation of mitigation in the form of focused surveys to determine the presence of the burrowing owls or other raptor species would reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. Overall the ro osed ro'ect has the otential to im act several s ecial status wildlife p p p l p p p species and nesting raptors. Implementation of mitigation measures taken from the MBHCP, including payment of pay aone-time mitigation fee to the City of Bakersfield and conducting focused surveys would reduce impacts to special status wi Idlife species to a less than significant level. WILDLIFE MOVEMENT 5.3-3 Project implementation may interfere substantially-with the movement of a native resident or migratory wildlife species. Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. The open land on the project sites could be used locally by wildlife to disperse to ~' native habitat. However, the canal on the LMR site does not function as a regional wildl ife corridor and the majority of the area surrounding the project sites is urbanized. In addition, larger blocks of similar habitat are present in the project vicinity and would ~, be more likely to be used by wildlife to reach the Kern River and other natural areas. Therefore, development of the proposed project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory wildlife corridors and no mitigation would be required. 1 Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5:3-29 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR CONSERVATION PLAN 5.3-4 Project implementation may conflict with the provisions of the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Payment of MBHCP mitigation fees would ensure project compliance, reducing impacts in this regard to less than significant levels. As previously noted, the proposed project sites are located in an area covered by the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and, therefore, are covered under the MBHCP. Project implementation has the potential to impact Federal and State listed species covered in the MBHCP (i.e., the Tipton kangaroo rat and the San Joaquin kit fox), and which are expected to occur on the project sites. Potentially suitable habitat is available for these species on the project sites and they are known to occur in the project vicinity. As a result, impacts on these species would be considered significant and would conflict with the provisions of the MBHCP. However, these impacts would be mitigated to a level of less than significant through implementation of the specified mitigation measures required in order to comply with the MBHCP. Specifically, these measures would involve payment of the MBHCP mitigation fee and conducting a focused survey for the San Joaquin kit fox. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 5.3-5 Cumulative development in the project area may, directly and indirectly, adversely affect the area's biological resources. Significance: Cumulative biological impacts are mitigated on a project-by-project basis and in accordance with the City's requirements. When viewed in conjunction with other major developments planned for the City of Bakersfield, the loss of trees and other native vegetation, as well as the loss of wildlife habitat and the displacement of wildlife species, could be considered a negative cumulative effect. However, cumulative impacts are mitigated on aproject-by-project basis and in accordance with the City's requirements. MITIGATION MEASURES The following mitigation measures directly correspond to the identified impact statement analyzed in the Impacts discussion. SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITY 5.3-1 No mitigation measures are required. Biological Resources JN 1 0-1 002 78 5.3-30 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR CANDIDATE/SENSITIVE/SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES 5.3-2a The project applicant shall pay aone-time mitigation fee due and j payable to the City of Bakersfield at the time grading plans are approved - or building permits are issued. The mitigation fee is currently $1,240 per acre (Burns pers. com. 2000) and may be increased to keep pace with inflation (City of Bakersfield 1994). The mitigation fee shall apply to the project sites in their entirety. 5.3-2b Prior to construction activities, focused surveys for the San Joaquin kit fox shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if any ,~ known kit fox dens are located on the project sites. If an active den is not found, no further mitigation would be necessary. However, if an active den is present, kit foxes shall be relocated by a qualified biologist using CDFG-and USFWS-approved methods. Ifthe biologistdetermines that relocation is not practicable, he/she shall destroy the den according to CDFG-and USFWS-approved methods to al low the foxes to relocate on their own. Results of the surveys shall be provided to CDFG. 5.3-2c Thirty days prior to construction activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey to determine if the burrowing owl is present on the project sites and the nesting status of any individuals present. If nesting is not occurring, construction work shall proceed after any owls have been evacuated from the project sites using CDFG-approved burrow closure procedures. If an active nest is present, to protect any active burrow site, the following restriction on construction shall be required between February 1 and June 30 or until nests are no longer active as determined by the project biologist: clearing limits shall be established by the biologist in any direction from raptor nests/burrows depending on the species and existing conditions. Results of the surveys and relocation efforts shall be provided to CDFG. 5.3-2d Thirty days prior to construction activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey to determine if any raptors are nesting in trees on the project sites. If nesting is not occurring, construction work shall proceed. If an active nest is present, to protect any active nest/burrow sites, the following restriction on construction shall be required between February 1 and June 30 or until nests are no longer active as determined by the project biologist: clearing limits shall be established by the biologist in any direction from raptor nests/burrows depending on the species and existing conditions. Results of the surveys shall be provided to CDFG. Biological Resources JN 10-100278 5.3-31 r May 24, 2000 M EIR ~ ~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRA ! WILDLIFE MOVEMENT 5.3-3 No mitigation measures are required. CONSERVATION PLAN 5.3-4 Refer to Mitigation Measures 5.3-2a and 5.3-2b. ' CUMULATIVE IMPACTS II ,~ ~ 5.3-5 No mitigation measures are required. , NIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION LEVEL OF SIG No significant impacts related to Biological Resources have been identified following implementation of mitigation measures and/orcompliancewith applicable standards, policies and/or City of Bakersfield Codes. ~. I I i Bi l l R o og ca esources JN 10-100278 5.3-32 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 5.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES The purpose of the Cultural Resources section is to identify cultural resources which may exist onsite and to assess the significance of such resources. Mitigation measures are also recommended to preserve and/or to protect the resources. Information in this ' Section is based on technical reports including An Archaeological Assessment of 450 Acres of Land Owned by North of The River Sanitation District, dated February 1991 and correspondence from the California Archeological Inventory Center, dated July 1991. The evaluation consisted of an archaeological records search and an on-foot survey of the property. Information contained in the technical studies can be found in Appendix 15.4, Archaeological Assessment. EXISTING CONDITIONS CULTURAL AND ETHNOGRAPHIC BACKGROUND ~~ The San Joaquin Valley has been occupied by Native American groups for thousands of years. During ethnographic times the San Joaquin Valley was inhabited by over 40 ' Yokuts tribes characterized with a distinct name, dialect and territory. Historically the Yokuts have been separated into three geographical divisions, Northern, Southern Valley, and Foothill. The Southern Valley Yokuts occupied the region around the project area. European contact with the Southern Valley Yokuts was first recorded in 1772 when a band of Spanish soldiers ventured through Tejon Pass in the San Joaquin Valley. No - further contact is indicated until Francisco Garces arrived in 1776. In the early 1800s, the Catholic church made an attempt to establish missions but failed. The southern valley became a haven for the runaways of missions outside the area, and the infiltration of different customs led to the breakdown of local cultural practices. When California was annexed by the United States, the San Joaquin Valley was overrun with settlers, and Indian lands passed into the Euroamerican hands. The few remaining Southern Valley people wenttotheTejon reservation established atthe base of the Tehachapi mountains or to the Fresno reservation near Madera. These reservations failed to prosper, and the Indians who remained on them were moved to ~ the Tule River reservation in 1859. RECORDS SEARCH A records search of the project area, and the areas immediately surrounding it, was conducted at the Archaeological Information Center (AIC) at California State University Bakersfield. The records search revealed that no known prehistoric nor historic sites or isolated artifacts were located on or adjacent to the subject property. However, it Cultural Resources JN 10-100278 5.4-1 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR roximatel one mile southeast of the ro ert and two did show one recorded site app y p p Y recorded sites less than two miles to the southeast. ON-SITE FIELD SURVEY On-foot surveying was conducted between September 20, 1990 and December 20, . 1990. Transects were walked over the entire acreage at intervals of 10 to 50 meters, spacing depending upon field conditions. Two prehistoric sites were found during the on-foot survey. The two recorded sites were assigned permanent trinomials by the AIC (CA-KER-2873 and CA-KER-2874), preliminary mapped, recorded, and filed at theAlC as follows: ~ CA-KER-2873. The current known extent of CA-KER-2873 is approximately 39 x 30 meters in size and is located along the southern edge of the 450-acre subject parcel. Artifacts discovered at this site include: One granite metate, one granite hammerstone/mano, one _ fragment of rhyolite groundstone, two obsidian flakes, three chalcedony ,, flakes, and one rhyolite flake. CA-KER-2874. This site is located along the northeastern boundary of , the survey area, and the four surface artifacts were located in a north- southline approximately 220 x 20 meters in size. Artifacts include: one sandstone bowl/mortar fragment, one steatite bowl fragment, one granitic pestle, and one chalcedony flake. Artifacts, except the flake, , were collected and are stored at CSUB. ~i With the diversity of artifacts from the two sites, multipurpose areas would be suggested. For example, the manos, metate, pestle, and range in the bowl size and materials, would indicate a variety of food processing activities. The lithic material indicates tool making and a certain level of tool technology. The obsidian (flakes) and steatite (bowl fragment) are not local products and would, therefore, suggest travel to other areas and/or trade with other groups. There are stream cobbles on both sites, but especially at and near CA-KER-2873, and many cobble fragments. Amore thorough examination would be needed to determine if these include decortication flakes, that would indicate primary reduction of local raw lithic material. IMPACTS ~ ~ '~ Significance Criteria The purpose of this analysis is to identify any potential cultural resources within or adjacent to the project area, and to assist the City of Bakersfield in determining whether , Cultural Resources )N 1 0-1 002 78 5.4-2 May 24, 2000 1 1 1 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR such resources meet the official definitions of "historical resources," as provided in the California Public Resource Code, in particular CEQA. According to Public Resources Code §5020.1(j), "historical resource" includes, but is not limited to, any object, building, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which is historically or archaeologically significant, or is significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California." More specifically, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Section 15064.5(a) (1-3)) state thatthe term "historical resources" applies to such resources listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in California Register of Historical Resources, included in a local register of historical resources, or determined to be historically significant by the Lead Agency. ' Regarding the proper criteria of historical significance, the CEQA Guidelines (Section 15064.5 (a) (1-3)) mandate that "a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be "historically significant' if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources". A resource may be listed in the California Register if it meets any of the following criteria: ' 1. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage. 2. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. 3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative - individual, or possesses high artistic values. . 4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history (Public Resources Code §5024.2 (c)) According to Appendix G, the Initial Study Checklist, of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would typically have a significant impact on cultural resources if the project would cause one or more of the following to occur. • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5; • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuantto CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5; • Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature (refer to Section 10.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant); Cultural Resources JN 10-100278 5.4-3 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR , • Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries (refer to Section 10.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant). Potential im acts are rou ed below accordin to to ic. The numbered miti ation p g p g p g measures at the end of this Section directly correspond with the numbered impact statements. , ON-SITE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES 5.4-1 Implementation of the proposed project may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological and/or historical resources. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Implementation of the specified mitigation would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Neither site CA-KER-2873 nor site CA-KER-2874 are located within the limits of the , proposed development areas. However, site CA-KER-2873 is located in proximity to the proposed LMR site, thus project implementation may impact this prehistoric site. In consideration of the diversity of artifacts and the lack of archaeological work which -- exists in the area, site CA-KER-2873 has the potential to add considerable knowledge to the understanding of the prehistory of the entire larger region. Therefore, impacts to this prehistoric site caused by project implementation may be significant. Impacts to archaeological/historical resources would be reduced to a less than significant level with implementation of the specified mitigation including mapping, surface collection and trenching of the site. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 5.4-2 Cumulative development may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of prehistoric resources. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Evaluated and mitigated on aproject--by-project basis. Potential im acts would be sites ecific and an evaluation of otential impacts would p p p be conducted on aproject-by-project basis. This would be especially true of those developments located in areas considered to have a high sensitivity for cultural (archaeological, paleontological, and historical) resources. Each incremental development is required to comply with all applicable State and Federal regulations - concerning preservation, salvage, or handling of cultural resources. In consideration of these regulations, potential cumulative impacts upon cultural resources would not be considered significant. 1 Cultural Resources )N 10-100278 5.4-4. May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ' MITIGATION MEASURES The following mitigation measures directly correspond to the identified impact statements provided in the impacts subsection. ' On-Site Archaeological and Historical Resources ' S.4-1a Priortoconstruction,theprojectapplicantshall implementthefollowing measures as outlined in the February, 1991 Archaeological Assessment for the project area: • Recorded sites CA-KER-2873 and CA-KE-R-2874 shall be mapped and surface collected. ' Two backhoe trenches (minimum depth: 1.5m. [5 ft.]) and two test units (1 x 2 m.) shall be placed at each recorded site to determine the presence and content of any intact subsurface deposit. Further recommendations, if any, will depend on the results of these tests. • Efforts shall be made to locate, borrow, and record artifacts previously removed from the project area. 5.4-1 b In the eventthat a material of potential cultural significance is uncovered ' during grading activities on the project sites, all grading shall cease and the project applicant shall retain a professional archaeologist to evaluate the quality and significance of the material. Grading shall not continue until resources have been completely removed by the archaeologist and recorded as appropriate: Compliance with this measure is subject to periodic field inspection the project applicant. Cumulative Impacts 5.4-2 No mitigation measures are required. LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant impacts related to cultural resources have been identified following ' implementation of mitigation measures and/or compliance with applicable standards, policies, and/or City of Bakersfield codes. 1 Cultural Resources JN 10-100278 5.4-5 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR i 5.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ' Information in this section is based on technical information including the Geological Hazards Investigation, prepared by Dayne L. Frary, Geologist, dated October 1991, ' and the City of Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR. Information contained in the technical study can be found in Appendix 15.5, Geology and Soils. The purpose of this section is to describe the geologic and seismic setting of the project area, identify potential impacts associated with the proposed project, and recommend mitigation measures to reduce the significance of such impacts. EX/STING CONDITIONS LANDFORM AND TOPOGRAPHY The City of Bakersfield lies between the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range and the Coast Ranges within the southern portion of San Joaquin Valley. Bakersfield is part of the Great Valley Geomorphic Province of California which is a large northwesterly trending trough between the Coast Ranges on the west and the Sierra Nevada on the east. This trough consists of a thickness of sediments which were deposited from the surrounding mountains. The project area lies within the floor of this valley in the northwest portion of Bakersfield. Elevations on the property range from approximately 403 feet above mean sea level (msl) to 430 feet above msl. GEOLOGIC FORMATIONS Durin the Late Pliocene and Earl Pleistocene E ochs the ancestral Kern River g Y p deposited a huge alluvial fan in Bakersfield and the surrounding areas. Subsequent ' uplift of the Sierra Nevada raised the fan to its present elevation and downward erosion by the present Kern River has produced the landforms that exist at the present time. In 1975 the Tenneco Oil Company drilled approximately 300 feet north of the project area and discovered sedimentary beds ranging in age from Pleistocene through Early Miocene. According to the Geological Hazards Investigation, the stratigraphic column which was found during this drilling bestdepicts the stratigraphy underlying the project area. The surface material within the project area is composed of non-marine alluvial deposits of the Pleistocene age and alluvial fan deposits of the Holocene age. The olderalluvium consists mainly of slightly consolidated and dissected fan deposits. The Holocene fan deposits consist of sediments deposited from streams emerging from highlands to the east. Geology and Soils JN 10-100278 5.5-1 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Soils Soils which were identified in the project area have been classified into four categories ' by the Kern County California Soil Survey for the Northwestern region. Based on the soil survey, the project area includes soil types of Cajon Sandy Loam, Milham Sandy Loam, Kimberlina Fine Sandy Loam and Wasco Sandy Loam. All of the soils are deep, ,- well-drained soil types which formed in alluvium derived predominantly from granitic and sedimentary debris. The characteristics of these soil types include moderate to , rapid permeability and very slow to slow runoff. These soils are considered poorly indurated within the top several feet. The following describes each of the four soil classifications: Cajon Sandy Loam: general ly used for irrigated crops mainly alfalfa, cotton, grapes and small grain. This soil is best suited for hay and other pasture land. When designing , on top of this soil type, buildings and roads should be designed to offset the limited ability ofthe soil in this unitto supporttheload.. The primary limitation classified with this type of soil is the hazard of soil blowing and susceptibility to rare periods of flooding. Kimberlina Fine Sandy Loam: generally used for irrigated crops mainly almonds, alfalfa, cotton and grapes. The soil is best suited for irrigated crops, hay and pasture land. Limitations include susceptibility to rare periods of flooding. ' Milham Sandy Loam: generally used for crops consisting mainly of cotton and alfalfa. This type of soil is best suited for irrigated pasture, livestock grazing, hay and pasture lands. Wasco Sandy Loam: generally used for homesite and crops consisting of mainly cotton , and alfalfa. This type of soil is best suited for speciality crops and homesite. The main limitation of this soil type is the susceptibility to rare periods of flooding. HAZARDS , GEOLOG C Faulting and Seismicity The San Joaquin Valley region is considered to be seismically active. Since it is situated on thick accumulations of sediments, the project area is subject to severe ground shaking and possible surface readjustment in the event ofmaximum-magnitude earthquakes along the Big Pine, Breckenridge-Kern Canyon, Edison, Garlock, Pond- Poso, San Andreas, Sierra Nevada, or White Wolf faults. Earthquakes are responsible for three types of seismic hazards including ground rupture, ground shaking and ground failure (such as collapse, landslides and liquefaction). ' Geology and Soils JN 10-100278 5.5-2 May 24, 2000 u 1 1 1 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR There are a total of nine faults which have been identified in the project vicinity as detailed in Table 5.5-1, Distance of Local Faults from Project. An active fault is defined by the State Mining and Geology Board as one that has "had surface displacementwithinHolocenetime(aboutthelast11,000years)." This definition does not mean that faults lacking evidence for surface displacement within Holocene time are necessarily inactive. A fault may be presumed to be inactive based on satisfactory geologic evidence; however, the evidence necessary to prove inactivity is sometimes difficult to obtain and locally may not exist. A potentially active fault is a fault that shows evidence of surface displacement during Quanternary time (last 1.6 million years). Table 5.5-1 DISTANCE OF LOCAL FAULTS FROM PROJECT Fault Distance from Project Edison 8 miles southeast Breckenridge-Kern Canyon 29 miles northeast Big Pine 48 miles southwest Garlock 39 miles southeast Pond-Poso 10 miles north San Andreas 37 miles southwest Sierra Nevada 58 miles northeast White Wolf 24 miles south Kern Front 4 miles northeast Source: Geological Hazards Investigation prepared by Dayne L. Frary, Geologist, dated October 1991. The Kern Front Fault, located approximately four miles northeast of the project area, has not been historically active in the area. A summary of the primary faults in the immediate project vicinity and their approximate distance from the project area is ' presented in Table 5.5-1. The closest known faults in the project are subsurface faults which were mapped underlying the southwest corners of the project area from previous analyses of electric logs of oil wells in the project area, commonly known as the Fruitvale Oil Field. These ' faults could be considered potentially active if Early Pleistocene sediments of the Kern River Formation are encountered on site. Geology and Soils JN 10-100278 5.5-3 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR It should be noted that faults not yet identified may exist in the immediate vicinity or region that are capable of producing earthquakes that could be damaging to the project area. Fault Rupture Fault rupture is a potential problem in the event of a strong earthquake occurring along the several active faults in the Bakersfield area. Figure 2-34, Geologic Hazards, of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR, identifies the Earthquake Fault Zones which have been designated by the State as areas where the City of Bakersfield should consider the possibility of fault rupture along designated active or potentially active faults'. Areas included in the Earthquake Fault Zones are located within the northeast portion of the City of Bakersfield. Landslide Hazards According to the City of Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR, landslides or slope failures are rare within the Bakersfield area due to the relatively flat land surface. Slopes which are subject to failure within the Bakersfield area are predominantly found along the river terraces, bluffs and foothills to the northeast and east of the city. Seismically-Induced Flooding Seismically-induced flooding has been studied for the Bakersfield area in the event of failure of Lake Isabella Dam. Lake Isabella Dam is located on the Kern River and is approximately 30 miles northeast of the City of Bakersfield. According to the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR, a break and failure of this dam could result in flooding affecting approximately 26 square miles of the city. The Kern River is located approximately 1.4 miles southeast of the project area. There are no large bodies of water in the vicinity which might endanger the area by inundation, nor is the project area located within any high potential or historical flood hazard zone as defined by the Kern County Planning Department, Floodplain Management Division. The project sites are safely situated in Zone C on local Flood Hazard Area Map No. 060075-10056 of the National Flood Insurance Administration. 1 1 u 1 1 ~~ '~ 1 Effective January 1, 1994, the name "Special Studies Zones" has been changed to "Earthquake Fault Zones" and Chapter 7.5, Div. 2 of the Public Resource code has been named the "Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zoning Act." Geology and Soils JN 1 0-1 002 78 5.5-4 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Liquefaction ' Liquefaction is defined as the transformation of a granular material from a solid state into a liquefied state as a consequence of increased pore water pressure that occurs during an earthquake. Liquefaction is possible when groundwater is within i approximately 40 feet of the surface, faults exist in the vicinity and geologic formations with a granular nature are present. According to the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 ' General Plan EIR, an area of high groundwater in the southeastern portion of Bakersfield could experience local areas of liquefaction during a strong earthquake. Subsidence Land subsidence may result from natural processes or the consequences of human activities. Wherever the supporting subsurface material is altered or removed, the ground surface may subside. The process may be destructive whether it occurs immediately or slowly over a period of time. There could be two major causes of subsidence in the ro'ect area. First subsidence p 1 , could occur due to the withdrawal of immense volumes of fluids, such as fresh water ' from the uppermost aquifer. Subsidence due to fluid withdrawal is progressive over a long period of time. The second cause is seismic activity, result in an almost instantaneous vertical movement during a large earthquake. IMPACTS Significance Criteria Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains the Initial Study Environmental Checklist form used during preparation of the project Initial Study as contained in Appendix 15.1 of this EIR. The Initial Study includes questions relating to geology, and soils. The issues presented in the Initial Study Checklist have been utilized as thresholds forsignificance in this Section. Accordingly, a project may cause a significant environmental impact if one or more of the following occurs: ' Geology and Soils • Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: (1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most ' recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issues by the Geology and Soils JN 10-100278 5.5-5 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR area or based on other substantial State Geologist for the evidence of a known fault; , (2) Strong seismic ground shaking; (3) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; (4) Landslides , • Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil; • Be located on ex ansive soils, as defined in Table 18-1 B of the Uniform p Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property and; ble of ade uatel su ortin the use of septic tanks or , • Have soils incapa q y pp g alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater (refer to Section 10.0, Effects Found Not To Be , Significant). Mineral Resources , • 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 (refer to Section 10.0, Effects ' Found Not To Be Significant); • Result in the loss of availability of alocally-important mineral resource recovery ' site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan (refer to Section 10.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant); ' • Potential impacts associated with geology, soils and seismicity may occur with __ project implementation. The impacts are categorized below according to topic and mitigation measures at the end of this Section directly correspond to the impact statements below (refer to Section 10.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant). ' Potential impacts are grouped below according to topic. The numbered mitigation - measures at the end of this section directly correspond with the numbered impact ' statements. GEOLOGY/SEISMICITY 5.5-1 Project implementation may expose people or structures to adverse effects ' associated with seismic activity. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Analysis has concluded that compliance with City and Uniform Building Code Geolog and Soils JN 10-100278 5.5-6 May 24, 2000 , 1 1 1 i~ 1 ~~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR (UBC) standards would reduce impacts in this regard to a less than significant level. As noted above under the Significance Criteria discussion, a significant impact would occur if the project would expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault; strong seismic ground shaking; seismic-related ground failure (i.e., liquefaction); or landslides. Rupture of a Known Earthquake Fault Since the proposed development would be situated in the northwest portion of the city where fault rupture is not considered a possibility (i.e., outside of the City's Earthquake Fault Zones), impacts in this regard are not anticipated. Further, no evidence has been found indicating that surface faulting or lurching has occurred across the project area or in the immediate vicinity. Subtle, steeply-dipping, subsurfacefaults underlyingthesouthwestcornerofthe project area have been previously mapped by the California Division of Oil and Gas. Although, these may be considered potentially active, these should not present a problem to future development.2 Based on the available data, development of the proposed project would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects with respect to rupture of a known earthquake fault. Strong Seismic Ground Shaking Although there are no active faults located along the project area, the entire Bakersfield area is considered to be seismically active with nine active faults located in proximity to the project area. The general project area may experience severe ground shaking and surface readjustment in the event of maximum magnitude earthquakes along the San Andreas, White Wolf, Big Pine, Garlock, Sierra Nevada, Breckenridge-Kern Canyon, Edison, or Pond-Poso faults. Average values of maximum bedrock accelerations during a maximum credible magnitude earthquake on the San Andreas fault might be expected to be as high as 0.24 gravity in the project area. With implementation of the specified mitigation measures, the potential to expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects associated with strong seismic ground shaking would be reduced to a less than significant level. z Geological Hazards Investigation, Dayne L. Frary, Geologist, October 1991, page 6. Geology and Soils JN 10-100278 5.5-7 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Seismic-Related Ground Failure According to the 1989 Report on Water Conditions by the Kern County Water Agency, groundwater underlies the property in the primary water table (uppermost unconfined aquifer) at depths ranging from 40 to over 200 feet. Additionally, the project site is located within the northwest region of Bakersfield where high groundwater is rare. Further, there are no known perched or other shallow water tables underlying the project area that would result in liquefaction problems in the event of groundshaking during an earthquake.3 As previously noted, there could be two major causes of subsidence in the project area. It is possible that both excessive ground water withdrawal and/or a seismic event could cause subsidence in the project area. The process would be destructive whether it occurred immediately or slowly over a period of time. However, with implementation of the specified mitigation measures, the potential to expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects associated with subsidence would be reduced to a less than significant level. According to the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR, a break and failure of Lake Isabella Dam could result in flooding affecting approximately 26 square miles of the City, including the project area. It is estimated that it would take four hours for waters released from the Dam, should it fail, to reach the project area. However, damages associated with dam failure are considered unlikely to occur. There are no large bodies of water in the area that could endanger the proposed development from inundation. The Kern River is 1.4 miles to the southeast, and the project sites are safely located in National Flood Insurance Administration "Zone C". Neither is the project~area located in any high potential or historical flood hazard zone as defined by the Kern County Planning Department, Floodplain Management Division. Landslides Elevations throughout the project area range from 403 feet above mean sea level (msl) to 430 feet above msl, with the land surface being relatively flat. There are no steep natural slopes near the area which could expose the proposed development to landslides. Overall, the intensity of future seismic activity at the proposed project is expected to be no greater than for other sites in the immediate vicinity. To ensure public safety, it is required thatthe proposed structures be designed in accordance with the minimum ~., 1 1 n I ~,~ 1 3 Ibid, page 9. Geology and Soils JN 10-100278 5.5-8 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Earthquake Regulations of the Uniform Building Code (UBC), Chapter23, as it provides for earthquake-resistant design, and Chapter 70, as it provides for excavation and grading. Development of the project would be subject to standards specified in the UBC as well as in the City of Bakersfield's Municipal Code. Compliance with these standards would reduce impacts associated with seismicity to a less than significant ' level. ' SOILS Soil Erosion 5.5-2 Implementation of the proposed project may result in substantial soil erosion. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Analysis has concluded that ' implementation of the specified mitigation and compliance with City and Uniform Building Code (UBC) standards would reduce impacts in regards to soil erosion to a less than significant level. ' Soils which occur in the project area include Cajon Sandy Loam, Milham Sandy Loam, Kimberlina Fine Sandy Loam and Wasco Sandy Loam. Clearing and removal of the ' existing vegetation in preparation for project development would expose the underlying soils to the potential for increased erosion during periods of winds and heavy rainfall. Grading and excavation activities would further disrupt these existing soils. The characteristics of these soil types include moderate to rapid permeability and very slow to slow runoff. These soi Is are considered generally cohesionless within the top several feet. It should be noted that pursuant to City of Bakersfield Municipal Code Sections ' ' ~ "" ^' ^ ~--' ' ~ "" ^~^ 1 x.16.100, an Erosion Control Plan would be required, prior to any grading activity, to ensure that erosion controls are implemented. Implementation of the specified mitigation and compliance with City and Uniform Building Code (UBC) standards would reduce impacts in regards totopography and soil erosion to a less than significant level. The Kern County California Soil Survey suggests when moderate to high density housing is built along types of soils present in the project area, community sewage systems are necessary to prevent contamination of water supplies from the onsite sewage disposal system. As the proposed project would involve the development of approximately 92 acres of low-medium density residential uses (LMR Site), implementation of a community sewage system would be required. Geology and Soils JN 10-100278 5.5-9 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR , Ex ansive Soils p 5.5-3 Implementation of the proposed project may create a substantial risk to life or , property as a result of expansive soils. Significance: Less than significant impact. , The soils which are known to occur in the project area (i.e., Cajon Sandy Loam, Milham Sandy Loam, Kimberlina Fine Sandy Loam and Wasco Sandy Loam) have been , classified with a low to marginal potential for soil expansion. This potential impact is further reduced through conformance with the UBC and applicable City Codes, as wel I as adherence to standard engineering practices and design criteria. Project ' implementation would therefore, not create a substantial risk to life or property as a result of development on expansive soils. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ' 5.5-4 The proposed project, combined with future development, may result in , increased geology and soil impacts within the area. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. " Mitigation incorporated on aproject-by-project basis would reduce impacts to less than significant levels in areas deemed suitable ' for development. Cumulative effects related to geology and soils resulting from implementation of the ' proposed project and development in the project vicinity and surrounding areas may expose more persons and property to potential hazards. The General Plan EIR states ' that all new development would be subject to the Uniform Building Code in an effort to preserve the structural integrity of new buildings in the event of an earthquake. The General Plan EIR does not identify significant and unavoidable impacts after t compliance with this measure. Further, any potential impacts would be mitigated to less than significant levels on aproject-by-project basis. The project would not exceed impacts in this regard beyond those anticipated within the General Plan. MITIGATION MEASURES act The following mitigation measures directly correspond to the identified imp statement provided in the impacts subsection. ' GEOLOGY/SEISMICITY 5.5-1 a The proposed project structures and improvements shall be designed in ' accordance with all applicable requirements of the Uniform Building Code and the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code. ' Geology and Soils ' JN 10-100278 5.5-10 May 24, 2000 1 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 5.5-1b Engineering design for all structures shall consider the probability that the project area will be subjected to strong ground motion during the lifetime of the proposed developments. Construction plans shall be subject to the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code and shall call for standards which address horizontal bedrock accelerations of at least 0.24 gravity. ' SOILS ~~ 5.5-4 No mitigation measures are required. ' LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION ' No significant impacts related to Geology and Soils have been identified following implementation of mitigation measures and/or compliance with applicable standards, policies and/or City of Bakersfield codes. 1 'J Geology and Soils JN 10-100278 5.5-11 5.5-2a Pursuant to City of Bakersfield Municipal Code Sections Q 16.16:100, prior to site grading or excavation, the project applicant shall submit to the Engineering Division for review and approval, an Erosion Control Plan. 5.5-2b In compliance with the Kern County California SoilSurvey,acommunity sewage system shall be designed and implemented in association with the proposed low-medium density residential housing (LMR Site), to the satisfaction of the City of Bakersfield Engineering Department. 5.5-3 No mitigation measures are required. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 5.6 HUMAN HEALTH/RISK OF UPSET _ -The purpose of the Section is to identify potential risks to human health from existing i and historical uses of the project site. Information in this Section is based on a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared by WZI Inc., dated February 1999, and Hazards Analysis prepared by Insight Environmental Consultants, dated January 13, ~; 2000 (refer to Appendix 15.6). This Phase I ESA includes a Phase II analysis of potential soil contamination associated with the North of the River Sanitary District property, a survey of surrounding land uses which may have affected the project site, and a regulatory agency review of records regarding known hazardous~materials,in the project vicinity. EXISTING CONDITIONS t ii C 1 1 e 1 The following discussion addresses the issues of public health and safety related to historical uses within the project boundaries. Other specific health and safety issues . associated with the project include the North of the River Sanitary District (NORSD) sewage treatment facility, the Fruitvale Oil Field, Meadows Field-Kern County Airport, rail line hazards, electromagnetic fields, valley fever, and the project's distance from existing heavy industrial uses. DEFINITION OF TERMS The term "hazardous material" refers to both hazardous substances and hazardous waste. A material is defined as "hazardous" if it appears on a list of hazardous materials prepared by a Federal, State or local regulatory agency or if it has characteristics defined as "hazardous" by such an agency. A "hazar_'d'ous waste" is a "solid waste" that exhibits toxic or hazardous characteristics. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) has defined the term "solid waste" to include many types of discarded materials, including: any gaseous, liquid, semi-liquid or solid material which is discarded or has served its intended purpose, unless the material is specifically excluded from regulation. Such materials are considered waste whether they are discarded, reused, recycled or reclaimed. AGRICULTURAL USE OF PROPERTY Agriculture within the Bakersfield area has been extensive since the introduction of livestock in the 1860s. Agricultural production forcrops within the City of Bakersfield include, cotton, alfalfa, milo, wheat and barely, plums, peaches, apricots, citrus, grapes, nuts, truck crops, potatoes, and other vegetables. Due to the historical and current agricultural use of the project area, soils within the site's boundaries have the potential to contain pesticide residues. s Human Health/Risk of Upset JN 10-100278 5.6-1 ~~ May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR OIL PRODUCTION FACILITIES The primary mineral resource currently under development throughout the City of Bakersfield is oil. Originally, oil related activities were confined to rural areas outside of the Bakersfield urban core; however, as urbanization has occurred, areas of urban development and oil-related activities have converged. The City of Bakersfield 2010 General Plan identifies the economic importance of continued development of mineral ~ and energy resources, recognizes the fact that urban encroachment can eliminate the , recovery of those resources, and also acknowledges that resource extraction has historically involved undesirable environmental damage to adjacent and nearby uses. ~~ Clearly, continued recovery of petroleum and mineral resources will be somewhat constrained by intensified industrial, commercial, and residential development ` throughout the project area, as will proposed urban development be constrained by `~ ` existing resource recovery operations. The project area itself is located within the Fruitvale Oilfield which is currently utilized for oil and gas production. According to the California Department of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR), the project sites includes 14 active oil production _~ wells, 3 abandoned oil wells, and 1 groundwater monitoring well. It should be noted that the groundwater monitoring well is no longer in use and has not been monitored for approximately 10 years. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/SUBSTANCES Approximately 170.9 acres of the North of River Sanitary District (NORSD) project area ~' is located within the boundaries of the proposed project site. Of this, approximately 14 acres comprise the NORSD sewage treatment facility on the northeast portion of the I project area which was originally constructed in 1.942. Wastewater discharge from the plant is regulated under Waste Discharge Requirements Order 92-016 which was ' issued by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Central Valley Region in 1992. Treated wastewater generated by the facility was used throughout the property as irrigation water until approximately 1990. Since 1990, the wastewater has reportedly been piped offsite and used as irrigation water at the new ~~ NORSD facility located approximately 18-miles to the west of the project area. t~ The project area contains one former pond situated on the southwest portion of the ~ sewage treatment facility. In addition, one sewage dumping area (spreading grounds) formerly utilized forthe disposal of sewage produced by the NORSD sewage treatment facility is located on the southwest portion of the project area, immediately adjacent to the LMR Site's southern boundary of the low-medium density residential portion of the project. A total of six pole-mounted transformers are located on the property which ~~ are maintained by Pacific Gas and Electric Company "'G & E). According to PG & E, - all transformers were tested for PCB's in 1981 and it is unlikely that the existing transformers located on the property contain any PCB's. , Human Health/Risk of Upset JN 10-100278 5.6-2 May 24, 2000 ~, f 1 1 I 1 1 [] GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR PROXIMITY TO ADJACENT HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES A number of heavy industrial uses are situated adjacent to the southeastern boundary of the North of the River Sanitary District site. These industries include the Equilon Enterprises Coker faci I ity which stores petroleum liquids and liquid ammonia, the Coast Gas facility which includes several large horizontal liquified petroleum gas (LPG) storage tanks, the San Joaquin Refinery, and several other small facilities (referto Table 5.6-1, List of Heavy Industries, below). Table 5.6-1 List of Heavy Industries Company Type of Hazardous Material Production/Storage Cost Energy Storage of Flammable Materials (i.e., diesel, gasoline, natural gasoline liquid, propane, butane, etc.). Amber Chemical Chemical Storage-Oil Field Service. Also handles 50°1° solution of hydrogen peroxide. Baker Petrolite Chemical Storage-Oil Field Service. San Joaquin Refining Storage of crude oil and petroleum produces, process boilers and heaters. Equilon Enterprises Petroleum coke refining operation-Storage of crude oil and petroleum projects including naphtha, process boilers and heaters, ammonia storage, chemical storage. Source: North of the River Project Hazard Analysis, prepared by Insight Environmental Consultants, dated January 13, 2000. q Issues regarding potential environmental, health and safety hazards associated with the existing industries were raised through several meetings with industry representatives which were coordinated by the Kern County Fire Department and the City of Bakersfield Fire Department. The purpose of the meetings was to identify the health and safety issues that could impact the general public, identify the issues associated with each facility and determine the separation (setback) distances required to protect the future residences. As a result of these meetings, the City of Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services developed recommendations that the City of Bakersfield Planning Department could utilize as a guideline in land-use planning decisions involving the separation of industrial and residential uses. The recommendations identify five criteria needed to establ ish the appropriate buffer distances between heavy industrial areas and residential areas (refer to discussion under Impact 5.6-5, below). Human Health/Risk of Upset JN 10-100278 5.6-3 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC FIELDS A Southern California Edison (SCE) high voltage transmission line easement extends in an east west direction across the northern portion of the future low-medium density residential area. Research conducted over the past decades has raised much debate over the health effects associated with electric and magnetic fields, typically referred to as electromagnetic fields (EMF). Electric fields are produced in electrical lines as a result of voltage applied to wiring, and is measured in volts per meter (V/m) or kilovolts per meter (kV/m). Electric field strength falls off dramatically with distance, and many objects, including trees and buildings shield these fields. Most exposure to residential electric fields is a result of internal household appliance use. Magnetic fields are a result of the movement (current) of electricity. These fields are measures in Gauss, however, this measure is extremely large, and fields from electrical lines are generally referred to in milligauss (mG). As with electrical fields, magnetic field strength decreases dramatically with distance from the source, however magnetic fields are not shielded by objects such as trees and buildings (Bally Research Associates, 1992). Exposure of electromagnetic fields in an existing circumstance that is typical in urban communities, including Bakersfield, and the intensity of the EMF varies with the type of electricity source. Whether the fields are originating from household appliances or high voltage transmission lines, public and scientific concern exists regarding the health effects resulting from exposure. The relationship between EMF exposure and adverse health effects, such as birth defects, cancer, neurobehavioral effects, and reproductive and development effects has been researched extensively. However, such relationships have not been scientifically proven. Results from the plethora of epidemiological and laboratory studies that have taken place have concluded that there is no conclusive scientific evidence regarding such relationships. As recently as June 24, 1998, a working group of scientists organized by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, who administer the Electric and Magnetic Fields Research and Public Information Dissemination (EMF RAPID) Program (established by Congress under Section 2118 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992), concluded that :the scientific literature provided no conclusive and consistent evidence to show that exposures to residential electric and magnetic fields produce cancer, adverse neurobehavioral effects, or reproductive and developmental effects." AIR TRAFFIC AND RAIL LINE HAZARDS Air Traffic Hazards The Meadows Field-Kern County Airport is located approximately two-miles northeast of the project area. The project sites are not situated within anon-compatible use zone for air flight operations. However, Table 2A of the Kern County, Airport La~~d Use Compatibility Plan indicates that the majority of the project area is situated in Zone C of the Meadows Field Comprehensive Land Use Plan which is subject to common air Human Health/Risk of Upset )N 10-100278 5.6-4 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR L ~, traffic patterns with limited risks. Zone C allows for a maximum of 15 residential dwelling units (du) per acre. Uses such as schools, hospitals, and nursing homes are considered inappropriate within this zone. ,~ Rail Line Hazards A Burlington Northern and Santa Fe (BN&SF) railroad line extends along the \ southeastern boundary of the project area. Current rail operations are limited to approximately six train trips per day and primarily transport oil products produced by nearby production facilities. Public safety hazards typically associated with train operations can be broken down into two groups: 1) accidents associated with population exposure to rail operations (primarily pedestrian and vehicular accidents ~ involving trains) and 2) accidents involving the trains themselves (i.e., derailments). A major train derailment could encompass many threats, such as hazardous materials incident, fire, severe damage to either adjacent buildings or vehicles, and the loss of life to pedestrians and those in adjacent buildings or vehicles.- ~, VALLEY FEVER Valley Fever is an infection caused by the spores of the Coccidioides immitis fungus. ~~ This fungus is found in soils in the southwestern region~of the United States, including the San Joaquin Valley and Kern County. Inhalation of the spores could result in symptoms that include mild influenza, fever, chills, sweating and chest pain lasting ~; from two to three weeks. In some individuals, the symptoms may worsen to include cough, loss of appetite, headache, muscle ache, swelling and redness of joints. When the spores spread throughout the body, meningitis may result, and in some instances ,~ skin, bones, joints and genitourinary systems maybe affected, resulting in possible death. Children, the elderly, pregnant women and persons with dark skin appear to ~j be more susceptible to Valley Fever than other persons. The Valley Fever fungus has been identified in soil samples taken near the California State University of Bakersfield campus. IMPACTS ~~' Significance Criferia Significance thresholds in this Section are based on the CEQA Appendix G ~, Environmental Checklist Form as indicated below. CEQA Appendix G Thresholds A potentially significant impact to human health would occur if the project caused one or more of the following to occur: Human Health/Risk of Upset JN 10-100278 5.6-5 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment; , • Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school (refer to Section 10.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant); • 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; • A safety hazard for people residing or working within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, or within two miles of a public airport; • A safety hazard for people residing or working within the vicinity of a private airstrip; • Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; and/or • Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving wildland fires (refer to Section 10.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant). Potential human health impacts associated with the proposed project have been identified. The impacts are categorized according to topic then numbered consecutively under each category. Mitigation measures at the end of this Section directly correspond to the numbered impact statements below. AGRICULTURAL USE OF PROPERTY 5.6-1 Due to the historic use of the project area for agricultural purposes, there is a potential for pesticide residues (including DDT) to be present in the shallow soil. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Health hazards may occur which can be reduced to a less than significant level with implementation of mitigation measures. :; _ Human Health/Risk of Upset JN 10-100278 5.6-6 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Due to the historic use of portions of the project area for agricultural purposes, there ~~ is a potential for pesticide residues (including DDT) to be present in the shallow soil. Potential health impacts associated with individuals being exposed to pesticide ,~ residues, if at all, may occur during grading and construction phases of the project. The potential threat to public health can be reduced to less than significant levels by conducting soil samplingactivitiespriortothesitedevelopmenttodetermineareasthat have high levels of pesticide residues. Should the presence of pesticide residues be identified, on-site contamination can be successfully remediated prior to project site development using available technologies. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts in this regard to a less than significant level. ~~i r J ~~ 1 i r~l 1 5.6-2 Pesticide application procedures associated with adjacentagricultural uses may potentially create human health effects for future occupants of the development. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Comp/lance with local and State requirements would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Agricultural uses immediately adjacent to development areas during project buitdout could create human health effects, particularly during pesticide application operations. The potential impact of the continued use of agricultural chemicals within the development areas would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following standards: 1) agricultural chemicals are required to be used and stored in accordance with all applicable Federal, State and local regulations and guidelines; and 2) the use of buffers or barriers between agricultural and urban uses would provide a separation during pesticide application operations. These buffers or barriers can take the form of open space, roadways, utility corridors, canal, easements, six-foot high masonry walls, fences or landscape setbacks. Pursuant to Section 17.08.150(a) of the Bakersfield Municipal Code, residential structures are required to be setback a minimum of 50 feet from all agricultural zones. OIL PRODUCTION FACILITIES 5.6-3 Development adjacent to oil fields and oil wells can result in potential health and safety risks due to "gas migration," "attractive nuisances," "soil and groundwater contamination" and "blowouts" when drilling new wells, reworking old wells or abandonment of old wells. Several abandoned and active wells are located within the project's boundary, therefore, health and safety risks are present. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Development adjacent to oil fields and oil wells shall be required to comply with all Federal, State and local standards. In addition, compliance with mitigation measures identified by the Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR), as contained within Chapter 15.66 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code, would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. Human Health/Risk of Upset JN 10-100278 5.6-7 May 24, 2000 ~~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Gas Migration Development within an oil field could result in construction of structures over abandoned wells. If the wells are leaking, methane and hydrogen sulfide gas could migrate upward and could accumulate beneath developed areas where concrete and asphalt surfaces prevent the natural migration of the methane gas to the atmosphere. Migration of gases through cracks in concrete foundations into the interior of structures could create the potential for an explosion or fire. Proper well abandonment procedures on existing wells or reabandoment of previously abandoned wells prior to development of the proposed project would reduce potential gas migration impacts to less than significant levels. Soil Contamination Oil contaminated soil is known to occur in oil fields particularly adjacent to oil wells. Unrefined oil contains a variety of hazardous constituents, including polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), which are carcinogens, benzene, toluene, xylene, ethylbenzene and heavy metals; however, it should be noted that not all oil-contaminated soil is considered hazardous under State and Federal standards. Due to the historic oil drilling activities on-site there is the potential for oil contaminated soil to exist within the project area. Removal of such soil would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels (refer to Mitigation Measures). Blowouts Blowout prevention devices are generally used by the operators whenever the wells are being drilled or reworked. In addition, adequate setbacks, as determined by the Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (Division) and/or the City of Bakersfield would provide adequate separation between all new and existing wells and all proposed structures. Well Abandonment Public Resources Code Section 3208.1 authorizes the State and Oil and Gas Supervisor to order the reabandonment of a previously abandoned wel I when construction of any structure over or in the proximity of the well could result in a hazard. During construction and development operations, the currently abandoned wells on the project site would need to be exposed prior to construction. The Division must be notified to investigate the condition of the well heads and check for leakage. If any reabandonment is required, the Division would furnish necessary specification to the property owner. Human Health/Risk of Upset JN 10-100278 5.6-8 May 24, 2000 l 1 1 ~r ,~, 1 1 f L r '~. ~~, ,~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR On-Site Oil Production Facilities The Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan contains several implementation programs designed to ensure the continued viability of the general plan area's mineral and petroleum industries and to eliminate existing land use conflicts due to resource extraction as well as prevent their future occurrence. Specific implementation measures include development and maintenance of mineral resource maps showing present and future resource areas, extraction and drilling sites, and existing permit areas; the designation of mineral resource zoning areas, determination of acceptable interim land uses within these zones, and development of a plan for suitable buffer zones and compatible land uses surrounding mineral extraction areas; and coordination with responsible local, state, and federal agencies to establish development compliance criteria, health hazards safeguards, and restoration/re- vegetation follow-up procedures. These implementation programs are designed to mitigate any adverse impacts related to continued exploitation of petroleum and mineral resources in the general plan area. Any attempt to develop the study area's natural mineral wealth while accommodating forecasted population growth would be subject to potential conflicts between resource and commercial/residential uses. The 2010 General Plan and Municipal Code policies, objectives, and implementation programs are generally successful at balancing these potentially competing interests. Strict compliance with CEQA, the City of Bakersfield's Oil and Gas Code, and the State Division of Oil and Gas Regulation would provide for the controlled establishment of mineral production activities among established and proposed urban uses. City policies do not explicitly eliminate the practice of integrating drilling sites within existing and proposed residential and other urban uses, nor does it itself provide explicit standards for acceptable integration. With regard to the establishment of open space and drilling islands, Chapter 15.66 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code provides detailed guidelines and standards for well site development, permits and encroachment of development in petroleum,areas. Chapter 15.66.080 cites the following regarding encroachment of development in petroleum areas which includes provisions for drilling islands: 15.66.080 Development Encroachment in Petroleum Areas On-Site Petroleum Facilities. Where a developer proposes to subdivide, rezone or otherwise develop property which contains existing drilling and/or production operations including disposal wells, the developer shall provide a plan showing how all existing petroleum related facilities will be protected and integrated into the proposed development so as said facilities will satisfy the development standards pursuant to this Human Health/Risk of Upset )N 10-100278 5.6-9 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR chapter. The developer shall also submit a plan of the ultimate use of the land after cessation of petroleum operations and abandonment of ~~ the wells. Any buildable lot containing an area which may not be built upon because of development standard compliance of the petroleum ~ facilities shall be encumbered by the developer with a deed restriction ~ specifying the area so encumbered and identifying the name and location of the well causing the encumbrance. If a final map is required, said encumbrance shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. ,' Abandoned Wells. Tentative maps, planned development and other development plans submitted to the City shall show the location of all wells drilled on the property. Prior to development of an area, any well ~~; shown as abandoned shall be accompanied by written verification from the D.O.G. that the well was properly abandoned pursuant to their regulations. Any well thereafter abandoned shall also be accompanied , ~ by written verification from the D.O.G. Development shall be designed . such that the City Building Official is satisfied that no structure will be built within 10 feet of any well that has been properly abandoned pursuant to D.O.G. requirements. Any lot or parcel containing an abandoned well shall be encumbered with a deed restriction specifying the exact location of said well and prohibiting any construction within said 10 feet area. If a final map is required, said encumbrance shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. The D.O.G., at their discretion, may also require that any abandoned well be uncovered, tested for leakage, require remedial work on leaking wells, and accurately located on the final map before said map is recorded. '~~~ Drilling Islands. Lands may be reserved as part of a rezoning, subdivision or other development for future drilling and/or production operations as drilling islands. Such sites shall be no less than two (2) net acres in size, configured so that the proposed development and petroleum activities can be adequately buffered from one another, ~~, prov-de for adequate ingress and egress, and shall be accompanied with a plan of the ultimate use of the site after abandonment or decision not to pursue petroleum operations. Future drilling and/or production operations shall be required to acquire necessary permits as well as satisfy all well site development standards pursuant to this chapter. Adherence to Federal, State, and local requirements relative to oil filed production and oil well operations, including provisions outlined within Chapter 15.66 of the P,kersfield Municipal Code would reduce potential impactto existing oil facilities and mineral rights to less than significant levels. ~ Human Health/Risk of Upset ~~ JN 10-100278 5.6-10 May 24, 2000 '~t GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/SUBSTANCES 5.6-4 Project development could expose future residents to potential health impacts associated with historical operations which have occurred within the North of the River Sanitary District (NORSD) property. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. A Phase I and Phase ll Environmental Investigation prepared for the NORSD property indicated that historical activities have not significantly impacted the property. Mitigation measures have been included to further reduce the potential for an environmental condition to occur during demolition activities. The project proposes development of residential uses on approximately 156.4 acres ~; within the North of the River Sanitary District (NORSD) property. Primary concerns associated with this portion of the NORSD property is the former sewage dumping area (spreading grounds) which was formerly utilized for the disposal of sewage produced by the NORSD sewage treatment facility. As such, soil sampling and laboratory analyses were conducted at the sewage dumping area and within the area of the oil production facilities located within the project boundaries in order to characterize the extent and nature of potential contamination. According to the Phase II Environmental Investigation prepared by WZI, Inc., dated April 22, 1999, soil samples analyzed from the former sewage dumping area for the Total Threshold Limit Concentrations (TTLC) of CAM-17 metals are considered to contain normal background concentrations for the area. Current metal concentrations '- ~ are a result of the breakdown of naturally occurring minerals within the soil. The reported metals concentrations in al I of the samples analyzed were either low or below ;~1 laboratory analytical detection limits and were well below hazardous concentration limits set fourth in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). Analyses of soil samples collected adjacent to the oil production facilities located on the NORSD property reportedly contain low level of hydraulidmotor oil range hydrocarbons. The reported concentrations of the hydrocarbon contamination encountered are consistent with normal oilfield operations and do not pose a significant environmental concern with respect to the subject property. ~` Sewage Treatment Plant The project proposes General Commercial uses on the 14 acre North of the River Sewage Treatment Plant site. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted by WZI, Inc., dated February 1999, on the North of the River Sanitary District (NORSD) Property, which identified two (500 gallons each) above ground gasoline and diesel storage tanks and approximately 220 gallons of motor oil"stored in drums within the sewage treatment facility. Soils staining was reported present ~~ beneath the above ground storage tanks, however, the staining appeared to be sun`icial !~ Human Health/Risk of Upset JN 10=100278 5.6-11 May 24, 2000 _~~' GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~, in nature and probably does not indicate an environmental condition. Implementation of recommended mitigation measures contained in this section would further serve to reduce potential impacts associated with the above ground storage tanks and soil staining. It is also noted that due to the age of the on-site structures associated with the sewage treatment plant (i.e., equipment shed, tool shed, truck shed, maintenance shop, engine room, and office building), which were constructed prior to 1978, the potential for Asbestos Containing Materials (AGMs) and Lead-Based Paints (LBPs) to be encountered during demolition activities is considered likely. The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) mandates that building owners conduct an asbestos survey to determine the presence of AGMs prior to the commencement of any remedial work, including demolition. Additionally, according to the Department of ~~~ Substances Control (DTSC), if paint is not removed from the building material during demolition (and is not chipping or peeling), the material could be disposed of as construction debris (a non-hazardous waste). Adherence to state and local regulations ,,, regarding the handling and disposal of such materials would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. PROXIMITY TO ADJACENT HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USES ~ 5.6-5 Im lementation of the ro osed roject could expose future occupants to P P P P ~ potential health and safety impacts associated with an accidental release of hazardous material(s) or an explosion from the adjacent heavy industrial area `~ situated to the southeast. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. -mpacts are reduced to a less than significant level by establishing appropriate separation distances pursuant to criteria set forth by the City of Bakersfield and County of Kern Fire Departments. As previously stated above, several meetings coordinated by the City of Bakersfield and ~~ County of Kern Fire Departments were conduced to address potential health and safety impacts to future residences associated with the adjacent heavy industrial uses located southeast of the project site. According to the January 13, 2000 report prepared by ~,~ Insight Environmental Consultants, based on these meetings, it was determined that set- back distances should be established through a scientific basis in accordance with accepted risk management practices. The calculated set-back distances were determined to not include any potential active or passive mitigation measures. Since the industries of concern handle liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), petroleum liquids and ,~ other potentially hazardous materials the following issues were addressed: 1. Health risks associated with the normal operations of the facilities; 2. Accidental ~eleases of acutely hazardous materials; 3. Explosion over pressure hazards (structural property damage due to a pressure wave) associated with upsets at the facilities; and ~~ Human Health/Risk of Upset )N 10-100278 5.6-12 May 24, 2000 ~~ ~` GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 4. A boiling liquid expansion vapor explosion (BLEVE). As a result, the City of Bakersfield Fire Department Office of Environmental Services, ~~ ~ with the assistance of the Kern County Fire Department, developed the following recommendations which identify five criteria needed to establ ish the appropriate buffer distances between heavy industrial areas and residential areas. The greatest buffer ;~; ~ distance calculated in accordance with these criteria is the minimum setback distance which could be approved without consideration of other potential safety programs. These criteria are as follows: 1. A minimum set-back of 330 feet; or 2. The endpoint distance of achemical-specific, Emergency Response ~' Planning Guide 2 (ERPG 2) concentration calculation; or 3. The endpoint distance of a one pound per square inch (psi) over pressure; or 4. The endpoint distance based on the radiant heat exposure that could potentially cause second degree burns to a person for the duration of a :~ fireball resulting from a BLEVE; or 5. The endpoint distance of the zone of impact of a one in ten million .. lifetime cancer risk. Based on information provided by the heavy industrial uses, it was determined thattwo facilities (Coast Energyand Equilon Enterprises) would havethe mostsignificantimpact ~~ on the proposed project in the event of an accidental release or explosion (refer to Exhibit 5.6-1, HeavylndustrySetbackDistances). All otherindustriesweredetermined to have potential impacts which would fall within the set-back distances associated ;~i with the two facilities. The data and associated calculations utilized within this analysis were submitted to, and verified by, the Bakersfield City Fire Department Office of Environmental Services. The following is a brief description of the facility operations at Coast Energy and Equilon Enterprises. Coast Energy Facility Coast Energy stores liquefied petroleum gases (LPG) in 40,000 gallon capacity horizontal storage tanks. Propane is the most conservative substance to use in determining the potential impacts from a vapor cloud explosion. The potential offsite impacts were determined in accordance with the U. S. Environmental Protection ~1 Agency (EPA) Risk Management Plan GuidelineforOffsiteConsequenceAnalysis. For this facility items 3 and 4 (1 psi over pressure and BLEVE) of the criteria was considered. The appropriate calculations determined that a radius of 0.3 miles from ,~ any of the LPG storage tanks was required fora 1 psi over pressure set-back and that 0.47 miles was required for a BLEVE set-back. Incorporation of these setback distances ~` would reduce potentially significant impacts associated with the Coast Energy facility ~' to less than significant levels. Human Health/Risk of Upset JN 10-100278 5.6-13 May 24, 2000 ~. ~~~aa~ ~ S~~N`d1Sia ~d~S JlN1.Sf1aNl JU1d~H ~ " " ~ ~ T ~ ~ taro, fna> art sorrrra Wy ~ iiurur. o.urrra y,rw •cco<s seo~a •a~rna ,oyr wt 31Y4 Q r ~,.,,~,. sNaslA3tl I ~V•51181HX~ sa~eroossy.~g ~so.{~ uretll~'urag alagog ~ f ,g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C~l~..LLJJ ~~GO~NN ~5 < !5 Q •~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ a V J ~o ~ < are W~ ~~ ~~ ~W ~~ ~~ WW ~R~o~ ~J 3~ 3~ Q Lllrl -O ~ ~ ~ ~_..._ ~ . .~ '^ r I.L Q QJ r~ tt ~%1•~r~t~ tt c f'. 'l '~1K ~l' RIB, 1 5,L ~, 2 a ,`(a"_Fy y • r "~~: p~. ~3r :' 4,~1 /{ , " .\~., H~~ r~ ~ x +. i. i tl ' ~r`'k•+i ~r~r ~~, fl G: ~~ 0 N ' d J ~ _ J Z f v p Q y1 3 Z 7 Z W~ 3 a z W O ~ Z F ~ J z _ ~ J + ~ ~~~ ~> ^ t r ~,< /~ r / ~~,P 'd .rr' /- • • ~ f A _ i.~' tar .. wa,. nr 1rlR' h ~ r1 ` it ~i ~ h ~-z-~ ~ It a 8 V e m3 ~.Wr k .. f. I~ _%- t v,,y - x ,n,F •~ ~ ~ . .~y " ~~ ~.i ~3 ~~~ m S ; '1 % p~ Zi,, l^ ~' ~~ I ru ?3 ^~ Y°i7t 1 . k £.. i : ~ QI ~Trp~~ f-1.~~ 'F'4 S 1 5 V , I ~%ik~ d {I ~ m r ry r»r?z~ 't 11J ~ r . 1 ~ E. / ,t {~ m ,.~',^ • ~•.' ~y,~• ~.~ 4 ..~ r~•n ~,r~~ " e I II,~.s~ ' 4 w a { 4 ~ ~, t m"^ u, _~.,4,Rrtt 6'i` T ~ 'xc i~, ,.;/"' ~i 't-w.y.-r~--Raa~~, ~cc ~ ' ~ 6t ~, ,.3 r i m ,, in .rMSl - u s .ovrt'F ~~„~„s •^'w Y -ir a' L ~+ 'k~ tl -4 i • r.k~ - • a r/ I 1 J ° `~•~'3'Fx•~' agar; u Lm r I' .s . , .. ;'~o' 'c' < ~:. 5s, w{ ` ; ~ar ~`; kI ~i. 9z- :.x e ( .r~ ~,. '~` r ~' sf r'"'t" 4~ ~st , s,~~ ~r' :{S w r 1' 'i'-;,~' } ,0 m t a ,.`' r t `f, m r'w, th•r:SU~~- .r. - rrx { R ~:5, ~' o ~ •E o ~ -~~ ,s. l~ iit ~ .2.• ~.y`~c"~;y~r ~.',y~:h'y~; ,y! ~~ j ! ~:,I t r - r~rr-`; i '/ ...-i.. - , i}, r 5 F / r' ~ 'f;:`"•;~,'t." ,L... r..,,3_ i~ ,ttL.41J~ { r a •a ~. 1 s ~ ~ _ .. ,'~' T t; ^ < ~~r. .r ~ r ;~c r-!' ~'~' ~~q~'~rriY~~.~ ~'yti~5w3t~.~ t:.`"" i1/ 1 • ' ~{-af$la j: ~tb`., t Q ~r1+,ro rt i~r~~/ ~u ~ / L~ a~~~s /' _~ i a t I / xt , { ~':t,"T S~ ~r ° ;a•' 'y li+ 'S ~St."• F" ° `3 ~ ff r RA` t ~` a ^eu k ~F r`r ',r'r=aT^:,0,? "'Y•t-"~.TM, 'C , ter. '+..r+ `i ,7a+'.C" .c%w .. - ~~ _ _ ~m .. ~~ ~~r~.T/ / --ara rw ~ aus--".. i~ { ~ iit"+ .p~'~ - ' r r'e ,+r~,/ ,... ;w: •z /~' m ~"Fr '- !.»3j r r`•, ~ , 1 :~ ~ Na;:.i~I- r +~\ ~C~+S{'i ~O ors-1"r..l~:~'"'~t~^',L. 1 •3 ';°-y,'."?3~~ ~r~n~r`mF' • .,/ } % :..:c~ . "~ r~ { . _~! ' ,3 : a: s•-~ ~~•~ t z:s'z..'. ~'~`~ zs;; ~ i' ~ a ,~;~ ~~r~9~ye h.. i ~~ ~~ t^. '~; ~ ~"Mr --r=--- ct~Iwt .r.r ~rt,•ij~;r., tf„;, _~.r.;-..,.x -rs,•'r ~`'~.r[, r,,"r,,. .~ r,c I .a,.:: „~ rP ,m~, e is ~/ ~~ r-<,. ,-ilt `2 i:~}.t :n.:~'t%c .r-.. 1:j :~.~. I ',,'*µ. dt" rf f ': r,~ _ ~,_..P'r .itr~ .{ ~ i.. ..y~'~t':5.,~_^r 1..s ~~ r .7: M' ~. .Y _.t,ir~: Y~ ,.~.5 Fr ,,~`'.rl ."1..,, •~1a:r. `4:•t "€;~ '.,~.t~te:.~p~ ~i r, i yy ,~ :.~ r s Z, ,rr, "~'~_1~. ': ,'" - '-~ .'~~ I -i'.L t /-- v ! Jib r{-°`~}~<l' ,.:s~'~^~.•14 ;~ •!f ~,,+ '•. .. 'r~ :y~~,. a>F'}z.l s ' :)' 35 ~ S'~ t '~ I' { •-. .~-41r. _ - /ro ' ~y ...{ .~- .ry,~ 1, ~ . rY r P ~r• -.t~ y ,9 ~ifu ".~.x, f tt. ~ I ~ Y ~ ^4 1, t L.r 4 4 ,,' 44i r k .ht.Z / rv' r I ,1 - i I ~~F %;'t C. 144 F- JtG ~•~ C ~3: ..4, '~. ,t ",y m t ~:,,tt I$\ ~~. =~,_ 'L .~ LL ,,_ \ ~ .is,i -'c•~'.^i ~~l ~I^{ c:is 'c ..,*_ { ''',.'~, S ~' m $ ~I'.' a" ~. .,~~ 'r - - •! 3 ti• `ti;. ~ `rr•' - j;L _~7~ '~ ~yT.(3 y... "~::i1 {~'.; ~c~•,,p• I s,•.y; ~ ~ t w r' r 4 \ ~ nt r~ „'.!~ .,' ~~ '~ m y ;, 'J'(<y ~l ~~ tl t :,,{ '2t ~-t; ;r' ~~ O'`~~t I ;.~ -\~ ~/Ab :Z'~`x } '\ *~~'~J t~ ''~ £~,+' 4 4- ? a` t ^ ~'!.}~ :F~s t: -.- ~ S r ~ I., I rN ,~:;'•~ L e? r- C a~y.r., ._x'• r,.. ,4 ! ~~ ~v': •~6' .$~ . _ y~ ~ S rF y~ ~f~.. ~5~ ~x F,- !f - ~~ Zl', .,. 3~ F~ ;k'i,:, 'F4 ,• "r :ie`A+yyy -rt , ~_ "fin: ~ E.. n.,L^?Y,..` /'•b `,+',.}t I;,.• r~„ ,dy,,.~,+ I .f *'•k' `•. r R. ~' .n Z ~~, L:ia.- ~.. :,~, i "I,t~.f'.',•T i~ i ut.. ,y } ~' .l •:~ ~~~' .a'°, Y' ~.~ i?., ,~ n.iv ~JC.+, ~, ~1:• .i i'y .~'~" f• ,~.; .r'," ;r-..%~,r,.,,.~~.,17j,,,.~ ^.,~'. y' ,,y. ;i. ~,i~. p \/ %it::.lJ c.r~;, n >4', s; °. ,T, r5,i<, 1••~a',, .~, .~ n`~',:' °`c~'r'` ;;d :e 3- ZZ vr• arr._~.:1' ~:.._ wx:, ,t=~.„ r4 r<..,~ hx--, _ - ~ t ~. ''~,~4, ~ 7• .f L .3.1 G'~..I~' •rl~r `t J.:P ?~' •it~.. ~,' .. _.~ ..,.r~! J ~1, .\' ? ~~IY.."yii.ri'v. +,?I ~.L~ S} / u. ~ p,,.i :., a: "~~, r ra{c+'r2~. I. ;I,~ .';..~'yC',..r,. %/ \-~ '."1-'~' - - .,•"+'° tl~'1~'!i .ate, - -- ~'~ ,x, ta. ;1"~" ~j, ._,{_ /..~.s• 3t: {- ~yy ~t~:.; -y •1.:,.` ..\~- -, x. 3 a ,:r ;r ~.~ ~,,F' d Y -, ... n t `!f' ~ ryI-. lAl,l°-', Sr':t +,~y,y ...,:'~ ,.Rj :w+y. ~ Y ,tZ' , r, . .\: i ` ~:;; itr ""'~~ •.Y.' .t~' e:r; ~ f"i !. ~a:'k ~+~' 3 ! ZI, i'Ik j e'`y.~,C i ~"/H ~ ~~; •,k~`I . P,.yr R:.,+s~ t .t ,c ~ ~ aS1 : 'a\ ~ ' '\ "_ rvr~ . a w _ r I , ur t"`.~` ~~/ r -~ '" I ;~3~ ..-` .-.\"y. 39 a+~~r)`- .~'~~a- t .\ Y .:y ~ .~ S1'I ~'f 'h \;'- ''. -.s a ; ' 1 f , ,,.~ <4 /,: §. J'. \ is r ~ Y, p I+ ~= ~ y' s~ ~ ` Z i.. ',f~„r<~F ~ , I r . l ~ ? r'~c r •/ 1 ~, 1 1~ rR„- ~ g°'r`~,~ ~ ~i ~,i . ~. ~.'+r, ~i , ~ a~~(t.',t ~ °'~siisl ~~ ~'rs~~ ,It..s+r' ~~ »Y+t.a k-t x'~i it ^• ~I ~'.~'.INO ~~ ../ .1 •Lt rtr, i~, ~. '4~',w"}. .,; ':t1.1.1- ~~ .1 \ t r,•1,~}1 ! !-~+`'r `L:e ;~7 `~' .y -s:g .off- n r. r fir; t~ - $': ~ ~~~~ :/ \ >! . %~~~ ~r f I~..V, J 7,3 :r `•'~,~ i rS - 'a". `_ ~~`;r :,: +, ~ ~, ~~'.~ t• j ~ v..J, l ~ l,O, *'tl: hx~~+, „~: \~ {-. :F. -f.'J,~'i x '~I r ~€.,.\ti~M,~ ta~; , xI~ I ~ ~~?M1,.J \ . ,. - y? - ~... ' Ir , ,II,I~11 •i t ? ~., .Ir' \ _ ..\,r x:v , t i ~• ~. , , r,' c" .~~3 ~. ".~v. r., -. j:l-.3 -* ~~1 s ~~~, ..Y.y es„ .r ='r. `~ i, • I & - ??~a. ,fir: ~ - ,y . x:t. r ""^~> I :_ ti\ ,;r ~ r'in-. <~'Rw y,.,+' a. ra, :c..tu c I k 't •'1 .`.~.'','. 1 =6i: r. ~ • `fib' {-"~' i ~ ,,~ \,3 ,;~ '~~ ~. , ,. gg ~: - . . l:` ¢ .. § , .. `t} ,'.. r ~ t z `'-ta ~";.",° ! .~ ~" .; ~ 1 ? t. t •` `.1 _ jr. ~ ar z~Y ~'tr'i.\' ~ ~-''t"' `~".' I ~'~''~'}Y it4 a 0 . :ra t~` `J7d' .r... ~:s_{.~, `«, r.FSe^~''! ""~{,. :rl 'r~' ,1.. 3 _ ~1 >'~ i ~!i ~~ r ~ 1;t~~. a kjt'= rl `::F. ;i' 'I si.- .t\ . ~` ~ _ +~x w -W .i'S~ wari'`~`N' I.ri .,1, X14 ,~' ,'~~' a l t, r >t:r., `\ ,`.y a !.x,,, ; y. t ~ i .~t3- s k;g h',. .;s .x ~ ~i .'. ° }! 'S 3~.c.`t~: ":r'rr'..I:. ! S ,.s. s ~,1,- ~ ~ '-1 a, _ ,, a ~ ; h: ~~\ - • - :-~ru~.. ~~%' 1 ~~~"k'a . ~~~. 5w -a ~ .,~~~~t ~x.,, 1 I21 p :.1;t ;.1. .~~.1 s. ,•i,.r r, ,s!yMl }•'v~. ~:` jI f •,•°~ ~ ,y. .~;;T r .l ,\ u.. i r (~; S;A, V4: at ~~~ \~~~ .§'.'s-' ' n:~*'1.. «I~l.llFt,..4 ::rY I-1 i~ - _ a -r:ec' l' ka:~_ -.r u~>...r ~.~ S< xr.,v~.e .r...%',F !}, ~ srrt, W;. _~. "'r;s,'~-' _ ~ jrr r: ~~•'~G.. ~'7., I' I,~~. ,'t°:..^ ~7 Q ~ ~-•1°'':` C,':. ?„1 ,~. q\9 ~i'S :`?.>. m -i .si l Sri,/ .:~r~td yI w. -. rr c ~ _ '., -- 'i fa,'.. ~~ t:,lr;-~ w_xt31?b-_,'~'.y. '.1, ry_~~^^tl .°,4,, ~ jr~ .,I, +o '* _ ~~/4_/c:;t ,.r„ nt 1'~' ~" .: N. ~ t ~..: .~,,~ ;"vl Imo, 1' ti 4"' ~ ~" ~ f \~ _ -.t..,_`\~ , le:: ~~"'i~ :ei ? j 1 1. ;y'~,, Irr y3 Aa ~ , 'ii y h. Fr ~~. ,~ ~__----- ~ Ih :I~ ~~ ; \~ ~ .~?', _ ,,,~' i t' '7' m~~..d:..... as,p,_ 4:.,,uk''r' ` ~~y'_ k r f ~1"t, iik~"~. ~ k~ ~ ~,,, ' ~'r <'& 5,. i .i",i,.,rFrl 'r"_ -- ---- '-T `.I \ ~ t S :::+ t\ I ;~. ~'+:~ n. vG:.. cv"eFa rK?L•: > ~ _-~"~.. _-- >.~ ~:ay ~ ,':'r{ ~~- Ni:?N ~ eirfiV. 'S3 5-: ~+t \ ~ ~ S ~ `-" ^t ~^^ 1,-t e}fr7•ar '' ~ y ~a LL \ 3,.na* _r~ ~t >i ..1 T Y J \ \ ' - ' r' ~' ~ I <^i ,.cr~+ fw\~c`t•:~'s,r r~'k,dy ~tv t a' ~MPJ' `fi°gr"' ~ F , _ ~%+ w r ~ r t f{T ? i ' : ~ ; \\ ~ r k . r '~ ~\ ; ', \y ~ 2j ~ ~ x ~r°~Etdw' ~P`,~,t ~~:J..~~iF~~ r.`/' ~~~ ~rr'.~~ .. .\ ~ ~ ' t~rr ~v ~ ~ ,,F ~ '~ r ~ ' ~f . ' r \ •.. \ • ~., ; ~ ~Ct+~'~»ap y`~: ~„`~ ~1'''~~a/ r~s, Sr .,i ~ :.,y\ ~' ~~ r3 -y .,,t, r< ~"i-';k ~ 1 . • \- ~ \ t}f ,~ i} "' yTr rf/ ~ k ^' _ { `:' ' ~ g - .MO'IOSO(1NM.- - - `~,'~ ~ 3 ~a ,wi•x"r --~..,,,•, ~v~...:: o..>o..., v,_lt _ ,~`- `s~~~T Y,,.a, - ~ ~,m - '" t '~ n~twn:. _ 1f:~I :;ti"t'la `l~~ ~ } ` _ ~~,~i. +~ Y ~ X; 1 ~ ,.,, t -r . - 4. ~ r \ \ ~ " rr -'1 w~' ! •,g,~ 4 S' '• ~ _ ~ O. \ tta ~y,,) .t'\"~~+ `.g" i'q/ u"''. { f r.. r 'r~ 4 e~ ° _ 'F ~"-,_ , .. - • ~ui...~„_~~s ~\. tl,w 1 .Y.a.A `I ty~ \^.\:'s~'us~ ~~..- ,~~rTrn t " .,c'+'r ~~. , t !~ - tea, ~.; \ ~ 11 3 - S ~• ? .t, a , ,~ .~„ •~ ,,[r 1.:o- _; ~I* , wY'~ -.g~.i'!-, ~ \ p t ~ .•A~i~ ~i•7?k'a s, If: e ,1'`` :~' ",- - r a-y`. {~~~ r 't1 , .fit ~„~ \,\ :Ti wr ~~.f. \,x:r ~ ,•r. 1~. t7.y,1:!$"'.'":. '!'~f: \~.^ iJ`i.,'~°.^;•f;l '~:~:- \ \~`t~.zy`. 7rx .!I„,;c.' Itr X f'i?'^~I: M 4_~,. .~'. S~C _ r ..'; + ~ "^;tt/fi` x' a .\: 3 +O 4:r ,'~q~. -~* ~s' \`C~~,,., 44..~?I ~ . .,. c~ ~ ~\• t;`~~na3.~' ~-,, x ky, 'i c _n, ~ir~~ : ~ rt •,~sy, + ~ .~~ ~' aG' 1~ ~^r C -'S.~• 'x ~e.~ _""c,. 'ec~_: `~. io'~ ~\ t.ti~`~" ~ ~,~; G'. r'- c.~s~r ^"' ;-~ r mr ~'!_ ~' ;x",p,G:X,~ v T."` - ~ , ..z '' \ . ,+ \ HN. r,cs.`. f;"` .c ~"~ \ rc :~- I u' •, ~` •`\ ~u\tU ~ ~~~t. ar'Y9:3•.;+~' ~~r: r w -•4! ,, z '~C! ~ ,+ ~::e t - --1' "~'"5 yc;t~ g >,',W •~"'~°A.~S~, ;;:I~";~}',-\~,,, `'~~'~?•'~.tx y.:. •~..tl: i ~~~ S/~, ,f ' ~y ry~j~.r'~ .,, €$ a .r ~; - \ w ir.. (~~~ ~' ...6. xa,l,.~,~ -,`la., ~ ~y~;?. \ w ~ .~ ~S.:r k vr-lt+F1 8. Ni k!• -~ `rr C •2; /~/~ ~`~~' ~ -J u _ :r'V \.'~ r is~y .,,~:.r •~~+ °'I~t ~:r ~~~ i +.y':4~~.. »#; ~ ~ y'I ~'wr' ix ~ 4 ss;w.51 ri SI $ ~ ;~ = o ~ ~ \ ;,,yv, t \ , .~„ J ~ ~ ~' ~ ,+~'~ .^\ V:z,Y~ ~t :..a t ~ ~~' ~a I A ~ (• :'S 4 ,j{I ~Li.:VQ '~Y \ d, -~ ~ ~ `. y ~f•~,3 ``.°"~, ~ \ .I I„F ~~.r¢~~t Y i~ ~~' 4 ~ Nyr +Ni+~"J^'r':. >.. ~,. yr..,r~ti r ,~,,ti Sao - : ,\0 ~ r '(;y.f~"~? ~'- Ar N a y r•H ~,h ,: i ~S +" s. \ i 54 . ~ a ~~ -, ~'•[ s"'t _ .'tc..u''t:?'~:~ ~~ ?- 't•~. a Ja ~ ~-- ~-~. ; ti. fi.. ,<' ~' I~~ c~ d` ,:a '`I \r , fir,, 4 r' ?'~t~_r1~~ .~. ~ T~j S - o'r - `\11 '~rJ„ '~t,3 J,s;«~, ~ ~i'iF \'s~s~'f:7,"a "~3:~ +t Ca'>f i xt ti fp e~ ~ "t. 'i,,.., - ~_' -" }~ - :\.\~~` :• - r 't 1;-,k x'.ta 1} i.,x°\rl ~".~'. .,t*,~.::~S ~ck~ti~.- ~n}k'h:',n^J." ~\•F`1~F'%~i .J, FI.. ST~,:~}:'\2~r!'/,,a-~ ve~rQf+tlf7T Smirw:w~.^~i t .f ~ ~.' \y I'~~~„S. , , :?tN.l ,.'..., ,_.lr.T T' ,,\,,eU t~E; ,^:.CT~:-. .M .1..4a - ' S` 7 ~ ~~: 'r"t `" •^s-••{I ; 'p`.h~.,~f;,p. i~.•r ~~ \.e{' £ !'~; -. :4 ~t ~~d?re~1i'°' k , .'~ ~~..: i.Jy~e r7 'a.- s . 133iLLSt11010N ,rv ~ ~ \\ .""~.•,,r ~±' x ,~rS ~~ %~'I 1 _ ,\'i T.~3~[~'y1t e`"rt ,.n,,$ s$? i.. ti• ,~ ~~"u',"rk S - t r . ,.ro'v. ra t ~ ;,y ~~' 1 i C ay. \ ~. (- Ar .E,,,~ ~,.•r~i+r r'r. a y'~'Y I I I . t.. ~ '`•r ~',~\ n'^~`~r ">} r&-x r4,:G,r $ _ r ,~~~ ~pp~``~~'r~C.'';~i,~,`~" ~'~~,t~~~ ,7 ~ -',Ss #`~T U.r' ,. `r^`33':~: - ~-~ ~'-\F+ ,+~'~ ~ ~.Y ~y r :}fit'`` \ iL Y. Ida I .. \•, ~~ ' ~,r.~15'tx6`~.,~?%ti t ~~''r:1r~{ `t j"'"{^~S:;C,'~ ~ r "l ~.. rF"- g'ut'' r.y t,"kh _, ,~ ~' \y r .; b* x,•rrc2'c~.3 Vi'i` ~~.~"O=''F I. ~I ..? ~t i~~t:r. +~",•~F,I^y.g.rr ~.,.~, ,k'~t'`i...;;w4: , `'~` s,,; r 't r „t yt ~ ~" '~ \ i':xfrt"'+ --3rr`i;,~'~<i} ~' _;r^II I~' \'s \~.~\;:;*~} r>•y g •~ r>r v"~t~ ';~.` tj,t.rx i'`i ~~y~ Ra"`~-,~E,.u,F r __ ~~ ~2b,s~ ~ratA'^,,~S.F ~~?~,yy~-x 4 ,. ~3.1,,...3~ I , ~, ~~ I I _6 ,, r .~' '~:}~ a:;t~r w r. •i`.xl- `~ ~ ,. rr 1~:....?e4j ?-.h- . ,y. ,. ~•trre v :. `1 I t y ,~.x ~a y , ^`~ip~`ysz'='r~~ j?ir x~: f ~! ~ '\ 7 '`cr'F t i*{r 3 ~ r \\ ~5 a .n.," ,pr~..t t y '3, I~. ' .. / I t ~~~~~+r ~' ~~} - r f a'}. r .iY~: ~,.. %:.~"'. !}.', y. ~. +ti s~ \_ ~ - \,,;'1.~" ~5;~~',\ \. ~~ X.~~§~,\ I; ~ / I ~- ~r-y, it',~:: ef~~.t~'4~s\c. ,' 1L M1-_~ ~? `yi~,er~.~ w.. o ; '.!., K ; Z.ttiy .>`ri;,`L`~ 4' t. v - ~ ~ \5 \ :`i^ * 4\ ` ~."L i 1 ~ a I ~{ \a .fit t ( v'/ Y:r.:h'~'~~.S~r t+~u' * .}7,•~ ~ ~ G ,,i{" \..~ ~.~+ \ `t4~iT ~_~?~-'~'~``t;-°~' ~ ~~: ..~_' .1. ~4i - ¢~~. '~`Y'~"k"r'r:}M, ~.v"~~:fi~tt!a~ / ~. r,1 .;Y r~a;t`' _ !cr y ~ I -a -~~,~„ - 1 t"~5 S:ro.. ,,~. <M,'H"~. a Z,' ':'! ~ I,~ +;>~.~ err !, •,k~/..~;.,: ~x,'i~r. ~..1.: ~ .dUA .wV i -~ ~rr.. \ \'. .-..k'% .k~.£,ir;,, ~.c, ~ :r 't I " I ~~ 'i' 1 ~~~ yw ~~r ,t - ,~.j} ''.M ~;,.~y,,;~'~ '~.,y ;~.3, [3 ,> r r, o- i! ~''~` t %~ ~,1$_.?:i~'t"r133tlLS waviaon ~~ ~ I=:. 6- J~ I!S Q _ <y. vt'vy „ ~~, f/ /~~ ' .-1`Y~4 i,t.. ?'k.r y'a~ ,~„t~ .J ..u w n r~~a~a a ~, t-, ~ ~ C~ .wrrw, ~` `'L... ':~/~ r v„' yW,i. ~f.:°~ s' ~'~r„ ! rs3r r t a . - ,,, '' ) 5r ' I1`, i 'l:,xtk, v'~ nr~ ~` t-,~ a t., . ----_.- M ~, ~~ :!< ~ r '~~" r`.; r" ~~ S-4'~+dc kq~+~yv~-~ ~,... }1 ~ r ~ ' ~ ~ +Y :~ 7... ~ .,, t /.a•~j ~r~~..Jn.'1 '?" jS~~+r! a`~•`~'. 'ter w4 ~ 1 lux r {. •C .E r, 1 t , `a ?' ,~- " a # rm i ~ s y 1 ~, tQ~ I ih ' }'S2 ?I,cyr`r' F1 r'II.. -~ ~h i -i+{ I ~r Vy'4\.4,,,,,1`4fi.~4, ~'. ( `54~ry' .: y1~.;'"M .,P '? {^ t f~".r ~ ~ . P; : •.., nih„'~ ryr D.~ ,~, ~N 1 I ~ r 3t ~L~•,•,y,,;s~ ,/ r:r ;"' ~ r,:trc I 'c' ~,., ~ \'. 1 I+ •ta~~ . r t t'a~.S~ r{..itm.,~`k >< s ~ ,. ~ 1 , q~'~irst•,`,~$ T -til.. .'~, '~"r~4"tt'y\"r"k ~ x,}:~ ~~rt9t ~°~FZ,.~t~"s~ i+ r ~, t ~„; r r ~,s d ~" „ ,~ s 41 '. .~• ~` ~ 4'b*c 1 ,`~ t ~ .,F ,~i -`~2 Px •ir''~`„+4 ~`n ~ t't f~, w i ~r r t n ~, r ~ ~' ,µr c,f ~x v '' t t «~1 tl ,' 1 1 ,~ r~ •~ ~ ~. u, s. -J~i '4 ~YFa #.. ~ E~ ~r'3k. {,L,.:. mg~ rr'yc t",tY'~+'~t""~~- ~I. ,x}Fy''~,r~~z~r'~ ~~', {y~ I ~£r '-t ' ~?.r: v . 1 /' -•,':, 'r _,~ ' rel.- ~1 '. rr'~ r ~ k` t ~ ..~ ,~i o.SU i M^'..•k ' I tl} I~ `N y~~j~ ,r t ~^ "i~.. ~{., .2.Y~ 1 °`••° t ~."~_`' $H r ~ S a d,, ~.ft r a t jd,^~,~~ TOOOO ~i t' {,'~.r ~ ~'~tcr .t ~, ~ ~ " "tl~} 1t~,a.$x~ ~ s,r~~ -:~~''c{."s'$r 3e~ I ~ "~„ ~~"`l~. ~`~''° ¢~ r ~.c {~ r h f e fro- ^t_~~t 1 tF4r ~f .{ r a,r: - r'.ryrrs;.:~ tk $r t a ~ .t.-Cy is 'I. ~ a ~F~r',s"~: ~ ~ ° .I ~~~~ °e"''7'y~. t .~..t'~oN' `xa f ~" T3 t s ,-t , T Lt t ~ ~ Icf I~ r7 'rf r xiP, 1 t '-ny~c. Q ~I. r`Q2 ~ ~ m 1rr h +L r ~T q F3~ zd t ,, -~,1_ ~,. r , % ,y p,~ p {{ ty~.,Frs }Y` I 1 ., ~ , r k 5 "ht` ,~. 'L-;5 ~ ~. ,, s '{ t~ ~ 'ri) x i 7-a'~ o ~~7 k~~G-*'~.. „ ye F,T ~ J ~ ~ t 'e:x a i~ ~x :5; r ~ i'i r :r ~ ,; ~,,,i. `r ~~ ~.x4aJ*'~ u .~`~r .c. :w„ 4 ?- yE` I I t i` +~P~'-iliSY •.=i, ~~ 1,., r. '7iT3 `. 2 3' k"M ~ ~k=7t, ~•. 'a ~.. r t.,.S `5"= rx ~ x..i t.st rr. 1 tkl u t- ~ 3 " a + r a c tax ~ ++. e b~'P t . "tyti.'(•- ~m ,}}S ?+ ~ ~ t it '~< ,x r: ~.~4. ,K. '"~k4' : t' _ rN'nt ~:~t-.7~ '~ ~ :r `* .<: `.'•~u~-r:r_ ~,b r S .',,,:y,, ,yr I ~... ~ ;~,rk,;i ~•4w i I 4 i~~n ""i%n' .R ~ tkrr `x ~; s ~ti'iS ~~~ s.{Y~-.h-r ~I/'3 ;.,r.,1 ^''°~`'S ~"~ytw~a ~ ;~'~ s~M; ~.~'1 .%`;Y :~,.J,x ;,N ~~~i ;,~1 ~ - .., ~'~.b'. <' 1 :•1~'~ >- f, ~ ,1.s' r ~ ~ a bC•. J~ '' ,a •,.f.# x. 7; - ,\ i~ _r ~ S' r r \ .: t< '1": j ~ ' ~ ~ ~ J x ~ a t - ,, t ~" ( 1 e ,., ~ '+ ~ ~ t ;+ h1 t~ t ,, r. ,~ sx }ty~'b'n~ ~ I,n { + ~'t '`+ :r- ~ : t ., Ftv 45f ~..r ~ x ryTw ~ ::.t ~ <'r r - ~ :~ 4 h 'r' a ,, 4 xi ~, R5 ~~ ~ yt;" 1~ s•^j: t ' '~ Sr , ~'' 7,It r~' ` ,~,'},.,~" v ' ° ! '~ c "~ I' •.f.' ~, _" z ~, 1 `Jp~ryl ltlr: ~3~.#i'- V'2 Y....'~ t~>",,,z 'u~~y ,~.•«.~36 ft ~.. -y ~ n f r ufi.W' a -'i?' :~I"'~ ~I ~'ra~; y7 ~ 1 ~ F c. , r`~I t,f/1{ +~ c.h~ r }' ; ~' ~ ~rjC to a.I ~ t rq ~ 'raa ^+p. `I. y. 3r '~+~ ,1} }.~ ~, '~~c+ III I ~~`. ;>,a}.~t ~' i. 's tl, ~„',~'"-y .S *'~r~''rt.:.ak xl. .~. ~; s `s+.tc• ~",. rtr~ '°J'~t ^, t7x"r~' r~ et•rY.;fia'v-~ ., ;~ ..a,>°"r'P ;~' t a. L c.lr7 ' d tx s ~, tt~: '. 7 mow.. rr ~~ 4 "ri.~ t f N: ' 4 ~t :7LS Y :>b • e\ ~'.~°" N ~'d- in - .rwtivsl.+.+~-'• I" ~ _ __ •`a.9 yY .=;': a~..;i-.- ~r~tis xr~rk'' n, ,4: •t1 ; e.. ?" ;~'? .}~~~s~ x`'G,~ - 'a.•1""., >` ;9~ .,I jfa, f S :~fE ~' i~_-•brn. ~h >?• r nt .. ~~ r 't L+ r t; .~k:r' ~ ~ a N c ~; S 1 rh .a r , ~ ~4 rr ~{~~ a~~,•` ~tL'r.?F~.: J ` Y.'ni5..^..e~.';F "_. DTI '. I.. + i,t _ _ I~ -GZ- , r- w ~x .~ 7C ,'G {3 „ y r .ri^-- { r;r. 2 .r• 3fIn3+1V 37Y w , ^ '~. q- ,.. ~» a -t=P. ~,c,- r't aia w_~' _ ~;'zon wa ' :-~ io a l;i'F " t ~ ,'~ab'7.X' .5 r 5 Sy, tF ~., ~r ~~ 3 ,i d k r r ~~. .t .%f~ r - , r y ., ~ 1 a ~ '. ~ '.:..:, i"' `•S„,' a 4'. ~ ,~ t ~ '`~ ,], - i.+;., ~.'_. rr t/ 1~1 .1> I; '.t t' ''{ ' a ?, J '. - _ .. ~, 3 ~; 4 r >, '~ ,?''S t~. n~'r`.t ~; }: °~- ~r R°s ,+ •~~.{ ,s°,1S ri 't" ~-.:x ,}~~ fit 2~ ~ z Y., , ~ C :'FICA *, . S- ~ k ~ V~a,~••' f a a i{ .~ ~ r i '.~ C „I.b ' r ~St _' ~F3 '.~' < i - < St tr Y , ..2Y c-~s' J3"~ x ~' •';'; ~r..9..,F`.$ ?,a-'j".._ .-1:, .r' :., •, }LS F ..., a :' Ys_,~ wR •r t r .. t. rk i.t r`•' sl.`~ ~.3 ~ r e ....-. .,... r.,; +. ~,. - ~. ~.- w._ r.. :.4 ~'.. _,•J.r _lL:.3,,h~_ ..+v':..,,,°r -~i.~._ + s^ ~r - -,~ ~ ,~ . mil- ~aii r! ~_~, tit -~: _~,,,~,__~;;~,-_wi; -~;I~,--~_,l~--~~_ ~t;_~;I~;i - t _~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ r t I 1 r t 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Equilon Enterprises Facility The Equilon Enterprises facility includes a liquid anhydrous ammonia (NH3) storage tank, a naphtha storage tank, various other petroleum liquid storage tanks, chemical storage, and the Coker process. Operations at this facility also have the potential to emit toxic air contaminants for which a health risk assessment was prepared and submitted to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (APCD). An evaluation of the facility determined that item 5 must be considered for the facility as a whole, item 2 of the preceding criteria must be considered for the NM3 storage tank, and items 3 and 4 of the preceding criteria must be considered for the naphtha storage tank. For the Equilon facility, the calculated set-back radius associated with the NH3 storage tank is 0.52 miles, the calculated set-back radius for the naphtha storage tank is 0.09 miles for the 1 psi over pressure and 0.45 miles for the BLEVE. The isopleth for the 1 in a million and 1 in 10 million cancer risks associated with this facility were obtained from the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District. For the proposed project area, these isopleths fell within the boundaries of the preceding set-back distances. Therefore, adherence with recommended setback distances would result in less than significant impacts for future residences. Additionally, implementation of the proposed project would result in the inclusion of an industrially zoned area which, under developed conditions, would serve as a physical buffer between the proposed residential developments and the existing heavy industrial area. This industrial area extends out to the boundaries established as-the necessary set-back distances which were calculated (refer to Exhibit 5.6-1, Heavy Industry Setback Distances). Therefore, the proposed residential areas would not be located within the areas identified above as having potentially significant health or safety concerns with implementation of recommended setbacks. Potential impacts in this regard are considered to be less than significant. ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC FIELDS 5.6-6 Development of the proposed project could expose future occupants to potential health effects associated with EMFs. However, the relationship between EMF exposure and health effects has not been scientifically proven. Results from the plethora of epidemiological and laboratory studies that have taken place have concluded that there is no conclusive scientific evidence regarding the relationship between EMFs and adverse health effects. There are currently no enforceable standards for exposure to EMFs. Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. Impacts related to EMfs would be less Phan ~~gnificant and no mitigation measures are required. Human Health/Risk of Upset JN 10-100278 5.6-15 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR There are a number of safety issues which would typically face the general public and ~~ rail operators from daily rail operations. These issues include the potential for accidents between vehicles and trains at grade crossings, accidents involving pedestrians and trains, and exposure to injury or hazardous materials as a result of train ~~ accidents. A major issue of concern to the public is the potential for train derailments and spills. The risk of upset involving hazardous materials is especially important as the BN & SF rail line within the vicinity of the proposed project is utilized to transport oil products associated with nearby production facilities. This rail line is buffered by approximately 0.5 miles and 0.3 miles of industrial zoned land from the nearest proposed residential units, thereby reducing the impact of a train derailment and/or release of hazardous materials. This area between the rail line and proposed residential areas is currently under cultivation, however, future structures constructed according ;~; to land uses designations would provide additional physical "buffering" from the rail line. ~, In addition, the hazard analysis conducted for the project area (refer to Exhibit 5.6=1) addressed potential human health effects associated with accidental releases from the -~ adjacent heavy industrial uses. Such incidences were considered to include multiple releases orexplosions as aworst-case scenario. The quantity of materials which would be transported along the rail line would be significantly lower than the quantities utilized in the hazard analysis. Therefore, the setback distances provided within the hazard analysis would serve to reduce impacts associated with an accidental train derailment to less than significant levels. Additionally, as previously stated above, approximately 6 trips per day occur along this portion of the rail line at low speeds and ~` trips are not anticipated to increase in the future.' Due to the relative) limited use of Y this rail line in conjunction with adherence with applicable Federal, State, and local ~. regulations related to carrier operation procedures, potential impacts associated with rail operations are considered to be less than significant. VALLEY FEVER 5.6-9 Grading within the boundary of the project may lead to the release of fugitive ~,~~ dust and spores causing valley fever. Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. Mitigation which reduces fugitive dust emissions would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. If Valley Fever spore occurs within the boundaries of the project, with the absence of mitigation, there is potential forthe infection of construction workers and surrounding !! residents, as well as the project area. Mitigation measures designed to reduce the amount of fugitive dust during grading activities would reduce the likelihood of Valley ~r Fever to a less than significant level (refer to Section 2, Air Quality). The long-term covering of the project area wi±h landscaping material and/or impervious surfaces 1 Di i n w' scuss o ith City of Bakersfield transportation staff, July 28, 1999. Human Health/Risk of Upset )N 10-100278 5.6-17 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR potential spillage will be confined to the enclosure. Improvements are the responsibility of the project applicant/developer. 5.6-3b Sufficient access to the existing and abandoned wells shall be maintained in order for the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (Division) to investigate the conditions of the wellheads and \~, check for leakage. If any reabandonments are required, the Division shall furnish necessary specifications to the property owner. 5.6-3c If any abandoned or unrecorded wells are uncovered, or damaged .during excavation or grading activities,- remedial plugging operations ~~ pursuant to Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources ~~t requirements would be required. 5.6-3d Prior to issuance of building permits, any discovered oil contaminated ~- soil shall be remediated to the satisfaction of the Local Unified Program Agency (the Office of Environmental Services-Bakersfield City Fire '~ Department) in conjunction with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and/or California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). '~'" 5.6-3e Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall provide sufficient evidence that the existi ng groundwater wel I has been properly ~~, closed pursuant to the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCG) requirements. ,,~, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/SUBSTANCES !~ 5.6-4a Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the project applicant shall remove all above ground storage tanks and oil storage drums from the sewage treatment plant facility. Areas beneath the storage drums and storage tanks shall be re-inspected to verify if additional staining has occurred. All reported stained soils as well as newly identified staining shat l be tested, removed, and properly disposed of off-site in accordance ~, with local, state, and federal regulations. 5.6-4b Prior to demo) ition work, the appl icant shal I sample structures within the '~ sewage treatment area (i.e., equipment shed, truck shed, maintenance shop, engine room, and office building) to determine the presence or absence of asbestos containing materials (AGMs). Any demolition of the ,~,` existing buildings shall comply with State law, which requires a contractor, where there is asbestos-relate~~ work involving 100 square -~ feet or more of AGMs, to be certified and that certain procedures regarding the removal of asbestos be followed. Human Health/Risk of Upset JN 10-100278 5.6-19 May 24, 2000 ~'. GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR criteria would only apply to construction adjacent to existing facilities that have reported continuous releases subject to the (Air Toxics Hot Spots Act of 1987). 5.6-5b Prior to project approvals for future industrial uses located between the future residential development and the existing heavy industries, the City shall utilize the distance criteria developed by the City of Bakersfield and County of Kern fire departments and provide sufficient setbacks for the industrial uses. Refer to criteria outlined above. ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC FIELDS 5.6-6 No mitigation. measures are required. AIR TRAFFIC AND RAIL LINE HAZARDS Air Traffic Hazards 5.6-7 No mitigation measures are required. Rail Line Hazards ' 5.6-8 No mitigation measures are required. VALLEY FEVER 5.6-9a Refer to Section 5.6, Air Quality, regarding fugitive 4dust mitigation measures. 5.6-9b All areas with bare soil exposed as a result of grading activities shall be landscaped at the earliest time possible or stabilized by watering when winds exceed 25 miles per hour in order to reduce the potential inhalation of spores causing Valley Fever. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 5.6-10 No mitigation measures beyond those identified on aproject-by-project basis are required. Human Health/Risk of Upset )N 10-100278 5.6-21 May 24, 2000 A 1 i 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 5.7 LAND USE The purpose of this Section is to identify the existing land use conditions, analyze project compatibility with existing uses and the consistency with relevant planning policies, and to recommend mitigation measures to eliminate or reduce the significance of potential impacts. Information in this Section is based on the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and the City of Bakersfield and County of Kern Zoning Ordinance. EXISTING CONDITIONS On-Site The proposed project i nvolves the development of three noncontiguous sites generally bounded by Olive Drive on the north, Rosedale Highway on the south, State Route-99 on the east and Fruitvale on the west (refer to Exhibit 2, Site Vicinity). Overall, the project area is relatively flat and has in the past been extensively used for agricultural and petroleum production (since the 1930s-1940s). The existing conditions on each of the project sites are described as follows: GC Site: The North of River Sanitation District No. 1 offices and facilities are located near the northeastern corner of this approximately 14-acre site. The remainder of the site consists of vacant land overgrown with shrubs and weeds. One active oil well is located in the southeastern corner of this site. E l 1 1 LR Site: This 65-acre site consists of vacant land overgrown with shrubs and weeds. Oil recovery operations .have been conducted on this site with approximately seven active and two abandoned oil wells scattered throughout. Unpaved roadways traverse the site providing access to the oil pumping units. • LMR Site: This approximately 92-acre site is currently utilized for agricultural production and oil recovery operations. Approximately seven active and one abandoned oil wells are scattered throughout the site. Unpaved roadways traverse the site providing access to the oil pumping units. One ground water monitoring well is located in the northwestern portion of the site, adjacent to the western boundary. The Southern California Edison Power Line Easement traverses the northernmost portion of the site, parallel to Krebs Road. Additionally, an irrigation canal, constructed to bring additional water to the agricultural fields, centrally traverses this site in an east/west direction. _ JN 1 0-1 002 78 ~~ Land Use 5.7-1 May 24, 2000 ~, GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~( City and County's vision, plans and measures for implementation are formally set forth as goals and policies within each Element. Land Use Patterns The Land Use Element has separated the City into four quadrants with State Route (SR) ~' 99 serving as the north-south axis and Stockdale Highway/Brundage Lane, SR-58 serving as the east-west axis (refer toFigure II-1, Existing Urban and Rural Areas, of the 2010 General Plan). These four quadrants are further subdivided into developed urban and rural undeveloped areas. The project area is located in the Urban Northwest Planning Area of Bakersfield. The 2010 General Plan defines the Urban Northwest as ,~ follows (page II-7): "The urban northwest is generally bounded by Snow and Hageman Roads on the north, Renfro Road on the west, the Kern River on the south, and State Highway 99 on the east. This area includes: Rosedale, which consists of large-lot. rural residences, local serving commercial, and scattered oil refineries; Green Acres, which also has man ylarge-lot residences; and the Fruitvale Oil Field." Circulation Designations According to the Circulation Element, the City of Bakersfield has designed a circulation ~` system which is laid out as a grid pattern with arterials spaced at one-mile intervals. Within the older areas of the City, col lector streets are spaced atone-half-mi (e i ntervals ~, between the arterials. While throughout the newer development areas.in Bakersfield, the collectors are aligned in irregular patterns in order to discourage through traffic., A limited freeway system exists in addition to this network of arterials and collectors. State Route Highway-99 is the only existing north-south freeway which consists of six ~' to eight travel lanes. Rosedale Highway-58 is an east-west freeway which links Route- 99 with cities east of Bakersfield. Otherfreeways in the Metropolitan Bakersfield areas include portions of Route-204 (between Route-99 and Route-58) and Route-178 (between M Street and Fairfax Road). ~- General Plan Land Use Designations Land Use Desi nag tions. The existing land use designations for the project sites can be defined as areas which include manufacturing or assembly, storage, and petroleum refining. The land use designations designated for the project sites are defined by the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan as follows: GC Site: Service Industrial (SI) (0.4 FAR, 6 stories). Industrial activities which ~, involve outdoor storage or use of heavy equipment. Such uses produce significant air or noise pollution and are visually obtrusive. - ~ Land Use JN 10-100278 5.7-3 May 24, 2000 ~~ undesirable or adverse by-products, including traffic, noise, odors, dust, and vibrations. The M-3 District should be located in places substantially removed from residential areas. Permitted uses include residential uses and agricultural uses. LR Site: M-1, M-2, and M-3: See above. L 1 ,- GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR LMR Site: M-3: See above. The following zoning districts for the areas surrounding the project sites are identified by the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code and the County of Kern Zoning Ordinance as follows: North: City R-1 (One Family Dwelling) County Residential Suburban (R-S) County Estate (E) County Agriculture (A) County Medium Industrial (M-2) South: County Agriculture (A) County Medium Industrial (M-2) County Heavy Industrial (M-3) East: County Heavy Industrial(M-3) 1 1 1 West: City R-1 (One Family Dwelling) County Residential Suburban (R-S) County Medium Industrial (M-2) County Heavy Industrial (M-3) Light Manufacturing (M-1) General Manufacturing Zone (M-2) Agricultural Land Agriculture within the Bakersfield area has been extensive since the 1860's when livestock was introduced to the area. Crops throughout the Bakersfield area consist mainly of cotton, alfalfa, milo, wheat, barley, plums, peaches, apricots, citrus, grapes, nuts, truck crops, potatoes and other vegetables. Figure V-4, .Prime Agricultural Soils Lost to Urbanization, of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, identifies the areas which consist of prime agricultural soils. According to this Figure, the project sites are located in an area containing Prime Agricultural Soils. Land Use JN 10-100278 5.7-5 May 24, 2000 ~- ~1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~' Conflicts 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. ~~' As noted in the General Plan, the intermixing of land uses may result in land use incompatibilities. Land use compatibility impacts associated with land development are a factor of quality of life issues, including, but not limited to traffic, noise, risk, and aesthetics (views/physical scale). Whi le these may general ly be perceived as subjective - issues, the significance criteria detailed in each of the respective issues sections provides a basis for assessing land use compatibility impacts. Additionally, it should - be noted that the General Plan (Page II-9) identifies the following specific types of incompatible land uses: • Obtrusive industrial uses adjacent to residential; • Heavy industrial uses adjacent to commercial; • Commercial uses abutting residential uses without adequate buffers; and • Noise sensitive uses adjacent to highways or railroads. Potential impacts related to land use compatibility and consistenc with related Y planning documents and policies have been identified. Mitigation measures are ,~ provided to reduce the significance of impacts. CONVERSION OF UNDEVELOPED LAND '~ 5.7-1 Project implementation may result in the conversion of 171 acres of existing undeveloped lands to approximately 116,800 square feet of commercial uses and 727 residential units, thereby altering the project sites to a permanent developed condition. Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. The project sites consist primarily of undeveloped lands overgrown with shrubs and weeds, agricultural lands, and scattered oil production facilities. Development of the proposed project would irreversibly commit the sites to urban uses, converting the ,~ existing 171 acres of undeveloped land into approximately 116,800 square feet of commercial uses (14-acre GC Site), approximately 218 low density residential units (65-acre LR Site), and approximately 509 low-medium density residential units (65-acre !! LR Site). The project sites are designated as Light Industrial (LI), Service Industrial (SI) _ and Heavy Industrial (HI) in the City's General Plan. ~~` According to Table II-1, Exiting Land Uses, of the General Plan, agriculture/open - space, and mineral/petroleum land uses, are the predominant existing land uses comprising 213,314 acres of undeveloped land, or approximately 82 percent of the total planning area. The 171 acres proposed for development would constitute less ~, Land Use JN 10-100278 5.7=7 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR project sites as containing Prime Agricultural Soils. In as much as the project would result in the loss of prime agriculture soils and the conversion of agriculture uses to urban uses, implementation of the proposed project would be considered a significant 4 impact. However, policies which protect agricultural lands from conversion to urban uses are intended for unplanned urban development. The conversion of the project site from agricultural land to urban development is anticipated since the project sites are designated as industrial land uses in the General Plan. Additionally, it should be noted that the project site is not under a Land Conservation Act (LCA) or "Williamson ' Act" contract.2 LOSS OF MINERAL RESOURCE 5.7-3 Project implementation may result in the loss of mineral resources. Significance: Less Than Significant Impact The potential exists that mineral resources would be lost due to development of the proposed residential and commercial uses in areas of current and potential resource - extraction. The Bakersfield Municipal Code cites the following with respect to development in petroleum production areas: 15.66.080 Development Encroachment in Petroleum Areas ,' On-Site Petroleum Facilities. Where a developer proposes to subdivide, rezone or otherwise develop property which contains existing drilling and/or production operations including disposal wells, the developer ,~- shall provide a plan showing how all existing petroleum related facil ities will be protected and integrated into the proposed development so as said facilities will satisfy the development standards pursuant to this chapter. The developer shall also submit a plan of ultimate use of the land after cessation of petroleum operations and abandonment of wells. ~' Abandoned Wells. Tentative maps, planned development and other development plans submitted to the city shall show the location of all wells drilled on the property. Prior to development of any area, any well shown as abandoned shall be accompanied by written verification from the D.O.G. that the well was properly abandonedpursuant to their regulations. Any well thereafter abandoned shall also be accompanied by written verification from the D.O.G. Development shall be designed such that the city building official is satisfied that no structure will be s Lands under an LCA or Williamson Act contract would face additional land use restrictions aimed at avoiding the conversion of agricultural lands to other uses. ~~~ Land Use JN 10-100278 5.7-9 May 24, 2000 ~` GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR uses has been identified as a specific type of land use incompatibility in the General Plan. Compatibility impacts associated with safety, noise and aesthetic issues would be anticipated. Detailed discussions pertaining to these concerns and mitigation measures are provided in Section 5.6, Human Health/Risk of Upset, and Section 5.8, Noise. Potential risks associated with project development adjacent to petroleum ~' operations would involve gas migration, soil contamination, blowouts, and well abandonment. Noise concerns would include the potential for the noise sensitive receptors to experience excessive noise levels. Aesthetic concerns would involve ~, potentially offensive views of the remaining petroleum operations from the proposed residential uses. Power Lines. A Southern California Edison (SCE) high voltage transmission line easement extends in an east west direction across the northern portion of the proposed low-medium density residential site (LMR Site). Results from studies have concluded that there is no conclusive scientific evidence regarding the health effects resulting from exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF). Based on the available data, the proposed low-medium density residential uses would not be incompatible with the existing transmission line. Detailed discussions pertaining to these concerns and mitigation measures are provided in Section 5.6, Human Health/Risk of Upset. '~ Industrial Uses. Implementation of the proposed project would expose future residents to potential health and safety impacts associated with an accidental release of hazardous material(s) or an explosion from the adjacent heavy industrial area situated to the southeast of the project area. However, impacts in this regard would be reduced to a less than significant level by establishing appropriate separation distances pursuant to criteria set forth by the City of Bakersfield and County of Kern Fire Departments. Traffic & Noise. The Traffic Impact Study concluded that the study area would continue to operate at an acceptable level of service with the addition of project- ' generated trips for all analysis scenarios examined (refer to Section 5.9, Traffic and Circulation). The additional vehicular travel on the surrounding roadway network would result in noise level increases along these roadways. However; implementation of required mitigation measures would reduce on-site noise impacts to less than significant levels (refer to Section 5.8, Noise). Airport. The proposed project is located approximately two miles southwest of the Meadows Field -Kern County Airport and is situated in Zone C of the Kern County Airport Compatibility Land Use Plan (CLOP). Zone C is subject to common air traffic patterns with limited risks and allows for a maximum of 15 dwelling units per acre (not exceeded by the proposed residential uses). The project is considered compatible with the Zone C compatibility designation. Further, according to Exhibit 4-39, Noise Contours -Meadows Field Airport,~of the CLUP, the noise contours associated with ,~ flight activity at the Meadows Field -Kern County Airport indicate that the proposed residential uses would not be exposed to excessive noise levels. ,~ Land Use jN 10-100278 5.7-11 May 24, 2000 ~, GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR A 1 1 GC Site: From Service Industrial (SI) to General Commercial (GC). LR Site: From Light Industrial (LI), Service Industrial (SI) and Heavy Industrial (HI) to Low Density Residential (LR). LMR Site: From Heavy Industrial (HI) to Low Medium Density Residential (LMR). Approval of the proposed General Plan Amendments would bring the proposed land uses into conformity with the General Plan land use designations. The proposed project has been eval uated to determine project consistency with the goals~and policies of the General Plan Land Use Element. As analyzed in Table 5.7-1, Land Use Element Goals/Pol icies Analysis, the project would be consistent with the various goals/policies in the Land Use Element. Additionally, as the proposed uses would not be permitted underthe County's existing zoning districts, zone district amendments would be required as follows: GC Site: From County Light Industrial (M-1). Medium Industrial (M-2). and Heav Industrial (M-3) to City Regional Commercial (C-2): The purpose of the C-2 zone is to permit development of concentrated large-scale retail operations providing a broad range of goods and services which serve the metropolitan market area. i 1 1 1 LR Site: From County M-1, M-2, and M-3 to City One Family Dwellin (g. R=1): A one-family dwelling; accessory buildings or structures; private green houses and horticultural collections; on rear of lot.- an additional dwelling; home occupations; etc. LMR Site: From County M-3 to City Limited Multiple-Family Dwellin (~: Any use permitted in an R-1 zone; limited multiple-family dwellings; and accessory buildings. Approval of the proposed zone district amendments would bring the proposed land uses into conformity with the City's Municipal Code. Significant impacts with respect to consistency with the City's Zoning Ordinance would not be anticipated. Land Use JN 10-100278 5.7=13 ~' May 24, 2000 ~~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 1 A 1 1 t I 1 Land Use Element Goals Land Use Goal #7: "Establish a built environment which achieves a compatible functional and visual relationship among individual buildings and sites." Land Use Element Policies Land Use Policv #1: "Provide for the following types of land uses, as depicted on the Land Use Plan:...(This policy continues to list the various land use designations indicated on the General Plan Land Use Map.)" Land Use Policv #2: "Allow for the development of a variety of residential types and densities. " Land Use Policv #3: "Ensure [hat residential uses are located in proximity to commercial services, employment centers, public services, transportation routes, and recreational and cultural resources." Land Use Policv #4: "Encourage maintenance of the residential character of specially identified neighborhoods through such mechanisms as architectural design, landscape, and property setbacks. " Consistent. As stated in Section 5.7 Land Use Compatibility, the proposed land uses would be both internally and externally compatible with surrounding land uses. This EIR is on a program level (pursuant to CEQA Section 15168), which proposes an amendment to the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, thus an analysis of site design is not the focus of this review. Development onsite shall be subject to City design review and, Municipal Code requirements. Consistent. As previously stated, the project proposes a GPA for the project sites from LI, SI and HI to LR, LMR, and GC. Thus, the proposed amendments provide a variety of uses which are consistent with recognized uses in the 2010 General Plan. . Consistent. The project provides for a variety of low, and low medium density uses on-site. Refer to the previous discussion under Land Use Policy #1. Consistent. The project site is located with northwest Bakersfield, which is an area containing existing development, thus commercial services are available within the area in addition to provided on-site. Roadways linking to all areas of Bakersfield are in close proximity to the site. Consistent. Development of the proposed project is subject to City Municipal Code and design review requirements. A final development plan will be subject to review by the City of Bakersfield. Land. Use jN 1 0-1 002 78 Analysis remain in operation. As analyzed in Section 5.6, significant impacts would not occur in this regard provided mitigation is implemented. There are no known or suspected earthquake faults traversing the project site. It is noted that the site is located in an area subject to inundation in the event of a major Lake Isabella Dam failure. However, several hours' advanced warning for such an impending occurrence would be forthcoming. Given this and the site's proximity to State Route-99, complete site evacuation prior to inundation is ensured. 5.7-15 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 1 1 1 1 Land Use Element Goals Land Use Policv #17: "Require all new commercial designations be assigned to sites where the aggregate of all contiguous parcels designated for commercial use is no less than five (5) acres, except for approved specific plans, parcels to be developed for highway- orientedservice uses at freewa y on-and off-ramps, or where physical conditions are such that commercial is the only logical use of the property." Land Use Policv #18: "The depth of new commercial developments shall be at least half the length of the street frontage. Exceptions maybe made where the existing development or physical constraints provide a more logical step. " Land Use Policv #19: "Encourage a separation of at least one-half mile between new commercial designations. " Land Use Policv #26: "Require that commercial development provide design features such as screen walls, landscaping and height, setback and lighting restrictions between boundaries of adjacent residential land use designations so as to reduce impacts on residences due to noise, traffic, parking, and differences in scale. " Land Use Policv #27: "Require that automobile and truck access to commercial properties sited adjacent to designated residential parcels be located at the maximum parcel distance from the residential parcel. " Land Use Policv #28: "Street frontages along all new Consistent. Refer to Policy #27. commercial development shall be landscaped. " t A r Land Use Policv #30: "Protect existing industrial designations from incompatible land use intrusions. " Land Use Policy #48: "Coordinate with the appropriate agencies so that adequate land and facilitie_; are set aside for schools, parks, police/fire, libraries, cultural facilities, recreational facilities and other service uses to serve the community. " Analysis Consistent: The proposed commercial uses would be located on a parcel over 5 acres in size. Consistent. While a specific land use plan has not yet been developed, the development plan would be required to be consistent with this policy. Consistent. The proposed commercial area is not located within one-half mile of another new commercial designation. Consistent. The project would be required to provide features in this regard in accordance with the City's Noise Ordinance. As stated in Section 5.8, Noise, significant impacts would not occur in this regard with adherence to standard Codes. Consistent. While a specific development plan has not been prepared for the proposed commercial site, project development plans would be required to demonstrate compliance with this policy during the site plan approval process. . Consistent. The existing industrial uses are located to the south and the east of the proposed sites. As stated in Section 5.6, Human Health/Risk of Upset, and Section 5.7, Land Use Compatibility, the proposed land uses would be compatible with nearby existing industrial uses. Consistent. The project shall be subject to the requirements of local service providers as a part of the project review and approval. Land Use )N 10-100278 5.7-17 May 24, 2000 ~' GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Land Use Element Goals Analysis Land Use Policv #63: "Allow variation in the use of Consistent. Refer to the analysis for Land Use Goal street trees, shrubs, lighting and other details to give #7 and Land Use Policy #4. streets better visual continuity. " '~ Land Use Policv #64: "Provide for installation of Consistent. Refer to the analysis for Land Use Goal street trees which enhance pedestrian activity and #7 and Land Use Policy #4. convey a distinctive high quality visual image." Land Use Policv #65: "Encourage landscaping the Consistent. Refer to the analysis for Land Use Goal banks of flood control channels, canals, roadways #7 and Land Use Policy #4. and other public improvements with trees to provide a strong visual element in the planning area. " Land Use Policv #66: "Promote the establishment of attractive entrances into communities, major districts, and transportation terminals and corridors within the planning area." Land Use Policv #68: "Encourage the establishment of design programs which may include signage, street furniture, landscape, lighting, pavement treatments, public art, and architectural design." Land Use Policv #70: "Provide for a mix of land uses which meets the diverse needs of residents; offers a variety of employment opportunities; capitalizes, enhances, and expands upon existing economic `_ assets; and allows for the capture of regional growth. " Land Use Policv #71: "Allow for the continuance of agricultural uses in areas designated for future urban growth. " 11 Consistent. Refer to the analysis for Land Use Goal #7 and Land Use Policy #4. Consistent. Refer to the analysis for Land Use Goal #7, Land Use Policies #4 and #56. Consistent. Refer to the analysis for Land Use Goals #1, #2 and #3. Consistent. Currently, a portion of the project site is utilized for agricultural production, which will be replaced with the proposed residential uses. Urban development has been anticipated on-site, thus, agricultural operations have been considered a transitioned use. Land Use Policv #72: "Accommodate new projects Consistent. The proposed site is currently vacantand which are infill or expansion of existing urban is surrounded on many sides with development and development." would therefore be considered an infill project. The proposed residential and commercial uses would be consistent with the current uses off-site. Land Use Policv #73: "Provide foran orderly outward Consistent. Refer to analysis for Land Use Goals #1, expansion of new "urban" development (any #2, #3, #4, #5, #6 and #7. commercial, industrial, and residential development have a density greater than one unit per acre) so that it maintains continuity of existing development, .~ allows for the incremental expansion of infrastructure and public services, minimizes impacts on natural environmental resources, and provides a high quality environment for living and business. " - ~ ~ Land -Use JN 10-100278 5.7-19 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P49-0482 PROGRAM EIR CIRCULATION DESIGNATIONS 5.7-6 The proposed project requires an amendment to the Circulation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. The General Plan Circulation ElementAmendments which '~ are pre-requisite to project development would ensure consistency of the proposed uses with the General Plan circulation designations. The project proposes amendments to the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Specifically, changes would include the following: ~. Delete Mohawk Street as an Arterial north of Hageman Road to Olive Drive; • Change Hageman Road from a Col lector to an Arterial between Mohawk Street and Knudsen Drive/Landco Drive, along with modifying the alignment with an extension north a few hundred feet; and • Establish a Collector segment for Hageman Road between Knudsen Drive/Landco Drive to State Route 99/State Route 204. The General Plan Circulation Element Amendments which are pre-requisite to project development would ensure consistency of the proposed uses with the General Plan circulation designations. Also, refertoSection 5.9, Traffic and Circulation, for detailed discussions and mitigation regarding traffic and circulation. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 5.7-7 The proposedproject, combined with other future development, may increase the intensity of land uses in the area. Significance: Analysis has concluded that impacts are less than significant and no mitigation is required. Evaluated in accordance with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and on a project-by-project basis. Project impacts in conjunction with cumulative development in the vicinity would increase urbanization and result in the loss of undeveloped land in the local vicinity. Potential land use impacts are, for the most part, site-specific, and require evaluation on a case-by-case basis. This would be particularly true with regard to land use compatibility impacts in that they are generally a function of the interactive effects between a specific development site and its immediate environment. As cumulative land use impacts are difficult to individually mitigate, mitigation is most effective through the implementation of City policies and regulations. .. _ _ .. . _ .._ . _.... _..._ . _ __... Land Use JN 10-100278 5.7-21 May 24, 2000 1 L L 1 1 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 5.8 NOISE The purpose of this Section is to analyze project-related noise source impacts on the project site and to surrounding land uses. Mitigation measures are also recommended to minimize the noise impacts of the project. This Section evaluates short-term construction-related impacts as well as long-term buildout conditions based, in part, on the Traffic Study included as Appendix 15.8. Refer to Appendix 15.7, Noise Data, for the assumptions used in this analysis. EXISTING CONDITIONS NOISE SCALES AND DEFINITIONS Decibels (dB) are based on the logarithmic scale. The logarithmic scale compresses the wide range in sound pressure levels to a more usable range of numbers in a manner similar to the Richter scale used to measure earthquakes. In terms of human response to noise, a sound 10 dBA higher than another is judged to be twice as loud; and 20 dBA higher four times as loud; and so forth. Everyday sounds normally range from 30 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud). The A-weighted sound pressure level is the sound pressure level, in decibels, as measured on a sound level meter using the A- weighted filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound, placing greater emphasis on those frequencies within the sensitivity range of the human ear. Examples, of various sound levels in different environments are shown in Table 5.8-1, Sound Levels and Human Response. Many methods have been developed for evaluating community noise to account for, among other things: • The variation of noise levels over time; • The influence of periodic individual loud events; and • The community response to changes in the community noise environment. 1 1 1 Numerous methods have been developed to measure sound over a period of time. These methods include: 1) the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL); 2) the Equivalent Sound Level (Leq); and 3) the Day/Night Average Sound Level (Ldn). These methods are described below. Noise )N 1 0-1 002 78 5.8-1 May 24, 2000 or GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) The predominant community noise rating scale used in California for land use compatibility assessment is the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). The CNEL reading represents the average of 24-hour readings of equivalent levels, known as Leq's, based on an A-weighted decibel with upward adjustments added to account for increased noise sensitivity in the evening and night periods. These adjustments are + 5 dBA for the evening, 7 p.m. to 10 p.m., and + 10 dBA for the night, 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. CNEL may be indicated by "dBA CNEL" or just "CNEL". Leq The Leq is the sound level containing the same total energy over a given sample time period. The Leq can be thought of as the steady sound level which, in a stated period of time, would contain the same acoustic energy as the time-varying sound level during the same period. Leq is typically computed over 1, 8 and 24-hour sample periods. Day Night Average (Ldn) Another commonly used method is the day/riight average level or Ldn. The Ldn is a _ . measure of the 24-hour average noise level at a given location. It was adopted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for developing criteria for the evaluation of community noise exposure. It is based on a measure of the average noise level over a given time period called the Leq. The Ldn is calculated by averaging the Leq=s for each hour of the day at a given location after penalizing the "sleeping. hours" (defined as 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.), by 10 dBA to account for the increased sensitivity of people to noises that occur at night. The maximum noise level recorded during a noise ' event is typically expressed as Lmax. The sound level exceeded over a specified time frame can be expressed as Ln (i.e., L9o, Lso, L,o, etc.). Lso equals the level exceeded 50 percent of the time, L,o 10 percent of the time, etc. 1 1 As previously mentioned, people tend to respond to changes in sound pressure in a logarithmic manner. In general, a 1 dBA change in the sound pressure levels of a given sound is detectable only under laboratory conditions. A 3 dBA change in sound pressure level is considered a "just detectable" difference in most situations. A 5 dBA change is readily noticeable and a 10 dBA change is considered a doubling (or halving) of the subjective loudness. It should be noted that a 3 dBA increase or decrease in the average traffic.noise level is realized by a doubling or halving of the traffic volume; or by about a 7 mile per hour (mph) increase or decrease in speed. For each doubling of distance from a point noise source, the sound level will decrease by 6 dBA. In other words, if a person is 100 feet from a machine, and moves to 200 feet from that source, sound levels will drop approximately 6 dBA. For each doubling )N 1 0-1 002 78 Noise 5.8-3 May 24; 2000 U 1 1 1 1 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.8-2 CALIFORNIA LAND USE COMPATIBILITY NOISE GUIDELINES COMMUNITY NOISE EXPOSURE LAND USE CATEGORY Ldo or CNEL dBA Normally Conditionally Normally Clearly Acceptable Acceptable .Unacceptable Unacceptable Residential -Low Density, Single- 50 - 60 55 - 70 70 - 75 70 - 85 Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes Residential -Multiple Family 50 - 65 60 - 70 70 - 75 70 - 85 Transient Lodging -Motel, Hotels 50 - 65 60 - 70 70 - 80 80 - 85 Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, 50 - 70 60 - 70 70 - 80 80 - 85 Nursing Homes Auditoriums, Concert Halls, NA 50 - 70 NA 65 - 85 Amphitheaters Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator NA 50 - 75 NA 70 - 85 Sports Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 50 - 70 NA 67.5 - 75 72.5 - 85 Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water 50 - 75 NA 70 - 80 80 - 85 Recreation, Cemeteries Office Buildings, Business Commercial 50 - 70 67.5 - 77.5 75 - 85 NA and Professional Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, 50 - 75 70 - 80 75 - 85 . NA Agriculture Source: Office of Noise Control, California Department of Health, as cited in the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General. Plan Noise Element, March 1990, Figure VIII-3. Notes: Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements. Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detai led analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features are included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning, will normally suffice. Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements needed to mitigate the unacceptable noise levels must be made and needed noise insulation features must be included in the design. Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally not be undertaken. NA: Not applicable. -~ JN 1 0-1 002 78 .. .. _.. _ . Noise 5.8-5 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR i in a semi-urban environment, Highway 99 is the dominant (constant) noise source within the vicinity of the project site. Noise sensitive receptors are not currently located on the project site. However, noise sensitive uses (single-family residential uses) are located north of the project site along Olive Drive from Victor Street to Fruitvale Avenue. Residential units are also situated west of the project site along Fruitvale Avenue from Olive Drive to south of Hageman Road. PRELIMINARY NOISE ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY Field Measurements Field measurements to identify ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project site were conducted on February 4, 2000. Noise monitoring equipment used for the field measurements consisted of a Larson Davis Laboratories Model 700 integrating sound level meter equipped with a Bruel & Kjaer (B & K) Type 4176%z" microphone.' Table 5.8-4, Existing Noise Levels, indicates the results of the field measurements i recorded along roadways immediately adjacent to the project site. 1 1 Table 5.8-4 EXISTING NOISE LEVELS (Based on Field Noise Measurements) Sound Level, dBA Sit M L i e easurement ocat on Time Source of Peak Noise- NO. Lmax Leq 1 Corner of Fruitvale 5:05 p.m. 81.2 70.9 Vehicular Traffic Avenue and Olive Drive 2 Corner of Fruitvale 5:20 p.m. 82.6 68.1 Vehicular Traffic Avenue and Hageman Road 3 Corner of Olive Drive and 5:35 p.m. 78.6 69.5 TraffidPump Station Victor Street 4 Corner of Krebs Road and 6:05 p.m. 64.3 52.6 Oil Pump Facility Mohawk Street 5 End of Victor Street 5:50 p.m. 70.3 58.1 Grading 6 End of Mohawk Street 6:20 .m. 71.5 59.5 Distant Traffic ~~urce: noise momtonng purvey conducted by Kobert t3ein, William Frost & Associates on February 4, 2000. .. . .. .. Noise )N 10-100278 5.8-7 May 24, 2000 i GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 1 ~' 1 1 Table 5.8-5 EXISTING TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS (Along Roadways Adjacent to the Project Site) Distances~from Roadway Centerline To: dBA CNEL @ 100 Roadway Segment 60 CNEL 65 CNEL 70 CNEL Feet From Contour Contour Contour Roadway Centerline Norris Road: Victor Street to Fruitvale Avenue 74 34 16 57.6 Fruitvale Avenue to Patton Way 73 34 16 57.6 Olive Drive: Victor Street to Fruitvale Avenue 280 130 60 65.8 Fruitvale Avenue to Patton Way 212 98 46 63.9 West of Patton Way 166 77 23 62.3 Hageman Road: Victor Street to Fruitvale Avenue 30 14 6 51.3 Fruitvale Avenue to Patton Way 119 55 26 60.2 West of Patton Way 142 66 31 61.3 Fruitvale Avenue: North of Norris Road 41 19 9 53.8 Norris Road to Olive Drive 84 39 18 57.9 Olive Drive to Hageman Road 145 67 31 61.5 Hagemen Road to Meany Avenue 139 65 30 61.2 Meany Avenue to Downing 143 66 31 61.4 Patton Way: Norris Road to Olive Drive 83 39 18 58.1 Olive Drive to Hageman Road 99 46 21 59.3 Hagemen Road to Meany Avenue 50 23 1 1 55.1 CNtL =Community Noise equivalent Level IMPACTS Significance Criteria The significance of noise impacts is determined by 1) comparing overall noise levels (including contributions from the project) to applicable Federal, State or local noise level standards, and 2) by the expected change in ambient noise levels which would occur as a result of the project. A project may be considered to have a significant noise impact if either the overall noise level or the expected change in noise level is excessive. _ _ Noise )N 10-100278 5.8-9 May 24, 2000 1 1 1 i~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.8-6 SIGNIFICANCE OF CHANGES IN CUMULATIVE NOISE EXPOSURE Ambient Noise Level Without Project (Ldn or CNEL) Significant Impact Assumed to Occur if the Project Increases Ambient Noise Levels by: <60 dBA +5.0 dBA or more 60-65 dBA +3.0 dBA or more > 65 dBA + 1.0 dBA or more Sources: FICON, FHWA, and Caltrans as applied by Brown-Buntin Associates,, Inc., 1997 CEQA Appendix G Thresholds Environmental impact thresholds as derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, Initial Study Checklist, were also used as significance thresholds in this analysis, as applicable. Accordingly, the project would create a significant noise impact if it caused one or more of the following to occur: , . . • 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; r n ~~~ i • Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels; ~ . • Substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project; and/or • A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project include both short- term and long-term impacts. Short-term impacts would result from all demolition/ construction related activities, while long-term impacts would result from project operations from both stationary and mobile sources. Impacts to the existing noise environment are categorized below according to topic. Mitigation measures at the end of this Section directly correspond to the numbered impact statements. J N.1 0-1 002 78 Noise 5.8-11 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ' -Excessive noise levels resulting from construction activities generally would occur in the daytime hours only since City Noise Standards exempt construction noise if construction activities are limited to the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. Construction noise would last the duration of construction, although it would be most noticeable during the initial months of site-intensive grading and building construction for each development phase. Noise sensitive receptors in proximity to the project area, may experience excessive noise levels resulting from construction activities. These impacts, ' however, are exempt as noted above and would be short-term, ceasing upon completion of each phase. In order to minimize short-term noise impacts to adjacent sensitive receptors even further, it is recommended that the hours of operation of noise- ' producing equipment should be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to'6:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. ' LONG-TERM TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS ' 5.8-2 Project implementation would generate additional vehicular travel on the surrounding roadway network, thereby resulting in noise level increases along these roadways. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. For on-site and locations, impacts would be potentiallysignificant. However, implementation of required mitigation measures would reduce on-site noise impacts to less than significant levels. Off-site vehicular noise impacts would be less than significant. Project implementation would result in additional traffic on adjacent roadways, thereby increasing vehiculargenerated noise in the vicinity of existing and proposed residential uses. These impacts would result from project-related vehicle travel, thereby contributing to future noise level increases above City standards along adjacent ' roadway segments. As explained in Section 5.9, Traffic and Circulation, project opening year is anticipated to be 2002; thus mobile noise impacts from the surrounding street network were modeled for Year 2002 both with and without the proposed project. In accordance with the traffic study, mobile noise impacts from a horizon year of 2020, both with and without the project, were also modeled. On-Site Vehicular Noise Impacts Future planned roadway alignments. including Knudsen Drive, Hageman Road, Mohawk Street, and Krebs Road would boarder the project and represent a new noise source potentially impacting future on-site residences. The most practical method to reduce noise to levels below City standards, and thereby reduce noise impacts to less than significant levels, is to construct sound barriers between the roadway and the future residences. Since lot design and grading plans are not yet available, the exact height and location of barriers cannot be accurately determined at this time. Since traffic noise levels do not greatly exceed the 65 dBA CNEL standard along these Noise JN 10-100278 5.8-13 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.8-8 YEAR 2002 65 CNEL NOISE PROJECTIONS (Based on Vehicular Generated Noise) Distance From Roadway Centerline CNEL at 100 feet to 65 CNEL Contour (Feet) From Roadway Centerline Roadwa Se ment y g Year Year Change Year Year Change Significant 2002 2002 Between 2002 2002 Between Noise With Without 2002 With With Without 2002 With Impact? Project Project. and Project Project and Without Without Project Project Norris Road: Victor Street to Fruitale Avenue 35 35 0 57.9 57.9 0 No FruiNale Avenue to Patton Way 35 35 0 57.8 57.8 0 No Olive Drive: Victor Street to FruiNale Avenue 141 136 +5 66.3 66.0 +0.3 No FruiNale Avenue to Patton Way 106 102 +4 64.3 64.2 +0.1 No West of Patton Way 85 80 +5 63.0 62.2 +0.8 No Hageman Road: Victor Street to Fruitale Avenue 38 20 +18 57.8 53.7 +4.1 No FruiNale Avenue to Patton Way 63 58 +5 61.0 60.5 +0.5 No West of Patton Way 73 69 +4 62.0 61.6 +0.4 No Fruitale Avenue: North of Norris Road 23 20 +3 55.0 54.2 +0.8 No Norris Road to Olive Drive 45 41 +4 58.8 58.3 +0.5 No Olive Drive to Hageman Road 75 70 +5 62.2 61.7 +0.5 No Hagemen Road to Meany Avenue 84 70 + 14 62.9 61.7 + 1.2 No Meany Avenue to Downing 85 71 +14 63.0 61.9 +2.1 No Patton Way: Norris Road to Olive Drive 40 40 0 58.4 58.4 0 No Olive Drive to Hageman Road 48 48 0 59.5 59.5 0 f No Hagemen Road to Meany Avenue 24 24 0 55.4 55.4 0 No NOTES/ASSUMPTIONS: 1. Year 2002 average daily traffic (ADT) derived from traffic data as contained within North of the River Sanitary District Traffic Impact Study Report, dated March 23, 2000. 2. The "change" column represents the difference between Year 2002 With Project and Year 2002 Without Project traffic scenarios. 3. Figures are based on the FHWA Highway Noise Prediction Model FHWA-RD-77-108, using posted speeds of 35 mph and 45 mph for Year 2002 With and Without Project Conditions, observed and planned road geometry, and "sok" site. 4. Estimates do not adjust for any existing noise barriers, and are for traffic noise only. 5. CNEL is based on 24 hourly readings of equivalent levels known as Leq's, based on an A-weighted decibel with upward adjustments added to account for increased noise sensitivi in the evenin and night periods. _., ;,; Noise JN 10-100278 5.8-15 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.8-9 YEAR 2020 65 CNEL NOISE PROJECTIONS (Based on Vehicular Generated Noise) Distance From Roadway Centerline CNEL at 100 Feet to 65 CNEL Contour (Feet) From Roadway Centerline Roadwa Se ment y g Year Year Change Year Year Change Significant 2020 2020 Between 2020 2020 Between Noise With Without 2020 With With Without 2020 With Impact Project Project and Project Project and Without Without Project Project Norris Road: Victor Street to FruiNale Avenue 38 38 0 58.3 58.3 0 No Fruitvale Avenue to Patton Way 38 38 0 58.3 58.3 0 No Olive Drive: Victor Street to Fruitvale Avenue 155 151 +4 66.9 66.7 +0.2 No Fruitvale Avenue to Patton Way 134 130 +4 65.9 65.8 +0.1 No West of Patton Way 145 142 +3 66.5 66.3 +0.2 No Hageman Road: Victor Street to Fruitvale Avenue 173 168 +5 67.3 67.2 +0.1 No Fruitvale Avenue to Patton Way 168 165 +3 67.2 67.0 +0.2 No West of Patton Way 162 159 +3 66.9 66.8 +0.1 No Fruitvale Avenue: , North of Norris Road 32 29 +3 57.1 56.7 +0.4 No Norris Road to Olive Drive 97 94 +3 63.8 63.7 +0.1 No Olive Drive to Hageman Road 92 89 +3 63.5 63.3 +0.2 No Hagemen Road to Meany Avenue 82 76 +6 62.7 62.3 +0.4 No Meany Avenue to Downing 80 76 +4 62.6 62.3 +0.3 No Patton Way: Norris Road to Olive Drive 43 43 0 58.8 58.8 0 No Olive Drive to Hageman Road 51 51 0 60.0 60.0 0 " ~' No Hagemen Road to Meany Avenue 25 25 0 55.7 55.7 0 No NOTES/ASSUMPTIONS: 1. Year 2020 average daily traffic (ADT) derived from traffic data as contained within North of the River Sanitary District Traffic Impact Study Report; dated March 23, 2000. 2. The "change" column represents the difference between Year 2020 With Project and Year 2020 Without Project traffic scenarios. 3. Figures are based on the FHWA Highway Noise Prediction Model FHWA-RD-77-108, using posted speeds of 35 mph and 45 mph for Year 2020 With and Without Project Conditions, observed and planned road geometry, and "soft" site. 4. Estimates do not adjust for any existing noise barriers, and are for traffic noise only. 5. CNEL is based on 24 hourly readings of equivalent levels known as Leq's, based on an A-weighted decibel with upward adjustments added to account for increased noise sensitivity in the evening and night rinds. Noise JN 10-100278 5.8-17 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR • Trucks traveling on the site, to and from loading docks; • Activities at loading docks (maneuvering and idling trucks, banging and clanging of equipment and P.A. systems); • Mechanical equipment on stores (air conditioners, trash compactors, emergency generators, etc.); • Parking lot sweepers; and • Slow moving cars in parking lot (parking lot traffic). ' Although several noise sources would be introduced on the general commercial portion of the project, many of them would operate for only very brief time periods, ~" such as truck movements, trash compactors, and parking lot sweepers. These types of ' sources usually do not operate concurrently. Other noise sources, such as air conditioning equipment, parking lot traffic, and loading dock activities, operate for comparatively longer periods of time. However, the proposed project would be requi red to reduce on-site noise impacts to below City noise standards and demonstrate adherence to the Bakersfield Noise Ordinance (Chapter 9.22 of the Municipal Code). ' A subsequent noise analysis shall be prepared during preparation of the Final Development Plans, demonstrating that site placement of stationary noise sources would not exceed Code criteria, described above, for adjacent residences. Therefore, long-term stationary noise generated from proposed commercial uses would be less than significant. OIL PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE LEVELS ' S.8-4 Existing oil production wells may remain on-site following project development; thereby, resulting in potential noise impacts to future noise on- site sensitive uses. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Compliance ' with City Noise standards would reduce impacts to a less Phan significant level. 1 1 Oil production equipment is currently located within the project area. Noise levels measured from oil wells may result in an exceedance of City noise standards at 50 feet. If the equipment remains and residences are built in close proximity to the oil production equipment, a significant noise impact may occur. However, with implementation of required setbacks and noise attenuation techniques in accordance with City standards, potential noise impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 5.8-5 Implementation of the proposed project, together with cumulative projects, would increase the ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. Significance: Noise )N 10-100278 5.8-19 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ' Chapter 9.22 of the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code, for adjacent residences. To demonstrate commercial noise source impacts are below the City's standards, the project applicant may need to include project design features such as setbacks, barriers, building location/orientation, acoustical design of buildings, etc. ' OIL PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE~LEVELS _ 5.8-4 No mitigation measures are required. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ' 5.8-5 No mitigation measures are required. ' LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant impacts related to Noise have been identified following implementation ' of mitigation measures and/or compliance with applicable standards, policies and/or City of Bakersfield codes. 1 1 1 1 Noise JN 10-100278 5.8-21 May 24, 2000 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 5.9 TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION This Section is based upon the project Traffic Study prepared by Robert Kahn, John Kain and Associates (RKJK), March 23, 2000, and included as Appendix 15.8 of this document. The evaluation considers impacts to local roadways, intersections, regional facilities and ingress/egress locations on-site. Mitigation measures are recommended ' to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. EX1STlNG CONDITIONS The following discussion summarizes existing roadway and traffic conditions in the study area. The number of through travel lanes for existing roadways and intersection controls are presented along with existing traffic count data. This data was used to analyze existing traffic operations in the study area. Existing plans for roadway improvements are also described in this section. ~l ~~ STUDY AREA The study area includes the following intersections: Patton Way (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Hageman Road (EW) Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) 1 Fruitvale Avenue (NS) at: Norris Road (EW) Olive Drive (EW) Hageman Road (EW) Krebs Road (EW) Downing Avenue (EW) Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Mohawk Street (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Victor Street (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Landco Road (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) ~- J N 10-1002 78 Traffic and Circulation 5.9-1 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Knudsen Drive (NS) at: Norris Road (EW) Olive Drive (EW) Gibson Street (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) SR-99 Freeway SB Ramps (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) State Road (NS) at: SR-99 Freeway NB Ramps (EW) Olive Drive (EW) Roberts Lane (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Buck Owens Boulevard (NS) at: Rio Mirada Drive (EW) SR-99 Freeway NB Ramps (EW) Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) SITE ACCESSIBILITY Area Roadway System Exhibit 5.9-1, Existing Number of Through Lanes and Intersection Controls, details the existing roadway conditions for study area roadways. The number of through traffic lanes for existing roadways and the existing intersection controls are identified. Exhibit 5.9-2, Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan Comprehensive Circulation Plan, illustrates the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan Comprehensive Circulation Plan. Traffic Volumes and Conditions Existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes on arterial highways throughout the study area are shown on Exhibit 5.9-3, Existing Average Daily Traffic (ADT). Existing ADT volumes are based upon the traffic data collected by the City of Bakersfield, 1998 `~ Traffic Volumes on California State Highways by Caltrans and are factored from peak hour counts made for RKJK. Existing volume to capacity ratios have been calculated and are shown on Exhibit 5.9- 4, Existing Volume to Capacity Ratios. Roadway capacity is generally defined as the Traffic and Circulation JN 10-100278 5.9-2 May 24, 2000 ,~ ~! L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~_ JII L ~= JI IL,= JIL ,= 1 JI-L ~ J I-~ ~I J,IL r= J lllr -Jilt Jll- il l J~Ir =~r ;,~ -'ll- J I I- ,_ 1 I L r=- J air 2 so J ~I~ _ -I p N N~ ~ --I ~- KNUD N J I l L _ r-' r- D R. NG ~- JIIL T ORRIS R. ORRI RD. ~Ir 2U 2U ~ o ~ ~Ilr -~ ~ p F ~ o _ ~GG~T ap !- < Na0 Q' 2V l.. J I ~ r- $ OLIVE DR 4D 4D D 4D 4U 1 I L rT- 4D 4 ~ _' -I I r 'a ~G Gs T ll I {- ~ O Q p ~ ~ q ~ i® 6'~ T~~O Q 4D I- _ I 9 a J J ~ r 4D $ HA4DMA p 3D -±~, ~ 2 O'O(0v~ J ~~~r ~ ~ p '1 KREBS RD. ~ ~ $ 2 ~~F ~~S = N I ; BRITTq ~S''4? q~F 1 MEANY AVE - ~ p m p ~~ RIO J ~ 2U i ~ `" MIRAD ~ l I G I I ILMOR DR. 2U -j-AVE.2U ~ ~ p ~ AVE.2U N ~ it ~ ~ - ~O N p ¢ ~ I io ~O N °z m LL~G BUCK OWENS BLVD. t r -~- ROSEDAL (SR-58}~-I ~ p ~ N -~ + 4 HWY 4D p -~-4D 4D 4D `~ ep 4D - ~ N Y = ~ ~ ¢ ~ LEGEND: L. ~ o ~ =TRAFFIC SIGNAL J I I L - r O$ =ALL WAY STOP J ~ I l r -T =STOP SIGN -~ 4 =NUMBER OF LANES D =DIVIDED L L ~ '~ U =UNDIVIDED -f- ~ J L . t r- 1L - RTO =RIGHT TURN OVERLAP -~ + ~ -~ + _ --~' =FREE RIGHT TURN . ~~` Q Not to Scale CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Existing Number of Through Lanes and Intersection Controls ,~ ~~ Hobert Beirl,`William `Ffost ~cJ1` ssociates 02/00 JN 10-100278 Exhibit 5.9-1 f1 i ~~ II CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~ Q Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan ' '~ Not to Scale Comprehensive Circulation Plan ~~~ `7~obe1[ Beirt,`William `Ffost C.Z~` ssociates EXfll~lt $.9-2 1( ~i~'• 02/00 JN 10-100278 ~NUDSEN~ - R . ~, NORRIS RD. NORRIS RD. 7.2 7.3 0 ~ o u~i ° OAF 16 'Qj 3 ~ ~ ~ v~ vl- . ~ 7? S, 7.4 '~• a DC OLIVE DR. U > ~ 4 13.2 19.1 ui 29.0 31.2 x,18.2 10.8 ¢ N N 38.9TO ,4~,~ ~S o ~ a °° I ' ~° T~R4 ~' ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ y ~ HAGEMAN RD. _ _ _ ~,,/ 0 ~ C~ 9 o "~ 10.5 8.0 ~ 1. + ~ EL O~ `' ~ RD. + KREBS ' ~ F ~S T r`S '9 0. ~ ~ 1 'Q.c, BRITT,gN T~ 'Q ° + ~ 7. ~ srJ MEANY AVE ~ + 14 ca ~ 1 ri MIRADA DOWNING ~ i .+ GILMOR~ j DR. AVE. 2.7 ~ ~ ~ AVE. z r o ~~ ~ ~o ~ o ~ 15.2 °- Z cv m ` SILL~~ BUCK OWENS BLVD ' , g O . r- a ROSEDALE (SR-58) ~ 31.1 HWY.34.0 41.0 33.5 ~ 39.3 40.0 37:0 N ~ ca ~ ~; ~ o ~ ~ _ r- ° O O LEGEND: 31.1 =VEHICLES P ER DAY (1000'S) CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Q GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Not to Scale Existing Average Daily Traffic (ADT) '' ~~_ ~ober'tBeitl,~lliam `Fr'ost ~8. `Associates EXFllbit $.9-3 02/00 JN 10.100278 ;~ NORRIS R0. '~~ 0.48 0.49 N ~ ~ ~ rn~ 0 00 o ~! U OLIVE DR. > 0.33 0.48 ui ¢ 0.73 tir 0.78 } ~ ~•46 0.27 ~ `~3 c 0~ c .97 5,~, ~2S Z O ` J N ~ ! ~ ~~F N ~ ~ ® ~O p t- ' a LL r ~ ~ ~ HAGEMAN ) R0. _ _ _ ~~/ 0.26 0.20 ~ 0.05 ~ ~ r. u~ ~ o ~KREBS RD No 0. . ~ j BRITL t MEANY AVE r i 0.37 ! ~ ~ o co DOWNING ~ i ~ ~ GILMOR AVE. 0.18 y ~ ~ AVE. ~ ~ ~ 1~ ~ o o r o.38 slue ~ ° ~° Z ° m ~ a ROSEDALE (SR-58) ~ g ~ o 0.78 HiNY.0.85 0.84 H 0.98 1.00- ~ tA3 n ~., v N O Not to Scale CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ~~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Existing Volume to Capacity Ratios r+Rg `7Zoben Beirt,~lliam ~Frvst ~.~Issociates ~/((~y~~• 02/00 JN 10-100278 -J Exhibit 5.9-4 i !~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR number of vehicles that can be reasonably expected to pass over a given section of road in a given time period, and is defined as follows: Roadway Type Level of Service "E" Type Capacitx 2 lane undivided 15,000 `. 4 lane undivided 30,000 4 lane divided 40,000 6 lane divided 60,000 The current technical guide to the evaluation of traffic operations is the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) (Transportation Research Board Special Report 209). The - HCM defines level of service as a qualitative measure which describes operational conditions within a traffic stream, generally in terms of such factors as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, and safety. The criteria used to evaluate LOS (Level of Service) conditions vary based on the type of roadway and whether the traffic flow is considered interrupted or uninterrupted. ~ Level of Service is described in Appendix A, Level of Service Description, of Appendix 15.8, Traffic Impact Study. ,~' The definitions of level of service for interrupted traffic flow (flow restrained by the existence of traffic signals and other traffic control devices) differ slightly depending on the type of traffic control. 1 ~~ 1 1 1 f The level of service is typically dependent on the quality of traffic flow at the intersections along a roadway. The HCM methodology expresses the level of service at an intersection in terms of delay time for the various intersection approaches. The HCM uses different procedures depending on the type of intersection control. The levels of service determined in this study are determined using the HCM methodology. For signalized intersections, average stopped delay per vehicle is used to determine level of service. Levels of service at signalized study intersections have been evaluated using the HCM intersection analysis program. Study area intersections which are stop sign controlled on minor streets have been analyzed using the unsignalized intersection methodology of the HCM. For these intersections, the calculation of level of service is dependent on the occurrence of gaps occurring in the traffic flow of the main street. Using data collected describing the intersection configuration and traffic volumes at these locations, the level of service has been calculated. The level of service criteria for this type of intersection analysis is based on average total delay per vehicle. Traffic and Circulation JN 1 0-1 002 78 5.9-7 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Due to various intersections containing all-way stop controlled (AWSC), the ability of vehicles to enter the intersection is not controlled by the occurrence of gaps in the flow of the main street. The AWSC intersections have been evaluated using the HCM methodology for this type ofmulti-way stop controlled intersection configuration. The level of service criteria for this type of intersection analysis are also based on average delay per vehicle. Table 5.9-1, Level of Service Definitions, defines the levels of service for the various analysis methodologies as follows: Table 5.9-1 LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS Level 'of 'Average Stoppel Delay Per Vehicle (Seconds): Average Total Delay'per Vehicle' (Seconds)~~° Service- Signalized Unsignalized A 0 to 5.00 0 to 5.00 B 5.01 to 15.00 5.01 to 10.00 C 15.01 to 25.00 10.01 to 20.00 D 25.01 to 40.00 20.01 to 30.00 E 40.01 to 60.00 30.01 to 45.00 F 60.01 and up 45.01 and up The LOS analysis for signalized intersections has been performed using optimized signal timing. This analysis has included an assumed lost time of three seconds per phase in accordance with HCM recommended default values. Signal timing optimization has considered pedestrian safety and signal coordination requirements. Appropriate time for pedestrian crossings have also been considered in the signalized intersection analysis. Saturation flow rates of 1,900 vehicles per hour of green (vphg) have been assumed for all capacity analysis. Existing peak hour traffic operations have been evaluated for study area intersections. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 5.9-2, Intersection Analysis for Existing Conditions, along with the existing intersection geometries and traffic control devices at each analysis location. Existing intersection level of service calculations are based upon manual AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts made for RKJK in August, 1999 (see Exhibits 5.9-5, Existing AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes and 5.9-6, Existing PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes). Traffic count worksheets are included in Appendix B, Traffic Count Worksheets, of Appendix 15.8, Traffic Impact Study. Traffic and Circulation JN 1 0-1 002 78 5.9-8 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.9-2 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS Intersection Approach Lanes' Del ayz Level of- (secs.) Service Intersection Traffic Nor thbo und Sou thbo und Eastbound We stbound Cohtrol' L T R L T R L 7 °R L T R AM PM `°AM PM Patton Wy. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) AWS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 4.7 9.5 A B • Hageman Rd. (EW) AWS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 3.1 5.5 A B • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) CSS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 1.0 2.5 A A Fruitvale Ave. (NS) at: • Norris Rd. (EW) TS 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13.3 13.2 B B • Olive Dr. (EW) TS 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 19.8 25.6 C D • Hageman Rd. (EW) TS 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 15.0 16.2 C C • Krebs Rd. (EW) CSS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0.5 0.5 A A • Downing Ave. (EW) CSS 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1.0 1.3 A A • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) TS 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 21.7 22.1 C C Mohawk St. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) CSS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 1.9 17.4 A C Victor St. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) TS 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 14.0 15.1 B C Landco Rd. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) TS 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 2 1 72.7 7.3 F B Knudsen Dr. (NS) at: • Norris Rd. (EW) CSS 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 3.3 3.2 A A • Olive Dr. (EW) TS 1 1 1 1.5 0.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 20.8 18.9 C C Gibson St. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) TS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 9.6 15.1 B C SR-99 Fwy. SB Ramps (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) CSS 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 2 1» 16.9 23.9 C D • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) TS 0 0 0 1.5 0 0.5 0 3 1» 0 3 1» 8.4 6.8 B B State Rd. (NS) at: • SR-99 Fwy. NB Ramps (EW) CSS 0 1 0 0 1 1» 1 0 1» 0 0 0 2.0 1.7 A A • Olive Dr. (EW) TS 1 1 0 1 1 1» 1 2 1 1 2 1 18.2 19.7 C C Roberts Ln. (NS) at: _ • Olive Dr. (EW) TS 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 16.4 17.7 C C Buck Owens Blvd. (NS) at: • Rio Mirada Dr. (EW) AWS 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 6.8 9.9 B B • SR-99 Fwy. NB Ramps (EW) TS 2 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1.5 0.5 1 18.2 23.9 C C • Rosedale H.- SR-58 EW TS 2 0 1» 2 0 1> 2 3 0 0 3 1> 17.5 26.6 C D ' When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes. L = Left; T = Through; R =Right; > =Right Turn Overlap; > > =Free Right Turn z Analysis Software: Traffix, Version 7.0.1208 (1997). 3 AWS =All Way Stop TS =Traffic Signal CSS =Cross Street Traffic and Circulation )N 10-100278 5.9-9 May 24, 2000 rn~ x-46 htnN L17 a0Nt0 x--40 °'~ ~~"' ~-146 ~n ~ '-227 M~ '``~'" 277 `D 78 ""O -~04 °7 07 '°~ -6 7 ~' JILL-17s J1~~25 Jllr-sa JI JI ~a JILr39 ~I 1~J l I r 13J l I r 42J l I r 61J l I 65J -1 I r 187s- ~~ (" 1aJ ~ I 82 - Coco 282- rno 1369- rnN~ 420-t mr~ 1396- N(rf 1r N 572-1 m 1 -~ rxoap 56--i ~V7N 13r ~u~ rnu~ 44-~ ch N NN M ~aoc~i x-2220 J ~ L x365 Nn~ L35 asoJ l r ~ I L ~ia6 5~ `~~~ 9, 18g02-' ~~ 124r_ ~~~ KNUDSEN DR. oNao ~-9 I I L ~1 ~ N RIS RD NOR IS RD. m c~NO x-23 2 sJ 1~ '~ o J A L ~zo 17s-, ~~ aF ~ 240J T5' a 266- ~ ~ r ~ ~. ~ 295r on morn X19 OLIVE DR. > -108 ui J I L r6 ~ Q S~, aDNN ~58 81J r21 233, l N r Z a I ; 9TF,~ J I L o ~ ~ o J ~,~ 11 a ~ i ~ ~~~-___ _~ 3911 NNN LL / ~ mo ,~ '-12 HAGEMA ~ RD. _ _ I % ~ J I L r-ia -~~ ; q` coy ~~ L5 1 ~_' l I ~ KREBS RD. ~ ; ~/s ~sT J I L r-i ~Zz 7~ ~ i ~ BRITT,gN~ ~??~ T~ 272 MEANY AVE t ~ O ~ 188J ~ ~ r ~ 59~ ~o~ / ~ i ~ MIRADA ~~ DOWNING i ~ GILMOR ~ DR. 00 36-~ ~ s ~ ~ AVE. N~ ~-353 48~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O BUCK J L -1075 N ~ ~ z m OWENS BLVD. 241J ~ r nom. ROSEDALE (SR-58) ~ ~ c7 1600- ~~ ~~ ~ HWY. jIL-fi58 3 Q 1534-, ~ ~ r O 15-~ ~ Joao `169 JIL~22 s1~ _ _ ~~ 1413- ~~~-, N~~ -954 `" 2 N "' `-945 "`~' x-69 a6~ ~M JIL,-az J ~ ~za J ~ L rao J L -113 12-' ~ I r 48-' 84J ~ I r 1556- 1705- f~~N 1589- 16330p- a,.- 601 ZO-t c7 22-~ ~''~ CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ,~ Q GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Existing A.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes 1 Not to Scale ____ Y~ I `I~oben Beitt,~lliam °Fi"ost GS.eJI` ssociates EXfllblt .5.9-5 w j 02!00 JN 10-100278 N.-N x-97 ~N•- x-57 vaoo i-82 0o to.-~ x-467 n~tn L109 N °'O7~ --981 '~~ -278 " 1333 tDNf'' -1388 tO''~ -1843 "" JILr2s5 JILL-3s JILr-sB JI JILrSS JILr3s JI 22--' l I {~ 18J ~ I (- 73-' l I r 38~ l l 9J ~ (r 1327- l~ r 2oJ l 50~- a~rnn 165- or- 910- vNn 290- orn 9~3- NtD(O 1~ N ao 1213 n 2 -~ Nco~ 54-i '~~`"~ 10r ~~co ~~0 44--~ c~N N n~i Nrnr ~4 J I L x196 ~vM L22 N~ 29-~,I(- JIL~3 382- Nno 7-i rn~ 'P 57~ i°~ 6~s-, l I ~ KNUDSEN rno DR. canv ~-4 ~ -28 N RIS RD NOR S RD. N J I L r4 rn~n x-45 ~ 00 -333 201 ~ ~Q 9 p 2z- ~, I ~ J I r7 sip ~,M~ F ~. ~ 1 sa-~ l I f S n0. 459- ~N`' ~(, ~ 207-1 Nn~ ~rxn x-36 OLIVE DR. > d'~Q -264 ui J I L x19 ¢ S MN`D x--161 264g l (r Z a ~ ~ T'9T~. J I L ,x26 53-i NMI o ~ ~ ; ® '~0 12J l I ~ Q ~ ~,~-------- 330-1 Nrnc°~ a LL ! ~ ~ r~o i J I L r7 i ~ qL ~~cc~, ~~~ ~9 2 ~- ~ ~ r KREBS RD. ~ ~ Fly, ST J I L x383 s~ „~ I i BRITCgN 'Q? qTC° 170-' ~ I r 145- Nrnn MEANY AVE ~ j ~~ RIO J 32r NaN c . i ~ MIRADA DOWNING j ~ `~w DR. J I I , ~ GILMOR orn ~ ~ AVE. ,~~ 89-~ ~ ~ Z ~ OU p BUCK J Lei sis ~v ~ ~ Z m OWENS BLVD. 1003-, ~ r a ROSEDALE (SR-58) ~ g ~ ~~ NWY. o ~ x-20 I L x1390 Q ~ 922 ~ ~ r ~ `.°-inio '-330 J 8I L r-;s33 ~rnn 1030- 133-~ <cMaoo J I L raag2 rnh L26 '-r~~ L-1624 N° X1250 8~ L -1745 Jg I L x-46 p pJ L -1465 138; ~ ~ r 1466-~ 1492- ~ f r 1882--i ~ CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Q GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Existing P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes Not to Scale `f~obert Beitt,`Wi/liam `Flbst ~~lssociates EXfllblt 5.9-6 ovoo ~N io-ioo2~a GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR For existing traffic conditions, the study area intersections operate at acceptable levels of service during the peak hours, except for the following study area intersections which operate at Level of Service "D" or worse during the peak hours: Fruitvale Avenue (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Landco Road (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) SR-99 Freeway SB Ramps (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Buck Owens Boulevard (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) HCM calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix C, Calculation of Intersection Level of Service -Existing, of Appendix 15.8, Traffic Impact Study. For existing traffic conditions, traffic signals appear to be warranted at the following study area intersections (see Appendix D, Traffic Signal Warrants, of Appendix 15.8, Traffic Impact Study). Patton Way (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Hageman Road (EW) Fruitvale Avenue (NS) at: Downing Avenue (EW) SR-99 Freeway SB Ramps (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Buck Owens Boulevard (NS) at: Rio Mirada Drive (EW) IMPACTS Significance Criferia The traffic issues related to the proposed land use and development have been evaluated in the context of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Metropolitan Bakersfield2010General Plan Comprehensive Circulation Plan. The City of Bakersfield is the lead agency responsible for preparation of the traffic impact analysis, in accordance with both CEQA and CMP authorizing legislation. Traffic and Circulation JN 10-100278 5.9-12 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~! The identification of significant impacts is a requirement of CEQA. The Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and Circulation Element have been adopted in accordance with CEQA requirements, and any roadway improvements within the City of Bakersfield which are consistent with these documents are not considered a significant impact, so long as the project contributes its "fair share" funding for ~,~ improvements. According to the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan Circulation Element `~ (Page III-13), the objective of the planned street system is to accommodate planned land development without traffic congestion. All new streets and freeways are ,- projected to operate at Level of Service C or better. On streets where the existing level `, ~ of service is below "C",special consideration to identify mitigation measures to prevent and/or delay degradation of the existing level of service would be required. Environmental impact thresholds as indicated in Appendix G, Initial Study Checklist, of the CEQA Guidelines were also used as significance thresholds in this analysis. As ,~ such, the project would create a significant impact if it would cause one or more of the following to occur: • 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); ' • Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a LOS standard established by the County CMP agency for designated roads or highways; -~ 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 (refer to Section 10.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant); '~,~~ Substantial ly increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) i~ (refer to Section 10.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant); • Result in inadequate emergency access (refer to Section 10.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant); • Result in inadequate parking capacity (refer to Section 10.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant); and/or _ Confl ict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative ~~ transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks) (refer to Section 10.0, Effects Found Not To Be Significant). Traffic and Circulation )N 10-100278 5.9-13 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Impacts to traffic and circulation are analyzed below according to topic. Mitigation measures at the end of this Section directly correspond with the identified impact. PROJECTED TRAFFIC AND TRAFFIC ANALYSIS -OPENING YEAR 5.9-1 Project implementation may cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the Opening Year traffic load and capacity of the street system and may exceed an established LOS standard. Significance: Potentially Significant Impacf. Implementation of recommended mitigation measures would reduce potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level. Overall Study Area Traffic Trip Generation. Trip generation represents the amount of traffic which is attracted and produced by a development. The traffic generation for the proposed project is based upon the specific land uses which have been planned for the development. In order to quantify the project land uses, the project was divided into three (3) traffic analysis zones (TAZ) as illustrated on Exhibit 5.9-7, Project Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) Map. Trip generation rates for the proposed project are shown in Table 5.9-3, Trip Generation Rates. The trip generation rates are based upon data collected by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The project trip generation summaries are depicted in Tables 5.9-4, Project Trip Generation (Existing General Plan Land Uses), and 5.9-5, Project Trip Generation (Proposed General Plan Land Uses), for the existing General Plan land uses and proposed General Plan land uses, respectively. Both total daily and peak hour trip generation by zone are shown in Tables 5.9-4 and 5.9-5. The existing General Plan land uses are projected to generate approximately 7,835 trip-ends per day with 1,357 vehicles per hour during the AM peak hour and 1,080 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. The proposed General Plan land uses are projected to generate approximately 14,489 trip-ends per day with 721 vehicles per hour during the AM peak hour and 1,430 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. As shown in Table 5.9-6, Trip Generation Comparison, the proposed General Plan land uses result in a net increase of approximately 6,654 trip-ends per day with 636 less vehicles per hour during the AM peak hour and 350 more vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour as compared to the existing General Plan land uses. Traffic and Circulation JN 10-100278 5.9-14 May 24, 2000 J ~ ~~ ~ UU~~~r ~_ ~ _ ili II it // OfN N11+OIYII II ~ O III a...~ ...~~ l 2 -~- - o ~/ I ~, r ~ ~+ / I I E%ISTINC INDUSTRIAL / ~Y 82.3t Aa Croa /\ -b~ ~~/ Ili) i ~~ l E705TINC INOUSTIBAL L - ~ ,62.77 ~~. cro,. I I~ I I~ III l it i~~ - - - - - - - - - 1 ur /~/ i /~ // /~ I I o-~ I~ ~ ~ LEGEND: ,, 0 =TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE \~ CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Q GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Project Traffic Analysis Zone Map Not to Scale __ ~~ `IZobettBeirt,~Wi/liam `Ffost la.~Jlssociates EX~llblt 5.9-7 02/00 JN 10-100276 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.9-3 TRIP GENERATION RATES' .......Peak Hour AM_ PM ..Land Use ;: 'Units2 In Out Irr -Oufi Daily Light Industrial TSF 0.81 0.11 0.12 0.86 6.97 Heavy Industrial TSF 0.46 0.05 0.04 0.15 1.50 Single-Family Detached Residential DU 0.19 0.56 0.65 0.36 9.57 Commercial Retail TSF 0.92 0.59 2.86 3.10 64.49 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation, Sixth Edition, 1997, Land Use Categories 110, 120, 210 and 820. z DU =Dwelling Units TSF =Thousand Square Feet Table 5.9-4 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION (Existing General Plan Land Uses) _ Peak Hour TAZ' Land Use Quantity; Units2 AM PM Daily In Out In Out 1 Heavy Industrial 1,033.2 TSF 474 53 39 157 1,550 2 Light Industrial 726.6 TSF 589 80 87 625 5,064 3 Light Industrial 175.2 TSF 142 19 21 151 1,221 TOTAL 1,205 152 147 933 7,835 TAZ =Traffic Analysis Zone z TSF =Thousand Square Feet !~ s, y ~~ t )N 1 0-1 002 78 Traffic and Circulation 5.9-16 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.9-5 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION (Proposed General Plan Land Uses) Peak Hour TAZ' Land Use Quantity Units` AM >PM Daily In 'Out In Out 1 Single-Family 509 DU 97 285 331 183 4,871 Detached Residential 2 Single-Family 218 DU 41 122 142 78 2,086 Detached Residential 3 Commercial Retail 116.8 TSF 107 69 334 362 7,532 TOTAL 245 476 807 623 14,489 ' TAZ =Traffic Analysis Zone z DU =Dwelling Units TSF =Thousand Square Feet Table 5.9-6 TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON Peak Hour AM PM Dail ... Land Use In Out In Out y Existing General Plan 1,205 152 147 933 7,835 Proposed General Plan 245 476 807 623 14,489 Difference -960 + 324 + 660 -310 + 6,654 Table 5.9-7 OTHER DEVELOPMENT TRIP GENERATION Peak Hour i " i ' U AM 1'M il D Land Use Quant ty n ts In Out In Out y a Single-Family Detached Residential 133 DU 25 74 86 48 1,273 ' DU = Dwelling Units Traffic and Circulation )N 10-100278 5.9-17 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Trip Distribution. Trip distribution represents the directional orientation of traffic to and from the project sites. Trip distribution is heavily influenced by the geographical location of the sites, the location of residential, commercial, employment and recreational land uses and the proximity to the regional freeway system. The directional orientation of traffic was determined by evaluating existing and proposed land uses and highways within the community and existing traffic volumes. Opening Year network trip distributions for the project have been based upon those highway facilities that are currently built or will be completed to provide access to the project sites. The trip distribution patterns for the project are graphically depicted on Exhibits 5.9-8, Opening Year Project TAZ 1 Trip Distribution, 5.9-9, Opening Year Project TAZ 2 Trip Distribution, and 5.9-10, Opening Year Project TAZ 3 Trip Distribution. Modal Split. The traffic reducing potential of public transit has not been considered in this report. Essentially, the traffic projections are conservative, in that public transit could potentially reduce the traffic volumes. Trip Assi -- nom. The assignment of traffic from the_ site to the adjoining roadway system has been based upon the site's trip generation, trip distributions, proposed arterial highway and local street systems. Based on the identified project traffic generation and Opening Yeardistributions, OpeningYearproject related ADTvolumes are shown on Exhibit 5.9-11, Opening Year Project Average Daily Traffic (ADT). Opening Year project AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits 5.9-12, Opening Year Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes, and 5.9-13, Opening Year Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes, respectively. Other Development Traffic Method of Projection. To assess Opening Year traffic conditions, project traffic is combined with existing traffic, other development and area wide growth. The study year (Opening Year) for analysis purposes in this report is 2002. Non-Site Traffic for Study Area. Table 5.9-7, Other Development Trip Generation, shows the daily and peak hour vehicle trips generated by the other development known by RKJK in the study area. Exhibit 5.9-14, Other Development Trip Distributions, contains the directional distribution and assignment of the other development traffic. Based on the identified trip distribution for the other development on arterial highways throughout the study area, other development ADT volumes are shown on Exhibit 5.9-15, Other Development Average Daily Traffic (ADT). Other development AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits 5.9-16, Other Development AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes, and 5.9-17, Other Development PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes, respectively. Traffic and Circulation JN 10-100278 5.9-18 May 24, 2000 ~S NUDSEN R. NORRIS RD. NORRIS RD. ~O ~ E... ~ eF ~ ~ T S~ a 10 U ti ~ Q ~ j 25 10 ~- Q ST Z a ~ ~ ~TF o ~ ~ ~- 1 ~ ® '~'o a ~ / ~ ,~~---- --- a. ~ t r 5 aD' - - - -}~ ' ; CO c~ 30 7D ~ ~ `n I ~O~ ~ S RD. r i ~ c5'). ~ BRITTq q~F MEANY AV 1 ~ O O J ~ / RI DA MIRA DOWNIN i ~ GILMOR j DR. AVE. ~ ~ ~ AVE. ~~ Z ~ ' ~ ~ SILL SUCK ~ ~ °z m OWENS BLVD. 10 E (SR-58) ~ g ~ HWY. 5 LEGEND: 10 = PERCENT TO/FROM PROJECT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Q GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~ Year 2020 Project TAZ 1 Trip Distribution Not to Scale __ `IZober7BeirL,~lliam ~Flbst l,BZ~j`lssociafes 02/00 JN 10-100278 Exhibit 5.9-8 ~s CITY OF BAKERSFIELD l~ Q GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Not to Scale Opening Year Project TAZ 2 Trip Distribution ~_ ~ `I~oben Beirt,~lliam `FY6st ~~Jlssociatcs EX~llblt $.9-9 ovoo ~N ~aioo2~a v NUDSEN R. NORRIS RD. NORRIS RD. ,... '4'O v7 eF ~ tx T ~ o 5 10 0 20 ~ Q "' S o S~. 5 Q f " ~o ~9T~~ O SO ~ ~~.. a 10 ~ 30 i ----~.. G'O~O~~ KREBS RD. S~. ,~ ~ BRITTgN '9I~ MEANY AV ~ o 'AQ RIO J 5 i `~' , DM RADA ~ GiLMOR AVE. ~ ~ AVE. 0 0 ~ ~ 0 SiLLti~ BUCK 5 ~ ~ Z m ~, OWENS BLVD. (SR-58) ~ ~ ~ HWY. ~ ~ 5 p ~ O I.EGEPID: 10 =PERCENT TO/FROM PROJECT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ® GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Not to Scale Opening Year Project TAZ 3 Trip Distribution `}ZobeR Beit~,~lliam `Frost ~.~JI` ssociates Exhibit 5.9-~ ~ 1 ovoo ~N io-iooz~a i . ~~ CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~ ~ ~ ~. Q Opening Year Project ~=- Not to Scale Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ~obert Beir~,`William `Frost ~~` ssociates EX~liblt 5.9-11 ' 1 ozioo JN 1x700278 l I L os ~ I ~ -0 ~~~ os ~ ~~ ° J I ~ -o3 J I 0 r x c r ta .. r 9J ~Ir ~J~ir ~J~Ir 26- gJ ~i 0-~~~r 2,4-~~ 0- 0- g-~~I 5 10-i rnoo Q ovo NN U-l N o00 0-1 ~ ~ ~ v 00 26-1 N N ~ aoo !D 00 4 I L rU ao ~-0 9 9=' ~ - r ~ ~~ ~ 0 ~ ~ .p sg KNUDSEN DR. ~n ( x-103 X2 N RIS RD NOR IS RD L 9 . '--0 ~_' ~(r R o QQqq ~IL~9 ~ 5-i .-VN ~ ~ ~ T 0-' l ~ r S O ti ~ 40-, _ OLIVE DR. > ~~ L -o? a , sr q L-o ~~~ ~ 10-~ l r O a 1 ® r ~'QO _, ~ ~ $_ fir ,~-- a LL rnrn '-57 HAGEMA i RD. / ----r- l L 0-' 0~ ~2e ~ I r oN~ KREBS RD. ~ i ,y ~o `F~ `~~5~. BRITTgN S'~? r c QQQQ ~-o J I B r~-0 ~ ~ t 2p 0- , o MEANY AVE ~ O J g~ RIO ~ ~ M I RADA j ~ DOWNING j o GILMOR ~ DR. ~ y AVE. o `--5 J ~ -7 0~ l ~ O ~ ~ ~ O BUCK J Z _m OWENS BLVD. O ~ r 24 o a ROSEDALE (SR-58) ~ ~ C7 N '---0 HWY. QQ JIL r-0 3 1O l~r Q 2 ~ Q O ~ v o Jul. x-41 ~ 'a~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ L ~`` ~~ a ~6 ~ l ~ o r , s o i r , 9~ , a~ ~ r 86= o~ , CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Q- Opening Year Project Not to Scale A.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes (~R `I~obett`Beirt,~lliam `Frost C,BZ~ssociates Exhibit 5.9-12 1( 3~! 02/00 JN 10-100278 ,~ vn x-18 0 '--0 ~-0 `-0p $ '-0 I L r-os ~ I ~ r-0a J ~~ ,--o ~~ ~~~ r375 J ~ r-0 1 pJ l l ~ p-' l l ~ p~' l l l~ o-' l i p-' ~ ~ 298- ~ ~~ $_' ~ 31- n~r1o 0- o~0 81- o00 0-1 00 0- co 0~ 0 19 -i ~n 33--i r'^ 0-i ~ ~ 0-1 81~ w N n J I L r-04 ~ '-0 64- o00 o-, ~~ i s-, ~ °~ ° KNUDSEN DR. qq~°nN '-22 J i L ~6 N RIS RD NOR S RD. '--0 40~ l i ~ ~ o ~~~ ~4 O)Nn e 17-~ d' pJ Ts a 40-1 '~! _~ OLIVE DR. > J ~ ro9 > pJ W ST ~~~ rd 57- loo Z Q ~ ~Tc° aQ ~ ~~~~ Or o00 LL / Q~cD`D X37 HAGEMA RD. /~ J i L-x082 ----7~' ,9 ~O ~ S~. 01 °r:~ I BRIT'TgN 'Q~ '9TH OJ MEANY AVE i ~~ ~pJ 0~ 1 i r / ~ RIO o ~ MIRADA j i DOWNING j Q GILMORE j DR. _ ~ ~ AVE. ~~ ~ \ ~ 0-1 lv p ~ ~ O BUCK -24 N ~ ~ z m OWENS BLVD. 31J ~ (" a ROSEDALE (SR-58) ~ g C7 HWY. . Q Y 60~ l i r ~ a m ~-140 ~IL~ ~-_' ~ i r c~~q QQ ~q _ Or oo J I L X40 J L ~40 J I L T-023 J L `=°2s p-~ s i r pJ 1B-~ s i r 1gg- 86- o00 86- 680 o00 55-1 0-1 Not to Scale ~ `f~olieft Beirt,ryVllliam `Flost (,d.~lssociates 02/00 JN 10.100278 ,~ CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~~ Opening Year Project a P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ~' ~I l~- Exhibit 5.9-13 ~s NUflSEN R. NORRIS Rfl. NORRIS RD. rP a O r O a 1Q ~ ~ ti > 25 id © `~ ~ 35 r- ST- O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 9 JF ~4. 4 _ J~' GL ~ r J 5 u' 55. r , G' KREBS Rfl. ~ ST '9 ~ t BRITTq\ TH ~ MEANY AV O J O ~ RI ~ J MlRADA DOWNIN i GILMOR ~ DR. AVE. ~ ~ AVE. ~~ ~ ~ o O SILL BUCK ~ ~ z ~ OWENS BLVD. ~~ {SR-58} ~ ~ ~ MWY. ~ 35 Y ~ 5 ~ O ~°,~ O LEGEND: 10 =PERCENT TOIFROM PRO.lECT Not to Scale ~B ~obelt Beirt,`A'illiam ~Fi'ost 1,8Z `associates j 02/00 JN 70-100278 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Other Development Trip Distribution Exhibit 5.9-14 R CITY OF BAKERSFIELD .- GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Q Other Development Not toscaie Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ,~ ~~~ ~o6en Beir~,~lliam `Frost GZ~lssociates EX~llblf $.9-15 C] 1 t ~~ t 1 1 1 Not to Scale ~~~ `IZobett Beir~.`William `Frost C.BZ~` ssociates 1 1.,~' - ovoo ~N io-iooz~a CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Other Development A.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes Exhibit 5.9-16 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Q Other Development Not to Scale P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ~!~ `I~ofien`Beir~.~/liam `FYost C.Z~Jlssociates EX~llblt 5.9-17 02/00 JN 70-100278 `1` ~~ f A GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Through Traffic. To account for area wide growth on roadways, Opening Year traffic volumes have been calculated based on a 2.8 percent annual growth rate of existing traffic volumes over a two year period. The area wide growth rate has been obtained from the City of Bakersfield. Area wide growth has been added to daily and peak hour traffic volumes on surrounding roadways, in addition to traffic generated by the project and other development. Total Traffic l 1 Exhibit 5.9-18, Opening Year Without Project Average Daily Traffic (ADT), shows the ADT volumes which can be expected for Opening Year without project traffic conditions. Volume to capacity ratios on study area roadways for Opening Year without project traffic conditions are shown on Exhibit 5.9-19, Opening Year Without Project Volume to Capacity Ratios. Exhibit 5.9-20, Opening Year With ProjectAverage Dail y Traffic (ADT), shows the ADT volumes which can be expected for Opening Year with project traffic conditions. Volume to capacity ratios on study area roadways for Opening Year with project traffic conditions are shown in Exhibit 5.9-21,Opening Year With Project Volume to Capacity Ratios. For Opening Year without project traffic conditions, the intersection of Knudsen Drive/Norris Road is projected to warrant a traffic signal (see Appendix D, Traffic . Signal Warrants, of Appendix 15.8, Traffic Impact Study). For Opening Year with project traffic conditions, the intersection of Fruitvale Avenue/Krebs Road is projected to warrant a traffic signal. Capacity and Level of Service and Improvement Analysis r t A Level of Service at Opening Year Without Project. Intersection levels of service for the Opening Year network without the project are shown in Table 5.9-8, Intersection Analysis for Opening Year Without Project Conditions. Table 5.9-8 shows HCM calculations based on the geometrics at the intersections without and with improvements. Opening Year without project HCM calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix E, Calculation of Intersection Level of Service -Opening Year Without Project, of Appendix 15.8, Traffic Impact Study). Opening Year without project AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits 5.9-22, Opening Year Without Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes, and 5.9-23, Opening Year Without Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes, respectively. As shown in Table 5.9-8, the fol lowing study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service "D" or worse during the peak hours, without improvements: 1. 1 Traffic and Circulation )N 10-100278 5.9-29 May 24, 2000 l~ CITY OF BAKERSFIELD _ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Q- Opening Year Without Project v Not to Scale Average Daily Traffic (ADT) -~-~ ~. ~o K~ ~obett `Beir~,~lliam `FYost 6d,~`Issociates Ex~libit 5.9-1 8 ~(q~i^~ 02100 JN 10-100278 i ~' I _ ~ CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ,~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ,- Q Opening Year Without Project Not to Scale Volume to Capacity Ratios ~~ `Robert Beirt,~lliam `Fr'ost ~~Issociates Exhlblt $.9-19 j 02/00 JN 10.100278 ~~ CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~I Q Opening Year Without Project rvOttOs~a-e Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ~'''''1/~~~("~~~~~_J~!~.'~T~) ~obert Beir~,`William ~FYost ~.~` ssociates EXF'llblt $.9-20 ~ ~' 02/00 JN 10-100276 ;~ ~' ,I,'~ CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ~~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR .. Q Opening Year With Project Not to Scale Volume to Capacity Ratios (, `fZobett `Beirt,~lliam `Ffbst ~.~` ssociates Exhibit rJ.9-21 1 02/00 JN 10-100278 ,~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.9-8 Intersection Analysis for Opening Year Without Project Conditions Intersection'Approach-Lanes ' North- South- `' East- Wes t- De layz Lev el of "Intersection 'Traffic ' ' Bound Boun d Bound Bound (Secs.). Service Control L T R L T R L T R L T R AM PM AM PM;> Patton Wy. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvement AWS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 5.3 11.0 B C -w/ Improvement TS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 6.3 5.5 B B • Hageman Rd. (EW) -w/o Improvement AWS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 3.3 6.2 A B -w/ Improvement TS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 6.3 5.7 B B • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) CSS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 1.3 4.2 A A Fruitvale Ave. (NS) at: • Norris Rd. (EW) TS 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13.4 13.3 B B • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvement TS 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 22.1 27.4 C D -w/ Improvement TS 1 2 1> 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 18.2 19.3 C C •Hageman Rd. (EW) TS 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 15.2 16.5 C C • Krebs Rd. (EW) CSS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0.5 0.6 A A • Downing Ave. (EW) -w/o Improvement CSS 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1.1 1.5 A A -w/ Improvement TS 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4.0 4.5 A A • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvement TS 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 25.1 25.3 D D -w/Improvement TS 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 18.6 19.4 C C Mohawk St. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvement CSS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 3.1 34.4 A E -w/ Improvement TS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 8.9 11.0 B B Victor St. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) TS 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 14.6 15.9 B C Landco Rd. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvement TS 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 2 1 -° 8.0 F B -w/ Improvement TSS 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 2 1 13.3 7.8 B B Knudsen Dr. (NS) at:: • Norris Rd. (EW) -w/o Improvement CSS 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 3.5 3.4 A A -w/ Improvement TS 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 6.5 7.7 B B • Olive Dr. (EW) TS 1 1 1 1.5 0.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 22.4 20.1 C C Gibson St. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) TS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 10.1 16.2 B C SR-99 Fwy. SB Ramps (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvement CSS 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 2 1» 32.9 -- E F -w/ Improvement TS 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 2 1» 4.9 4.8 A A • Rosedale H . - SR-58 EW TS 0 0 0 1.5 0 0.5 0 3 1» 0 3 1» 8.7 7.0 B B Traffic and Circulation JN 10-100278 5.9-34 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.9-8 Intersection Analysis for Opening Year Without Project Conditions (continued) Intersection Approach Lanes North-' South- East- West- Del ayZ Lev el of-- Intersection Traffic '' Boun d ` Bound Bound ' Bound (Se cs.) Service Control? L T R L T R L ~T R L T= R' AM PM AM'' PM°`' State Rd. (NS) at: • SR-99 Fwy. NB Ramps (EW) CSS 0 1 0 0 1 1» 1 0 1» 0 0 0 2.0 1.7 A A • Olive Dr. (EW) TS 1 1 0 1 1 1» 1 2 1 1 2 1 20.2 22.4 C C Roberts Ln. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) TS 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 16.6 18.1 C C Buck Owens Blvd. (NS) at: • Rio Mirada Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvement AWS 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 7.7 11.4 B C -w/ Improvement TS 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 6.2 7.3 B B • SR-99 Fwy. NB Ramps (EW) TS 2 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1.5 0.5 1 18.6 24.3 C C • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvement TS 2 0 1» 2 0 1> 2 3 0 0 3 1> 19.1 32.3 C D -w/ Im rovement TSS 2 0 1» 2 0 1» 2 3 0 0 3 1> 11.5 16.0 B C ' When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficientwidth for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes. L = Left; T = Through; R =Right; > =Right Turn Overlap; > > =Free Right Turn; 1 =Improvement z Analysis Software: Traffix, Version 7.0.1208 (1997). s AWS =All Way Stop TS =Traffic Signal CSS =Cross Street Stop a - =Delay High, Intersection Unstable, Level of Service "F". s Protected/Permitted Traffic Signal Phasing. Traffic and Circulation 4~ )N 10-100278 5.9-35 May 24, 2000 vN x-49 a0O`D i-18 oc_oqq-~~ L--442 r-u~ n_mti ~-155 N m ~--241 vn J I L x189 J (L -83 ~ (L 7 6 ~~ ~ I ~ X52 `D~`" -733 `~ r27 r 1 r3s JIL,-41 J I 1 aJ l l (' 14-' ~ I~ 45J l l (~ 65-' l l 6sJ 1 1 (" 2015- ~~ (- 1 s-~ l l 882- rnv~ 299- cono 147Q- vvn 445--i NO 1506- NNV 1-~ c~ 609- co•- 19-i conk 9-~. vcoc~ 1 --i ~m om 47-~ co N Mco oo~v L21 'n`' -246 J I L r38 COaoo '-37 18-~ (' ~ I L-457 515 l a~ g J r25 735- ~ ~ ~ KNUDSEN ~ 131-i ~ DR. vc.°-o x-14 nNN -16 J ! L r45 N RIS RD NOR IS RD. `n°mQ.- c-24 259--' ~ ~ ~ 'Q 6 ~ J `I `~ X536 190-1 r~nN F ~ 254-' Ts O 2g9- l ~ ~ '1! ~_ - 313-i ; n <c.-.- '-20 OLIVE DR. > NV -118 LLI J I J r8 w S,T oovN c--53 -19 335 ~ ~ r OZ Q ~® q~~'QO 12 L r-22 Q ~ ~~~- 414--s 1 ~ r a LL ~ rn~M ~-;3 HAGEMA RD. ___T~% ~ I L r-15 ~ ^9L ~~ccj, ~nNN ~1 1z-~ l I [- KREBS RD. F~ s~. JIL,-1~s ~~ oNN ~ BRIlZq~ `S'QL '9TH 289_; MEANY AVE - ~~ RIO J 163- 1 N r o ~ MIRADA /j v DOWNING j Q GILMOR j DR. corn ~ v~i AVE. NtD ~ 58-i l~ Z ~ OU p BUCK J L'-1141 ~'N ~ ~ ~ m OWENS BLVD. 255 ~' , 700=' 1 r a ROSEDALE {SR-58) ~ ~ O ~m HWY. Mom 3 JIL~i ~ ,626~~ir o Q NNN ~-188 ~M JiLr552 99J ~ I (- ~2 vch co N ~p amo~i 14 58 n~~ ~-•- -1020 Nv x-66 N -1011 MN X740 J I L ras J L -sae Jgg~ L r42 3J L -1242 1821 l ~ ~ 17 0~ 17~~ l N~ 1659-~ l~r CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~' Q Opening Year Without Project Not to Scale A.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ~~~ `7ZobertBeirt,~lliam ~Frbst ~~ssociates Exftlblt 5.9-22 1( i~ ovoo ~N ia~oo2~a ~. N~ x-121 n~`+~ ~-fi0 mrn~ X87 ~~ wNCh x-495 a~DN~O ~-116 ~'~°' -1071 v 295 n.-.- -1515 `~""~ 1501 2242 nc~i JILr281 JILTr-3e JILr113 JI JIL,--a3a JlLr-a1 JI 23-' 19-~ 77-J 40J 1059- env 1720 N 1485r ~~ l l (" ~ I I~ 1058- l r 307r ~~ ~ I r ~ ~~ l l 577- rnrn~ 175- u~ncn 57--, vow 57-~ naor~ 15~ '-ten oQr~ 128r N•-~ c+~ cpt+) N°oo ~-732 J I L r2oa °~~~ x-23 ~1O' -804 31-~ r-24 4,a~~~r JIL ~4~- ~ i r KNUDSEN ~ ~~ tO~`~ DR. '- ~av L2~ J I L r9 N RIS RD NOR IS RD. coo x-48 ~ N°°`n -426 268=' l i d ~ e o JIL r7 113- n~~ F ~ 174-' psi(, ~ 219x_ ~~r N_con X38 OLIVE DR. > -332 ui J ~~ r20 Q s MN~ ~-171 269 ~ ~ T'9T~ J I L r22 356 ~ ~~ ' O Q O NM00 ~ i® R 13J ~ I r a ~ '~~' 350-1 M~N n~cnp x-318 HAGEMA RD. ___T~/~ JIL. r89 ; ,9` ~0~.~ NNaO ~'S2 24-' ~ I ~ KREBS RD. FMS, S~. ~ I L x406 1- MNO 6r ~~~ ~ BRITZgN~ '4?~~ TF 180--~ MEANY AVE t O RIO J 134-1 ~ I r ~ MIRADA j ~ DOWNING j o GILMORE. j DR. ~' AVE. - ~~ saw M~ Z ~ ° o BucK J L~isoz Qn o ~, ~ z m OWENS BLVD. 331J ~ (- i 1097- ~a ROSEDALE (SR-58) ~ g c~ ~'~ HWY. ~ ' ~~~ -1734 Y . ILr14 ~ Y 32-' o ~ 105~~ ~ ~ r ~ nr~oco ~-520 JIL~6s191 1035r l ~+'O~' I-2070 'n`° X28 "'a'`~ ~--3 74 Nc~' ~-1325 J gI L raj gJ L -202o Jgg~~I L T-4~ J L -1706 1562 ~~ r 1657-~ 1663 l ~ r 1004-i r ~ ;~r i 1 Not to Scale '~.~ `7ZobeRBei~,`William `Frost ld.eJlssociates j 02/00 JN 10-100278 t~ CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Opening Year With Project P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes Exhibit 5.9-23 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Fruitvale Avenue (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Mohawk Street (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Landco Road (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) SR-99 Freeway SB Ramps (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Buck Owens Boulevard (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) For Opening Year without project traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at acceptable Levels of Service. during the peak hours, with improvements. Level of Service at Opening_Year With Project. Intersection levels of service for the Opening Year network with the project are shown in Table 5.9-9, Intersection Analysis for Opening Year with Project Conditions. Table 5.9-9 shows HCM calculations based on the geometries at the intersections without and with improvements. Opening Year with project HCM calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix F, Calculation of Intersection Level of Service -Opening Year With Project, of Appendix 15.8, Traffic Impact Study). Opening Year with project AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits 5.9-24, Opening Year with ProjectAM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes, and 5.9-25, Opening Year with Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes, respectively. As shown in Table 5.9-9, the fol lowing study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service "D" or worse during the peak hours, without improvements: Fruitvale Avenue (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Mohawk Street (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Landco Road (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Knudsen Drive (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) )N 10-100278 5.9-38 i M 1 1 1 1 ;~ . ~, 1 1~~, -~, ~. Traffic and Circulation May 24, 2000 1 A n 1 1 1 ~~I s. ~, i, GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.9-9 Intersection Analysis for Opening Year with Project Conditions ` - Intersection Approach Lanes North- South- East- West- Delay 'Level of Intersection Traffic t l' C Bound Bound Bound Bound (Secs.) Se rvice on ro L T R L T R L T, R L T R AM RM AM PM Patton Wy. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvements AWS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 5.6 12.0 B C -w/ Improvements TS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 6.6 5.6 B B • Hageman Rd. (EW) -w!o Improvements AWS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 3.4 6.8 A B -w/ Improvements TS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 6.3 5.7 B B • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) CSS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 1.4 5.6 A B Fruitvale Ave. (NS) at: • Norris Rd. (EW) TS 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13.5 13.3 B B • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 22.1 29.0 C D -w/ Improvements TS 1 2 1> 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 18.4 21.6 C C • Hageman Rd. (EW) TS 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 15.2 16.6 C C • Krebs Rd. (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 2.8 2.9 A A -w/ improvements TS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 5.7 4.4 B A • Downing Ave. (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1.2 2.4 A A -w/ Improvements TS 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4.5 5.1 A B • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 35.8 38.7 D D -w/ Improvement TS 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 21.3 23.8 C C Mohawk St. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 4.5 57.6 A F -w/ Improvement TS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 11.4 17.2 B C Victor St. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) TS 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 14.7 16.1 B C Landco Rd. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 2 1 -° 8.8 F B -w/ Improvement TSS 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 2 1 14.2 8.7 B B Knudsen Dr. (NS) at: • Norris Rd. (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0. 0 0 3.5 3.4 A A -w/ Improvements TS 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 6.5 7.7 B B • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvement TS 1 1 1 1.5 0.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 32.0 37.5 D D -w/ Improvement TS 1 1 1> 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 24.0 23.4 C C Gibson St. (NS) at: I - R- Traffic and Circulation )N 1 0-1 002 78 5.9-39 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.9-9 Intersection Analysis for Opening Year with Project Conditions (continued) Intersection Ap proach'Lanes z - North- South- ' East- West- Delay Level of tio Int Traffic Bound Bound Bound Bound ''(Secs:) Service. n ersec Control' - L T, R L T R L = T R L T R AM PM AM PM ' SR-99 Fwy. SB Ramps (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) CSS 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 2 1» 64.7 -- F F -w/o Improvement TS 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 2 1» 5.9 6.5 B B -w/ Improvements • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) TS 0 0 0 1.5 0 0.5 0 3 1» 0 3 1» 8.7 7.0 B B State Rd. (NS) at: • SR-99 Fwy. NB Ramps (EW) CSS 0 1 0 0 1 1» 1 0 1» 0 0 0 2.2 2.1 A A • Olive Dr. (EW) TS 1 1 0 1 1 1» 1 2 1 1 2 1 23.8 24.6 C C Roberts Ln. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) TS 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 16.6 18.2 C C Buck Owens Blvd. (NS) at: • Rio Mirada Dr. (EW) AWS 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 7.7 11.4 B C -w/o Improvement -w/Improvement TS 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 6.2 7.3 B B • SR-99 Fwy. NB Ramps (EW) TS 2 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1.5 0.5 1 18.6 24.4 C C • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvement TS 2 0 1» 2 0 1> 2 3 0 0 3 1> 19.5 37.8 C D -w/ Im rovement TS 2 0 1» 2 0 1» 2 3 0 0 3 1> 11.6 16.7 B C ' When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes. L = Left; T = Through; R =Right; > =Right Turn Overlap; > > =Free Right Turn; 1 =Improvement z Analysis Software: Traffix, Version 7.0.1208 (1997). a AWS =All Way Stop TS =Traffic Signal CSS =Cross Street Stop ' - =Delay High, Intersection Unstable, Level of Service "F". s Protected/Permitted Traffic Signal Phasing. Traffic and Circulation JN 10-100278 5.9-40 May 24, 2000 ~+ x--52 ~ `18 oc~+- x--42 ~n nao°' x-155 c~ ao x--241 vn nn~ 317 ~ B ~W -672 °' rv -6 °f'-'N -816 ra JIl~1as JI~r-2~i ~I~r-71 JI ~ILr1~~ JILra1 JI 18-~ l l f 1a-' l 1 f 45J l l f 65-' l l 6 l l f 222x- ~~ f 1~ ~~ 891- covr- 2~9- m•-o 149- ~r~ 445-t cvo 150 - cocvm 1~ r~ 66 -~ ~c '~~ t00~ '1 QWC7 1 ~ ~r(p ODD 7 1 ~ N NO cow ~--2g1 J I L x381 om~ +-37 ~~ ~ 56 18--i 535~~{r J ~~ ~,31I~ KNUDSEN ~ ~,~ DR. ~g ^~ 29 J (~ r74 N RIS RD NO IS RD. `n_°c~cgce~ x--24 259J l l f 'Q o ~:1 L X55 195-i ~``o°-'v e ~ 2 J N C• cc•-r- x-20 OLIVE DR. > wv -145 w J I ~, r8 a aooo x-53 88 S'~, aocvc~ -19 323- ~~ r Z Q ~ '9TF J I L r22 35r ~~ O Z ~® 'QO 12-J l l f Q ~ ~ J ~ ~ 414- o'~NN d LL ~ OWN X70 ' _1 RAGE RD. ___T~/ J ~ ~ x143 ~ ,9 <O~. nr- ~-5 1 ;J ~ ~ (~ KREBS RD. ~ BRI~~q~`~~ ~sT~9 ~ ' '- x129 7-i NQ ; .~Y~ s'Qc'pQ TF '188-~ gg-~Ir MEANY AVE t O RIO J 1 Q9- N v~ ~ MIRADA ~~~ no j ttj DR. DOWNING ~ o GILMOR ~ ~ ~ ~- AVE. N~ `379 51-~ ~ I Z i ~ p BUCK gJ ~ -1148 `~'~~' ~ ~ z m OWENS BLVD. 174_' ~ (~ a ROSEDALE (SR-58) ~ g c7 iam HWY. ~ g ~raD -749 Y Jl~r-7 ¢ ~ 1sis~ l i ~ o a ~NM ~22s J ~~ r51s2 1498-, l± r J I L r-4~61 J L x-66 °0 N 1047 `''~' L740 51-~ ~~ 55 -1026 J { ~ r-42 g J ~ -1278 1942-~ ~ ~~ 1819J 1823 ~c~vc(~v r 1745-i 21-1 Not to Scale `Robert Beit~,`William `FYost ~eJ1` ssociates 1 02/00 JN 10-700278 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Opening Year With Project A.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes Exhibit 5.9-24 c~~tco '-121 ti~`7~ x-60 aornr x-87 ~v mNC~ x-495 mNm X116 ~''°' -1071 -295 ~`~" -1515 t°`~`° 1501 2242 ~` JILT-2s1 ~I~r38 JILr113 JI JILr-434 JILT-41 JI 23J a l f 19J l i f n_' l l f 40J l l 63J l l f »20- l~ f ~1-' l l 577- rn•- 175- ux~M 1058- ~~ 307-i rxh 1059- ,~n~ 1~ N o 14 5-~ ~n~c 57~ ~o~ 57-7 r`com 15-~ .-.-n d~ 128 ~ ~ M 7oc~ NrOD '_-9632 J I L x208 ~~ L-2 31 ~'llf JIL~~Z~ 478- 7`')Nf~ KNUDSEN ~ `' a,~ DR. n~r> `-28 j ~ ~ X92 N RIS RD NOR IS RD. ~mo x-48 NaDtf1 213-'~If ~ o JILT-its 66- COwN e 113-7 ~~~ ~ 174- T`r ,), ~ 19-7 ~ r NQf` x-38 OLIVE DR. > ~Q -332 ui J I L r20 Q MN~ ~-171 2ss~ l l f ~ , srgT J I L ~2~ 7 cccc*- a¢ ~ ~J-- 350 ~nN u~. ~~~- x--38 HAGEMA RD. /~ -1 J I r89 - - - -1- ~ ~9L <O~ gN~m;~ao X23 24-_' l l f KREBS RD. ~ FrS, 4'S~. ~ I L r~406 6-7 ~~ I BRITLgN ~Q '9l F 1~-~~If ~ 'Po ~~ MEANY AVE ! RIO 134- r~NivN ~ MIRADA co ~ j i DOWNING i Q GILMOR j DR. ~~ ON ~ AVE. `~'~ 94-i ~ ~ z i ~ pU p BUCK ~ ~ 1702 ~~ ~ ~ z m OWENS BLVD. 1097-J ~ f a ROSEDALE (SR-58) ~ g C7 N N x-21 FiWY. JIL,-ia~ ~ 32J O 1052 ~ r ~ ~~m° X1519 JILrSs 21~ ~ I ~1 No rn ro ~-3 1os - ~, •- g 35~ CDB~*°' J! L 7-a~70 J L `-2020 JIL,-a~74 ~ L Liio~ a3J l l f 1s-' sa-' 1 I f ppg~s- 1562 ~~~ 1657- 161643 ~e~ 004- ,~~ CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Q Opening Year With Project NotcOsca-e P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ~' ~ `Robert `Beir~,~/liam `FYost 6Z~lssociates EXI'llblf 5.9-25 02/00 JN 70-100278 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~'~ SR-99 Freeway SB Ramps (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Buck Owens Boulevard (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Need for Improvements Off-Site. Off-site improvements would be required adjacent to the project site, and in conjunction with project development, in order to achieve the required levels of service at the following roadways (refer to mitigation measures for improvement details): • Krebs Road • Mohawk Street • Landco Road ~, Hageman Road For Opening Year with project traffic conditions, the study area intersections are ~~ projected to operate at acceptable Levels of Service during the peak hours, with improvements (refer to Table 5.9-9). Therefore, implementation of the specified mitigation measures would reduce the project's impacts under Opening Year traffic !- conditions to a less than significant level. PROJECTED TRAFFIC AND CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS -YEAR 2020 5.9-2 Project implementation may cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the Year 2020 traffic load and capacity of the street system and may - exceed an established LOS standard. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Implementation of recommended mitigation measures would reduce ~, potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level. ;~ Overall Study Area Traffic Trip Distribution. Future network trip distributions for the project have been based ;~ upon those highway facilities which are contemplated to be in place for Year 2020. The trip distribution patterns forthe project are graphically depicted on Exhibits 5.0-26, Year 2020 Project TAZ 1 Trip Distribution, 5.9-27, Year 2020 Project TAZ 2 Trip Distribution, and 5.9-28, Year 2020 Project TAZ 3 Trip Distribution. Trip Assignment. Based on the identified project traffic generation and Year 2020 distributions, Year 2020 project related ADT volumes are shown on Exhibit 5.9-29, Year 2020 Project Average Daily Traffic (ADT). Year 2020 project AM and PM peak _- hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits 5.9-30, Year 2020 `~ ProjectAM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes, and 5.9-31, Year 2020 Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes, respectively. -~~ Traffic and Circulation `~ JN 10-100278 5.9-43 May 24, 2000 ,' ~S NUDSEN R. MORRIS R0. MORRIS RD. ~ O o ~ AF 'QT ~ tr O R, ~ p0 10 U ,y .. ~ 25 10 S~. O Q ~ ~- , j ' ~~F ® 'QO !~ ~ `~ ~ ~` ~ ~ r w ~ ~- ~ ~ --- t 5 RD. ___„~ ~ ~ i I ~ ~ N 70 ~ 30 ~ ` i ~ Q ~y S RD. c *i ~ ST. ~ BRITtq '9TH, MEANY AV j i ~O ~~J ~ MIRADA OOWNiN t ~ GILMOR ~ DR. AVE. ~ ~ N AVE. Oz ~ o ~ SILLS BUCK ~ ~ z ~ OWENS BLVD. 10 E {SR-58) ~ g ~ HWY. ~ 5 Y Q ~ ~ O LEGEND: 10 =PERCENT TO/FROM PROJECT Not to Scale ~' K~ `I~oberT `Beim. William `FYost ~. `associates ~(~~~`l o2ioo JN io•tooz` ovoo JN 10.100278 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD , GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Year 2020 Project TAZ 1 Trip Distribution Exhibit 5.9-26 ~s NUDSEN R. NORRIS RD. NORRIS RD. ~O ~ eF ~ ~ S ~ O ~~ ~ 10 Q > 10 ~ 4 N sT q F ~ o ~ % ~ '~o Q ~ ~ ~a ---- --_ a. 5 u' 10 ~ 5 --- - ~ ~o i 45 i ~O ~ ~~ KREBS R . ~ S~. ~ ~ BRITTq '9TF MEANY AVE 1 ~ ~ O J RI MIRADA DOWNING i ~ GILMOR ~ DR. AVE. ~ ~ AVE. o N ' ~ SILLS BUCK ~ m OWENS BLVD. 10 i c~ HWY. 20 E- 5 Y Q O LEGEND: 10 = PERCENT TO/FROM PROJECT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Q GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Year 2020 Project TAZ 2 Trip Distribution Not to Scale - `7ZobenBeir~,`William `FYost ~.~ssociates _ Exhibit 5.9-27 ovoo ~N ~o-iooz~e 0 NUDSEN R. NORRIS RD. NORRIS RD. ~O ~ ~ eF ~~ ~ ~ 'c' 0 O S'~ Q. ~ 5 10 20 Q ~ 5 ~, s~. O ~ SO ~ 10 a. LL' 20 ~ ~ ~ --- '~25 - ~o ~ ~ KREBS R . ~ F ~ ~5~. ' ~ BRITTq 'qT~ MEANY AV ~~ ~° ~ ~ RIO J ~ / MIRADA 5 t ~ ~ t~ DR. ~ GILMOR ~ AVE. y ~ AVE. ~ S o ~ ~ ~ ~ SILL BUCK m OWENS BLVD. 5 ~ Ham' 15 10 5 cn 5 Y Q o O LEGEND: 10 =PERCENT TOIFROM PROJECT CITY OF BAKERSFIELD , ® GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Year 2020 Project TAZ 3 Trip Distribution ~ Not to Scale ~R `7Zobeft `Beit~,`William `F,-ost ~~`]ssociates l~ 02/00 JN 10-100278 Exhibit 5.9-28 1 i~ ,~KNUDSEN~\ ~R~ NORRIS RD. 0 F- 0 'vet` 'QTS, 1.1 O v ,y a OLIVE DR. > ~ 1 1.1 ui 1.0 1.7 1.7 1.1 1.1 ¢ ~ X3.6 0 .~s T o Q ~ Q ~ ® q~~ ~ ~ ~ a --- ~ ~ ~`'. r ~ i ~ HAGEMAN RD. - I C ---T- O .1 ~ 1.7 ~ ~ ~p ~KREBS RD. j ~ '9[ , F "~ tis ~ T i BRITTgN~ s~Q~1, '9~C MEANY AVE ~ O J 1 ~ ; ~ RIO ~ i M t RADA DR DOWNING ~ GILMOR . j AVE. 0.4 ~ ~ ~ AVE. oz c ~N o ~ z O o SILLti BUCK ~ Z m OWENS BLVD. a ROSEDALE (SR-58) ~ g _ ~ 1 HWY.1.1 ~ 1.4 2.5 2.1 0 ~ . Y O LEGEND: 1.1 =VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'S) '~ Not to Scale `7~oberT Beir~,`Wil/iam `Ffost ~~` ssociates 1 03/00 JN 10-100278 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Year 2020 Project Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Exhibit 5.9-29 Not to Scale ~~g ~o6ett Beit~,`William ~F}"ost C~~` ssociates H 03/00 JN 10-100278 1 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Year 2020 Project A.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes Exhibit 5.9-30 ~--~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ X02 ~ ~~~-~ 33 l~ ~ ~b 8~ ~ 0-i ~d 81-i ~ t 0-i ~ 17-~ ~,b J I L n ~~ ~~ KNUDSE ~ DR. ~2 ^4 ~~ r1 N IS RD NO S RD s Q ~! a 4qq OLIVE DR. > J I L r-O9 Q qqQ 5~ looo z ~ ~ Tq~~ J 1 L 0-~ ~ ~ ~ , I r Q = ~~~~~~_~~~ b88 a LL ~ ~ q°D` L ~ HAGE RD. / ~ J I L r98 ----rte ~ ,q pF ~ ~ ~ KREBS RD. ~ ~ ~ tisT9 ~~ ) ~ ASR MEANY AVE ~ ~ RIO ' ~~J ~ i 1 1 MIRAD j i DOWNING ` o~ GILMOR j DR. ` ~ ~ AVE. m t~ ~I z ' U O BUCK JL r~ O ~ p ~ OWENS BLVD ~ ~ ~ m s - ?~ a ROSEDALE (SRSB) ~ O 3_ qqqq~q HWY. JIL~ ~~ ~6 ~~~ ~ ~L ,-~° J L J~ r-d28 ~ ~2a CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Q Year 2020 Project Not to Scale P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes (~~~ `I~obeYt ~Beirt,`WWrlliam ~Fi'ost C.a ~`lssociates EX~llblt 5.9-31 i 03/00 JN 10-100278 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR '~ Based on the identified project traffic generation and Year 2020 distributions, Year 2020 project related ADT volumes are shown on Exhibit 5.9-29, Year 2020 Project Average Daily Traffic (ADT). Year 2020 project AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits 5.9-30,Year 2020 ProjectAM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes, and 5.9-31, Year 2020 Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes, respectively. Other Development Traffic ~„ Method of Projection. The Kern Council of Governments (COG) EMME2 traffic ~•' simulation model data was utilized for the assessment of Year 2020. The assignment of traffic to the future network using computer modeling allows for the interaction of trips between existing and future land uses assumed under future conditions on the street system with the proposed land uses in the study area. As portions of the street system become congested, travel patterns can change as drivers modify their travel route in order to avoid delays in the high volume areas. Because the Kern COG traffic simulation model data is limited to daily traffic projections for Year 2020, peak hour intersection analysis has been performed within the study area based upon a rigorous refinement process that provides traffic volume forecasts which exhibit an even distribution of growth and a minimum level of growth for each individual movement which is considered reasonable. It is, therefore, necessary to carefully review raw model outputs, using actual existing count data for both peak hour and daily conditions. This review has been conducted and the raw - numbers have been refined using the procedure described below. The data requirements ofthis procedure include existing peak hour count data, existing conditions ADT volumes, and future conditions (forecast) model ADT volumes. Two specific tests~were developed to achieve the development of future peak hour turning movement forecasts which are reasonable. The first test was for the traffic projections l to exhibit a pattern of increases consistent with the continued growth of City of Bakersfield communities. The second test involved review of the relationship between the peak hour volumes and the daily traffic volume forecasts. The peak hour intersection turning movement forecasts should represent an acceptable proportion of ~ the overall forecast average daily traffic volumes. ~ Total Traffic Exhibit 5.9-32, Year 2020 Without ProjectAverage Daily Traffic (ADT), shows the ADT volumes which can be expected for Year 2020 without project traffic conditions. ~,- Volume to capacity ratios on study area roadways for Year 2020 without project traffic conditions are shown on Exhibit 5.9-33,Year 2020 Without Project Volume to Capacity Ratios. For Year 2020 without project traffic conditions, the intersection of Mohawk Street/RosedaleRighway - SR-58 is projected to warrant a traffic signal (see Appendix ~~ D••). Traffic and Circulation )N 10-100278 5.9-50 May 24, 2000 NORRIS 33.0 z O N rr ti a 1 8.5 ri r- 29.2 ~i a 38.3 rn O N U 'n 36.1 37 NORRIS RD. 0 O s~ 19.3 a 50.3 21.8 ~ ao .2 •~ i Q ~\ ~~ ~ i®__ _ ~ ~'~~ 27.0 LL~ ~ ~ HAGEMAN RD. ~/ ~ 39.1 r.. 42.7 ' i' ~ v ~o ~ KREBS RD. ~ ~ ~ ~ti 5~ ~ ~ .~ 0.7 ' ~ ~ rS 'Q, ~. MEANY AVE ~~ i ~ 38.1 ~~ ~ a 1 ~ MIRADA DOWNING ~ t ~ GI LMO ~ DR. AVE. 3.5 ~ ~ ~ AVE. ~ Z ~ I d? UO °'? p a 36.5 ~ SILL~G ~ ' BUCK ~, ~c i ~ ~ N m ~ ~ OWENS BLVD. a ROSEDALE (SR~B) ~ O ~ 54.7 MNY.58.3 N 70.2 70.1 64.3 73 4 a ~v g ~; ~ LEGEND: 54.7 =VEHICLES PER DAY (1000'S) Not to Scale ~~ `ILo6eft ~Beit~,~lliam `Ffost ~.cJl` ssociates l 03/00 JN 10-100278 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Year 2020 Without Project Avera;~e Daily Traffic (ADT) Exhibit 5.9-32 NORRIS RD ao 0 OLIVE D B3 0.73 3 0 N IF--- O a HAGEM~ 65 0 0. MEANY A' r- u~ N o "~.O o~- U NORRIS RD. ui 0.91 0.90 0. t .e Q v ~ ~ .92~C{~ '~~ 0 0 ' w~o ~~ __ _ ~ ~'(~ ^ 0.68 LL o ~ 1 J RD. _ _ ..r • ~ ~ 0.71 ~ ~ aKREEIS RD. ~ ~ c~ DOWNING ~ i ~ ~ r ~ 0, ~ i 0. i ~ ~ ~ GILMC ~ ~ v~i AVE O ZO o_ o cit~ ~ $ V ~ co o Z m ^ 0.91. ~ o ~o ~ o a ROSEDALE (SR~8) ~ ~ 0.91 HWY.0.97 ~ 0.88 0.88 ~ 0.80 ao N ~ ~ ° ~ g o LEGEND: RIO MIRADA DR. ' ~ BUCK OWENS BLVD. 0.91 ~ VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIOS Not to Scale ~~g ~oberT ~Bein.`William `Ffost ~~ssociates ~(~'~ 03/00 JN 70-100278 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ;~ Year 2020 Without Project Volume to Capacity Ratios ~~ Exhibit 5.9-33 ~i 0.55 ~' GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Exhibit 5.9-34, Year 2020 with Project Average Daily Traffic (ADT), shows the ADT volumes which can be expected for Year 2020 with project traffic conditions. Volume to capacity ratios on study area roadways for Year 2020 with project traffic conditions are shown Exhibit 5.9-35, Year 2020 with Project Volume to Capacity Ratios. Capacity and Level of Service and Improvement Analysis, Year 2020 Level of Service at Year 2020 Without Project. Intersection levels of service for the Year 2020 network without the project are shown in Table 5.9-10, Intersection Analysis for Year 2020 Without Project Conditions. Table 5.9-10 shows HCM calculations based on the geometrics at the intersections without and with improvements. Year 2020 without project HCM calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix G, Calculation of Intersection Level of Service -Year 2020 Without Project, of Appendix 15.8, Traffic Impact Study). Year 2020 without project AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits 5.9-36, Year 2020 Without Project AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes, and 5.9-37, Year 2020 Without Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes„ respectively. As shown in Table 5.9-10, the following study area intersections are projected to ~ operate at Level of Service "D" or worse during the peak hours, without improvements: Patton Way (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Hageman Road (EW) Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Fruitvale Avenue (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Hageman Road (EW) Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Mohawk Street (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Landco Road (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) ` ~ Knudsen Drive (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) ~! Gibson Street (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) JN 1 0-1 002 78 5.9-53 Traffic and Circulation May 24, 2000 NORRIS RD ~ci 34.1 30.3 O N rr ~ Q a HAGE~ 40.2 0. v MEANY A' DOWNING z 0 ~ ~~ a '~ 12.5\ NORRIS RD. 8.5 ~ ~ O~ U `n ~ 37.3 37.8 39.1 r ~1.4 22.9 8.8 •? '~a,T q i ~~ _ __ ~'(~ 28.5 ` m r ~ ~ ~ ~ RD. ~ ~ ~ ,~ _ 44.4 "T ~ ~KREBS RD. j ~ i ~ ~ 8.3 ~ - 31.1 w vi i ~ 1 . - ~ - GILMORI ~ ~ ~ AVE. I~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ z N ~ N ~ 36.5 M ~ ~ ~ ~ (SR-58) ~ O ~ 71.6 72.6 66.4 to o N ~ Sri ~ ~ ~ O ,~ RIO MIRADA DR. SILLS~"~ ~~\ gUCK ,_ OWENS BLVD. CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Q Year 2020 With Project Not to Scale Average Daily Traffic (ADT) ~obert Beir~,`William `Frost C.~~lssociates EXlllbltf 5.9-34 03/00 JN 10-100278 t ~R: Z N O a 0.67 NORRIS RD. NORRIS RD 0.56 0.57 ~ 'Q06 °r° c ~o o)s'Qjs 0.68 ° o~ U ~ OLIVE DR. > 0.76 w 0.93 0.95 0.9 .86 0.5T Q v c ~ .98~C{Q '~S, 0~ ~ ° ° T,~ ~ ~ ~'~o ~®_ ___ ~';~ _ 0.71 -- LLo ~ ~ HAGEMAN RD. _ ~/ 0.74 ~T ~ "• O~v 0 MEANY AVE DOWNING AV O~ o a ROS 0.93 HV1 ~ ~ ~ ~KREBS RD. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i O.R ~ i 0.7 ~ ~ 1 o ~ ~ ~ ~ GILMOF ~ ~ AVE. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ U~ ~~ 0.91 c ~° ~ o m o (SR~B) ~ ~ O 0.90 0.91 ~ 0.83 ~ ~C ~ o N 3 ~ ~ C O RIO MIRADA DR. ~ BUCK OWENS BLVD. LEGEND: 0.93 =VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIOS CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Q ~ Year 2020 With Project Not to Scale Volume to Capacity Ratios (iRg `I~obeft `Beit~,~lliam `Ffost ~~ssociates EXlliblt 5.9-35 ~( f"~ 03/00 JN 10-100278 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.9-10 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR YEAR 2020 WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITIONS Intersection Approach Lanes North- South- ' East- West- Del ay2 Level of Traffic Bound Bound Bound Bound (Secs,) Service Intersection ' Control L T` R L T R L ` T R L T° R AM FM AM : PM' Patton Wy. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvements AWS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 15.3 54.6 C F -w/ Improvements TS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 10.1 11.8 B B • Hageman Rd. (EW) -w/o Improvements AWS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 88.2 -° F F -w/ Improvements TS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 2 3 0 1 3 0 12.5 20.4 B C • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 46.5 -- F F -w/ Improvements TS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 15.9 20.9 C C Fruitvale Ave. (NS) at: • Norris Rd. (EW) TS 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14.1 14.4 B B • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 -- 41.4 F E -w/ Improvements TS 1 2 1> 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 22.4 18.0 C C • Hageman Rd. (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 28.9 -- D F -w/ Improvements TS 2 2 1> 2 2 1> 2 3 1 2 3 1 22.8 24.6 C C • Krebs Rd. (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0.5 0.7 A A -w/ Improvements TS 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 4.5 4.5 A A • Downing Ave. (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1.3 1.9 A A -w/ Improvements TS 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4.7 5.8 A B • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 -- -- F F -w/ Improvements TS 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 23.2 21.6 C C Mohawk St. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 -- -- F F -w/ Improvements TS 2 3 1> 2 3 1> 2 4 1> 2 4 1> 23.8 21.7 C C Victor St. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. EW TS 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 18.4 19.4 C C Landco Rd. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 2 1 -- -- F F -w/ Improvements TS 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 4 0 0 4 0 13.9 13.9 B B Knudsen Dr. (NS) at: • Norris Rd. (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 4.5 4.8 A A -w/ Improvements TS 1.5 0.5 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 16.9 15.1 C C • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 1 1 1 1.5 0.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 95.4 49.9 F E -w/ Improvements TS 2 1 1> 2 1 1 1 3 1 2 3 1 23.5 21.6 C C SR-99 Fwy. SB Ramps (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvement CSS 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 2 1» 64.7 -- F F -w/ Improvements TS 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 2 1» 5.9 6.5 B B » » Traffic and Circulation ~ ~ JN 10-100278 5.9-56 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.9-10 INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR YEAR 2020 WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITIONS (~nntinuedl Intersection Approach Lanes North- South- East• West- Del ayZ Lev el of Intersection Traffic Bound Bound Bound Bound (Se cs.) Service. Control' L 'T R L T R -, _'L T R- L T R "`AM PM" AM PM State Rd. (NS) at: • SR-99 Fwy. NB Ramps (EW) CSS 0 1 0 0 1 1» 1 0 1» 0 0 0 2.2 2.1 A A • Olive Dr. (EW) TS 1 1 0 1 1 1» 1 2 1 1 2 1 23.8 24.6 C C Roberts Ln. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) TS 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 16.6 18.2 C C Buck Owens Blvd. (NS) at: • Rio Mirada Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvement AWS 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 7.7 11.4 B C -w/ Improvement TS 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 6.2 7.3 B B • SR-99 Fwy. NB Ramps (EW) TS 2 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1.5 0.5 1 18.6 24.4 C C • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvement TS 2 0 1» 2 0 1> 2 3 0 0 3 1> 19.5 37.8 C D -w/ Im rovement TS 2 0 1» 2 0 1» 2 3 0 0 3 1> 11.6 16.7 B C ' When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes. L = Left; T = Through; R =Right; > =Right Turn Overlap; > > =Free Right Turn; 1 =Improvement Z Analysis Software: Traffix, Version 7.0.1208 (1997). 3 AWS =All Way Stop TS =Traffic Signal CSS =Cross Street Stop a - =Delay High, Intersection Unstable, Level of Service "F". Traffic and Circulation JN 10-100278 5.9-57 May 24, 2000 J I L r-a JAI J Lr-~Za~ JIL~~ ~~LS JI JILL ~~ 55-~~ir gg ~-~ ~~~~ r ~g~J~I sir 2487-~Ir ~~~I 112-, nr)rn 1~~ , - 1-i ~~. ,Q?~-- -, r..-~ s u,~~ ~ Sac 5a---~ ~ 14ef--i ~~ `~ ~- T ~~3 9a'J~1r ~~3 ~~N ~ ~ , I r KNUDSEN 115 ~ "'~~°' 1 J I L ~2~~ N RIS RD NO S RD ;~~,,,~, ,~1 ~r~~r~c{~~ ~ J l ~~ R e - o Jc~'.I-'BLS -3~?8 /y ~ O f~V1~e- ~~ ~--6t OLIVE DR. > JIL z~2 a ~ w > ST JILL ,'z~~~ir o ~ ~® q Ro ='~ir fMVN . Q. LL ~ t ry '-13 RAGE RD. _ _ /~ ~ g I L r-15 r ~' ~ ~ lO~~' ~~ ~6 13-~ ~ I r KREBS RD. i ~~ Sp J L r 2 8~ rNN I i BRITZgN SR q~ _ ~ I r MEANY AVE i ~ ~O ~J 1 ~, i 1 MIRADA 1T DOWNING i pj ui DR. GILMOR ~ ~ N AVE. '~`D 4~J ~ i z I ° o BucK J L `=~~2t ; s -, ~~ o c-~ ~ Z m OWENS BLVD. 327J 1 ~ ~ g 2561- o, a ROSEDALE (SR-58) ~ c7 c a HWY. ~[ L rjp43 Q 1 O 26 fir ~;_, J t-14 L ,-1 2a~~ ^~° J I L ~s J L ~-i g~s JIL -s J L ~-i ~o 2~~ , zs~~ 2i ~ ~ 2~~ Not to Scale `I~obett `Bein,`William `F~ost 1,8Z~1ssociates • 03/00 JN 70-100278 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Year 2020 Without Project A.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes Exhibit 5.9-36 n JAI L r-3~" J I L,-g84 J I L r-~&i" JAI ~ I ~$~5 J I L ~-4~~' ~ -' l i d 1~~J ~ 1 ~ 12~ l~~ 4~~ 1 1 1ZOiJ l l~ 1s7~~ ~ 133a~ ~cN~` 132- ~vr- 41--~ ~vi~ ~m 2481 v~no~ r~ ((~~~~ N•-N N~-O ~-- 3 I L r~~57 NWCO 3 7~~ ~ pI ~r ~ ~ 524 1 N~XD ~ ' KNUDSEN ~ ~~o ~p p DR. 1nNM "~0/1 55J I L r88 N RIS RD NO IS RD ~~ 295r l r 'Q 9~. ~ ~ I l r19 S ~ ~ ~ ~ ti ~ ~ ^~ Noo L11G OLIVE DR. > J ' ` '-so'j8 Q qq~~~.+ ~~8 t 62~-J ~ ~ r w ~ srq J! L r--dd ~ ,(----- a LL /, ~ T -~ ~ ~ RAGE RD. /~ ~ 2~J ~ ~ r KREBS RD. I ~ ELF ~Fti ~. J I L 9 ~s S 7~ ~M~ ~ ~ ~N '~ ~ ~ MEANY AVE ~ ~ 'P~ RIO f ~ l~vx' r o - ~ MIRADA ~~ DOWNING j j ki DR. GILMOR ~ t ~ F AVE. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L 2 7 t ~~ , I z ~ ~ O BUCK q J L -2528 "'~n ~ j ~ m OWENS BLVD 1606- a ROSEDALE (SR-58) ~ O tim _ HWY. I L r-~ss' s ~~ ~ ~~~ ~-4 ~ ~~~ _ ~~~ ~ I r ~ 1~ ~ ~ 2 2a~~ ~~ '~o~--, CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Q Year 2020 Without Project Not to Scale P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes `7Zo6ett ~Beitt,`William ~Fi'ost G8Z~lssociates EX~11bIt 5.9-37 1 03/00 JN 1 0-7 002 78 RAM EIR GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROG NS ) at: SR-99 Freeway SB Ramps ( Olive Drive (EW) Roberts Lane (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Buck Owens Boulevard (NS) at: Rio Mirada Drive (EW) SR-99 Freeway NB Ramps (EW) Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) For Year 2020 without project traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at acceptable Levels of Service during the peak hours, with improvements. Level of Service at Year 2020 With Project. Intersection levels of service for the Year 2020 network with the project are shown in Table 5.9-11, Intersection Analysis for Year 2020 with Project Conditions. Table 5.9-11 shows HCM calculations based on . the geometrics at the intersections without and with improvements. Year 2020 with project HCM calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix H, Calculation of D Intersection Level of Service-Year 2020 With Project,. of Appendix 15.8, Trafficlmpact Study). Year 2020 with project AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibits 5.9-38, Year 2020 With Project AM Peak Hour O Intersection Volumes, and 5.9-39, Year 2020 With Project PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes, respectively. ,n As shown in Table 5.9-11, the following study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service "D" or worse during the peak hours, without improvements: Patton Way (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) a Hageman Road (EW) , Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Fruitvale Avenue (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Hageman Road (EW) Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Mohawk Street (NS) at: a Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) - Victor Street (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) JN 10-100278 5 9-60 Traffic and Circulation M 24 2000 . ay , GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.9-11 Intersection Analysis for Year 2020 with Project Conditions IntersectionAipproach Lanes North- South- East- West- Del ay2 Lev el of Traffic Bound `B ound Bound Bound (Secs.) Service Intersection ' Control L T R L_, T R L T R L T R AM PM AM PM Patton Wy. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvements AWS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 16.0 59.5 C F -w/ Improvements TS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 10.1 12.3 B B • Hageman Rd. (EW) -w/o Improvements AWS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 91.2 -" F F -w/ Improvements TS 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 1 2 3 0 1 3 0 12.6 21.1 B C • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 53.1 -- F F -w/ Improvements TS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 16.8 24.0 C C Fruitvale Ave. (NS) at: • Norris Rd. (EW) TS 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14.2 14.5 B B • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 -- 44.6 F E -w/ Improvements TS 1 2 1> 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 23.7 18.7 C C • Hageman Rd. (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 30.2 -- D F -w/ Improvements TS 2 2 1> 2 2 1> 2 3 1 2 3 1 23.0 25.0 C C • Krebs Rd. (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1.2 1.5 A A -w/ Improvements TS 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 4.9 4.7 A A • Downing Ave. (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1.4 2.5 A A -w/ Improvements TS 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4.7 6.0 A B • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 -- -- F F -w/ Improvements TS 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 3 1 1 3 1 23.9 21.6 C C Mohawk St. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 -- -- F F -w/ Improvements TS 2 3 1> 2 3 1> 2 4 1> 2 4 1> 24.1 23.5 C C Victor St. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. EW TS 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 18.9 20.6 C C Landco Rd. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 2 1 -- -- F F -w/Improvements TS 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 4 0 0 4 0 15.6 16.7 C C Knudsen Dr. (NS) at: • Norris Rd. (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 4.5 4.8 A A -w/ Improvements TS 1.5 0.5 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 16.9 15.1 C C • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 1 1 1 1.5 0.5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 -- -- F F -w/ Improvements TS 2 1 1> 2 1 1 1 3 1 2 3 1 24.9 22.9 C C Traffic and Circulation ' JN 10-100278 5.9-61 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.9-11 Intersection Analysis for Year 2020 with Project Conditions (continued) Intersection Approach Lanes North- South=' " East- ' West _ Del ay2 Lev el of Intersection .Traffic ' Bound Bound Bound Boun d - (Se cs:) Service Control' ' L . T; ' R _L T R L T R L T R AM PM AM> PM Gibson St. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 -- -- F F -w/ Improvements TS 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 4 0 1 4 0 14.2 14.6 B B SR-99 Fwy. SB Ramps (NS) at: ' • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvements CSS 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 2 1» -- -- F F -w/ Improvements TS 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 3 1» 5.6 6.4 B B • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) TS 0 0 0 1.5 0 0.5 0 3 1» 0 3 1» 11.4 7.3 B B State Rd. (NS) at: • SR-99 Fwy. NB Ramps (EW) CSS 0 1 0 0 1 1» 1 0 1» 0 0 0 2.2 2.0 A A • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 1 1 0 1 1 1» 1 2 1 1 2 1 19.6 23.3 C C -w/ Improvements TS 1 1 0 1 1 1» 1 3 0 1 3 0 19.0 18.9 C C Roberts Ln. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 -- -- F F -w/ Improvements TS 2 2 0 1 2 1> 2 2 1> 1 2 1 20.7 24.9 C C Buck Owens Blvd. (NS) at: • Rio Mirada Dr. (EW) -w/o Improvements AWS 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 39.7 68.5 E F -w/ Improvements TS 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 9.2 10.4 B B • SR-99 Fwy. NB Ramps (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 2 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1.5 0.5 1 29.9 33.4 D D -w/ Improvements TS 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 23.7 24.4 C C • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) -w/o Improvements TS 2 0 1» 2 0 1> 2 3 0 0 3 1> 19.8 - C F -w/ Im rovements TS 2 0 1» 2 0 1» 2 4 0 0 4 1» 15.0 19.0 C C JN 1 0-1 002 78 Traffic and Circulation 5.9-62 May 24, 2000 X11 ~~ IL Za~ ~- 1 ~~~ ~ ~~~5 A J J I I J I L I L ,- I J 1162-J 138- ~~~ ~~~ ~ mrn - 1874-J ~_ it 601--i 54-~ l ~ 182 c~ 17 1 ~ ~~ ~,r, " 258~~ , ~ r ~ ~ i i3 .-ri N J 7 O IL ;-d9 ~ ~g ~u~N -~ ~ 1~ ~---~~ r ~ ~ N ~ 11 v " KNUDSE DR. o,~ ~N g ~O~ ~ ~ ' X245 N IS RD NO S RD ~ ~41 5 75 7- ~ I f ~ 'Q ~~ o JILT-14 285- T S ~ O ° q~J c%~d,.= BSD-- ti ~ -i ~~ r-cnN 1 OLIVE DR. ~ W T gg 129 80-, ~r> r ~N ~ i ® ~~i RO 7 I r ° ~ ~ _ a ----- ~~ CD~1N a , ~~ NON '-70 ,~ - RAGE ~ ~ RD. / ~ 13-J ~ I (~ KREBS RD. I Fl S~. ~ ~ I-162 t- 8-, t,l,N N~ MEANY AVE I I i i Il-C~ SR 9~ ~O ~/ ~ ~~ I 01--i ~ q~ DOWNING i ~ / i I GILMOR j MIRADA DR. D~ J 5p-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ AVE. ~.°, ~-g 73 ~ ~ 62 -~ ~ I ~~ z ~ I p U i o ~ z p m BUCK OWENS BLVD -1 3 gp7~ 2585- a ROSEDALE (SR58) I O '~ I L ~oe7 HWY. zs~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ JIL ~ T-~ z s ; ~ - z ~ J L ~ I L~ ~-az ^~ - 7 -15~a A I L 7 ~ L `=1~a 2 2718) 2~ 27J- ~_~ gZ 2729-~ ~ .-aom CITY OF BAKERSFIELD GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Q Year 2020 With Project Not to Scale A.M. Peak Hour~lntersection Volumes ( `f~o6er't `Beirt,`William `T'ort ~. `oJlssociates Exhibit $.9-38 03/00 JN 10-100278 J I L,--~ J I L a J --.~ L ~~~ ~ J! L r~io~5 J L ~~~s J I r~~ l I A{pr i ~~1 ,~ 1 a~9~ ~ r ai sJ-i lo, I. 1329--, l 1 s2i-, ,r ~-~; 1 s51 , ~~ NIA ~ f~~ qN.~O ~-1 33 J I L r 112651 c`ovco~ 8~~---i ~ ~~~ ,~~_ ~ I, KNUDSE ~ ~ DR. ~~ L11 I L ~~~ N RIS RD NO S RD r~r- ~ I r ~~~ ~ <~ ~ eF r ~ 1 s ti ~ ~ OLIVE DR. > r~~o,, -115 JIL,-so227 Q s ~ 8 ,z~J ~ r Z ~ ~ T~~ a LL / ; ~~ `~8 RAGE RD. __ /~ ) ~~ ~ ~ ~ KREBS RD. ~ ' ~ ~~ O~~S `~ g ~~ v~~ I ~ I /3+,Q ~,y 33gg ,,~II rr ~ ~ i ~~J ~ 22 - MEANY AVE 1 ~ m f ~ MIRADA Q~ DOWNING i ~ GILMOR ~ DR. J_ ~ ~ ~ AVE. r~~ ~ p~ 185-, l ~ Z ~ 00 O BUCK q J L -2568 k ~ ~ m OWENS BLVD 183 a ROSEDALE (SR58) ~ ~ ~ ,~ HWY. cc u`4,.-r - 05 JILT ~ 167 ~ r :f, ~~~ ~ N ~Ir ' -, ~ J 1 L,-~a~sa J L `i$~a ~ ~~~a J L ~-~~~~ 23B-~ 3 J 138 1Q~1 ~ 2d31- 2 - ~~ 1027 L u--~ ~ N CITY OF BAKERSFIELD I~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ' Q Year 2020 With Project NottOScale P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Volumes , (`~1~(~~~J~~~~7~) `l~obert `Beim, William `Ffost ~~` ssociates EX~llblif 5.9-39 1 03!00 JN 10-100278 L_.J 1 1 i,~ ~~ 1 1 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Landco Road (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Knudsen Drive (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Gibson Street (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) SR-99 Freeway SB Ramps (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Roberts Lane (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Buck Owens Boulevard (NS) at: Rio Mirada Drive (EW) SR-99 Freeway NB Ramps (EW) Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) Need For Off-Site Improvements. Under these conditions, the off-site roadway system will need to be improved to roadway classifications shown on the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan Comprehensive Circulation Plan, with augmented roadway improvements along segments of Rosedale Highway (see Exhibit 5.9-40, Circulation Recommendations). The implementation of off-site improvements shall be determined as future entitlements are granted for development in and around the project area. Table 5.9-12, Project Traffic Contribution, presents the project traffic contribution to total new traffic for Year 2020 with project traffic conditions. To facilitate the improvement of key roadway links in the study area in conjunction with area wide growth, this traffic impact analysis indicates the roadway sizing requirements for Year 2020 based upon the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Comprehensive Circulation Plan (see Exhibit 5.9-40, Circulation Recommendations). This evaluation of roadway improvement needs will provide the basis for changes to the general plan in conjunction with the project. Specific circulation recommendations are provided on Exhibit 5.9-40, Circulation Recommendations for the Year 2020; these area wide improvements will ultimately be needed with or without development of the proposed project based upon Kern COG traffic projections. As shown in Table 5.9-11, off-site improvements would be needed at study area intersections to accommodate Year 2020 with project traffic conditions. With these intersection improvements as well as the on-site and off-site improvements indicated on Exhibit 5.9-40, Circulation Recommendations, the study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service "C" or better during the peak hours for Year Traffic and Circulation ' JN 10-100278 5.9-65 May 24, 2000 2U 6'~ `~'P ~G ~~ ~KNUDSEN CDR. a G NORRIS RD. NORRIS RD. 2U 2U ~O ~ eF v ~ ~ ,2~ ~ 'Qjs` o N ~,^ 'L 4D 4D 4D ~ /4D ~D 4D 4U o ~G l' ~ QCi S Q ~ i ~ qT ~~ ~RQ 4D c ~ O ~ __ f __-~~ 40 ~ Q p ~~ 4D a ~ ~ f i ~ HAGEMAN RD. ~/ a~ ~ C _ _ _ i 2U ` O 6D 6D p 6D o ~ O ~OF~O ~ ~~ N ~ KREBS RD. ~ ~ ~ s~-qr Zv ~rS ~ F ~ 2~ BRITTgN J ~ MEANY AVE . - i p ~ ~ 2U ~ - / ~ ° ° `~ RIO ~ - MIRADA DOWNING ~ ~ - ~ GILMORE ~u' DR. ~ S 2U ~ i AVE.2U ~ o AVE. 2U 2D ~ O~ N p ' ~ ~ = v~i o p '~ G ILLS BUCK Q ' ~~ °z ~ m OWENS BLVD. ~ ROSEDALE ~ (SR-58) g _ p v N 6D HWY.6D 6D ~ 8D SD = 8D 8D Y ~+ SD o ° ~ ¢ LEGEND: ~ O ®=TRAFFIC SIGNAL ® =ALL WAY STOP -~- =STOP SIGN 4 =NUMBER OF LANES D =DIVIDED U =UNDIVIDED Not to Scale CITY OF BAKERSFIELD u ~~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Circulation Recommendations n ~~$ `Robert `Beir~,~lliam `Fi"ost Q.~1` ssociates ,(1 03/00 JN 10-100278 Exhibit 5.9-40 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.9-12 PROJECT TRAFFIC CONTRIBUTION Year 2020 Projecf Existing With Project New Project `=0f New Intersection Traffic Traffic 'Traffic_ Traffic Traffic AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Patton Wy. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) 1,213 1,753 2,177 3,161 964 1,408 63 108 6.5% 7.7% • Hageman Rd. (EW) 803 1,239 2,896 4,327 2,093 3,088 45 106 2.2% 3.4% • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) 2,338 2,651 4,079 4,670 1,741 2,019 63 108 3.6% 5.3% Fruitvale Ave. (NS) at: • Norris Rd. (EW) 743 889 1,342 1,608 599 719 36 71 6.0% 9.9% • Olive Dr. (EW) 2,039 2,616 3,405 4,299 1,366 1,683 99 180 7.2% 10.7% • Hageman Rd. (EW) 968 1,192 3,860 4,885 2,892 3,693 128 265 4.4% 7.2% • Krebs Rd. (EW) 673 881 1,058 1,290 385 409 123 189 31.9% 46.2% • Downing Ave. (EW) 807 1,013 1,066 1,365 259 352 47 86 18.1% 24.4% Mohawk St. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) 2,941 3,607 5,557 5,947 2,616 2,340 64 108 2.4% 4.6% Victor St. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) 2,779 3,334 8,768 9,170 6,291 6,268 191 305 3.0% 4.9% Landco Rd. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) 2,346 2,798 3,295 4,014 1,427 1,867 52 161 10.2% 15.5% Knudsen Dr. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) 2,687 3,379 5,812 7,090 2,679 3,347 143 287 5.3% 8.6% • Norris Rd. (EW) 763 993 1,053 1,373 290 380 0 0 0.0% 0.0% • Olive Dr. (EW) 2,860 3,467 4,778 6,167 1,651 2,278 232 519 13.0% 21.8% Gibson St. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) 2,961 3,585 5,729 6,618 2,768 3,033 134 251 4.8% 8.3% SR-99 Fwy. SB Ramps (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) 2,926 3,443 4,134 5,075 1,208 1,632 180 357 14.9% 21.9% State Rd. (NS) at: • Rosedale Hwy. - SR-58 (EW) 4,658 5,127 6,106 6,616 1,448 1,489 127 216 8.8% 14.5% • SR-99 Fwy. NB Ramps (EW) 777 1,383 932 1,619 155 236 73 92 47.1% 39.0% • Olive Dr. (EW) 1,984 2,930 3,667 5,141 1,683 2,211 144 235 8.6% 10.6% Roberts Ln. (NS) at: • Olive Dr. (EW) 1,478 1,863 3,573 4,560 2,095 2,697 63 108 3.0% 4.0% Buck Owens Blvd. (NS) at: • Rio Mirada Dr. (EW) 948 1,526 2,158 3,044 1,210 1,518 0 0 0.0% 0.0% • SR-99 Fwy. NB Ramps (EW) 1,619 2,414 2,896 4,010 1,277 1,596 0 0 0.0% 0.0% •Rosedale H . - SR-58 EW 4,971 5,703 7,484 8,917 2,513 3,214 62 159 2.5% 4.9% Traffic and Circulation JN 10-100278 5.9-67 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 2020 with project traffic conditions. Accordingly, implementation of the specified mitigation measures would reduce the project's impacts under Year 2020 traffic conditions to a less than significant level. MITIGATION MEASURES The recommendations in this Section address on-site improvements, off-site improvements and the phasi ng of al I necessary study area transportation i mprovements. The following mitigation measures directly correspond to the numbered impact statements in the Impact Analysis. OPENING YEAR 5.9-1 a The following improvements shall be implemented off-site in conjunction with the proposed development: • Krebs Road shall be constructed adjacent to the project site at its ultimate half-section width as a Collector (2 lanes undivided) in conjunction with development. • Mohawk Street shall be constructed adjacent to the project site (south of Hageman Road) at its ultimate half-section width as an Arterial (4 lanes divided) in conjunction with development. • Landco Road shall be constructed adjacent to the project site (north of Hageman Road) at its ultimate cross-section width as a Arterial (4 lanes divided) in conjunction with development. • Hageman Road shall be constructed adjacent to the project site (west of Mohawk Street) at its ultimate half-section width as an Arterial (6 lanes divided) and as an Arterial (4 lanes divided) east of Mohawk Street in conjunction with development. 5.9-1 b Traffic signing/striping within the project boundaries shall be implemented in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the project. 5.9-1c Sight distance at each intersection shall be reviewed with respect to Caltrans/City of Bakersfield sight distance standards at the time of preparation of final grading, landscape and street improvement plans. 1 1 1 1 r i 1 5,9-1 ~f 'Opening day mitigation measures in sections 5.9-1 a through 5.9-1 c sh`al be required to be implemented with' the first phase of development. _ Traffic and Circulation )N 10-100278 5.9-68 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR CUMULATIVE: YEAR 2020 5.9-2a The project shall participate through payment of fees in the phased construction of off-site roadway improvements and traffic signals forthe Year 2020 follows: ' Olive Drive Knudsen Drive to Roberts Lane ' Six lanes divided Hageman Road West of Patton Way to Mohawk Street • Six lanes divided ' Mohawk Street to SR-204 Freeway • Four lanes divided Rosedale Highway (SR-58) West of Patton Way to Mohawk Street • Six lanes divided Mohawk Street to east of Oak Street • Eight lanes divided ~' Fruitvale Avenue Hageman Road to Rosedale Highway (SR-58) • Four lanes divided ' Mohawk Street Hageman Road to Rosedale Highway (SR-58) • Four lanes divided South of Rosedale Highway (SR-58) • Six lanes divided Landco Road Olive Drive to Hageman Road • Four lanes divided Hageman Road to Rosedale Highway (SR-58) • Four lanes undivided Gibson Street ' Gilmore Avenue to Rosedale Highway (SR-58} • Two lanes divided ' Buck Owens Boulevard SR-204 Freeway to Rio Mirada Drive • Six lanes divided JN 10-100278 5.9-69 Traffic and Circulation May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 5.9-2b The traffic signals required within the study area at buildout shall specifically include an interconnect of the signals to function in a coordinated system. 5.9-2c The project shall contribute on a pro-rata basis to the construction of ultimate intersection lane requirements for Year 2020 as follows: Patton Way (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) • Traffic signal Hageman Road (EW) • Traffic signal • Eastbound left turn lane • Eastbound through lane • Westbound through lane Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) • Traffic Signal Fruitvale Avenue (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) • Northbound right turn overlap Hageman Road (EW) • Northbound left turn lane • Northbound through lane • Northbound right turn overlap • Southbound left turn lane • Southbound right turn overlap • Eastbound dual through lane • Westbound through lane Krebs Road (EW) • Traffic signal • Northbound through lane • Southbound through lane Downing Avenue (EW) • Traffic signal • Northbound through lane • Southbound through lane Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) • Southbound left turn lane • Eastbound through lane • Westbound through lane JN 10-100278 5.9-70 1 1 1 1 r 1 ~. a a Traffic and Circulation May 24, 2000 a 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Mohawk Street (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) • Traffic signal • Northbound dual left turn lane • Northbound dual through lanes ' Northbound right turn lane with overlap • Southbound dual left turn lanes • Southbound dual through lanes ' Southbound right turn lanes with overlap • Eastbound left turn lane • Eastbound dual through lanes ' Eastbound right turn overlap • Westbound left turn lanes ' • Westbound dual through lanes Westbound right turn overlap ' Landco Road (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) • Southbound left turn lane • Eastbound left turn lane • Eastbound dual through lanes • Westbound dual through lanes ^ Knudsen Drive (NS) at: Norris Road (EW) ' Traffic signal • Northbound shared left turn lane ' Olive Drive (EW) • Northbound left turn lane • Northbound right turn overlap • Southbound left turn lane • Eastbound through lane Westbound left turn lane ' • Westbound through lane Gibson Street (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) • Northbound left turn lane ' Southbound left turn lane • Eastbound left turn lane • Eastbound dual through lanes ' Westbound dual through lanes SR-99 Freeway SB Ramps (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) Traffic and Circulation ' JN 10-100278 5.9-71 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR • Traffic signal • Eastbound through lane • Westbound through lane State Road (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) a • Eastbound through lane • Westbound through lane a Roberts Lane (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) • Northbound left turn lane • Southbound right turn lane with right turn overlap • Eastbound left turn lane • Eastbound right turn overlap Buck Owens Boulevard (NS) at: Rio Mirada Drive (EW) • Traffic signal SR-99 Freeway NB Ramps (EW) • Northbound right turn lane • Southbound right turn lane 0 • Eastbound left turn lane • Eastbound right turn lane • Westbound left turn lane Rosedale Highway = SR-58 (EW) • Southbound free right turn lane ~, • Eastbound through lane • Westbound through lane 0 • Westbound free right turn lane The project shall contribute to off-site improvements in accordance with the Capital Improvement Plan and establishment of transportation impact fees for the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan Area (Kern County Resolution 92-196 and 92-195). 5.9-2d The off-site roadway system shall be improved to roadway classifications as shown on the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan Comprehensive Circulation Plan. The implementation of off-site improvements shall be determined as future entitlements are granted for development in and around the project area. 5'.9-2e The developer shall be required to pay his proportionate share of all the year 2020. mitigation measures as specified in sections 5.9-2a through =~ Traffic and Circulation JN 10-100278 5.9-72 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 5.9-2c of fhe DEIR. A fee schedule shall',be prepared by the developer with a requirement for approval prior to recordation of a subdivision map orfinal occupancy of any'commercial developmentwith fees'being paid ~t time`of building permit on a`=_per unit basis. ~5:~9=2f The traffic. impactfee scheduleshall also include computation of fees for those facilities on the `Phase 2 RTIF list-which-are not included in .the improvements specifically 'listed. for Year :2020. These''' additional t facilities shall include all facilities on the RTIF Fist within the influence 'area of the project which isgenerally the-area bounded by Coffee Road, Norris. Road, Roberts Lane, Freeway 99 and Rosedale Highway. The ' additional facilities include, but are`not limited to, the following: ' Olive Drive from- Knudsen. Drive to Coffee Road • Mohawk Street from California Avenue to Rosedale Highway • Mohawk Street Bridge over the Kern River • Various other signals, bridges, culverts and improvements within ' the study area which are on the RTIF list ' LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant impacts related to traffic and circulation have been identified following ' implementation of mitigation measures and/or compliance with applicable standards, policies, and/or City of Bakersfield codes. 1 1 1 Traffic and Circulation ' )N 10-100278 5.9-73 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~' 5.10 SERVICES AND UTILITIES The analysis in this section focuses upon public services, recreation, and utilities and service systems. Information in this Section was obtained from the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and EIR and correspondence from public service and ,,~ utility agencies (referto Appendix 15.1, Correspondence). Public services include fire protection, police protection, schools, libraries, and roadway maintenance. Recreation includes neighborhood parks, regional parks, and other recreational facilities. Utilities and service systems include wastewater, water, and solid waste. Electricity, natural gas, and telephone services are also evaluated. ~''~` This Section includes an Existing Conditions discussion which rovides back round p g information necessary to -understand potential impacts of the proposed project. The criteria by which an impact may be considered potentially significant is provided along with a discussion of impacts pursuant to Appendix G of CEQA. Mitigation Measures are identified in an effort to reduce potential impacts to Less Than Significant Levels. EXISTING CONDITIONS PUBLIC SERVICES Fire Protection The Kern County Fire Department provides fire protection and emergency medical ,~ services to the project area from two local stations. A description of these facilities is as follows: Table 5.10-1 FIRE PROTECTION FACILITIES i 1 1 -Facility Location Equipment/Personnel Response Time Norris Substation 6400 Fruitvale Avenue one engine, one ladder truck, one patrol 3 minutes (Station No. 61) with six personnel (all Emergency Medical Technicians) Landco Substation 3000 Landco Drive one engine, one hazardous materials 4 minutes (Station No. 66) response van, and one patrol with 5 personnel (all Emergency Medical Technicians) Additional equipment and personnel-are also available within a five minute response time. The ISO rating for the project sites is Class 4. Services and Utilities JN 10-100278 5.10-1 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Police Protection ~~ City of Bakersfield Police Department. Law enforcement and other police services to the incorporated portions of the project area are provided by the Bakersfield Police Department. The Police Department, which serves the entire City of Bakersfield, is headquartered at 1601 Truxton Avenue. The number of law enforcement officers and patrol cars which presently serve the project vicinity varies according to shift and time of day. The Police Department's current ratio of Police Officers to population is 1.30 officers per one thousand population. The Department has a vehicle take home program which provides each officer with a vehicle as well as other necessary equipment. Response times to the ~~ project area vary depending on the type of call for Police service. Typically, response __ times for serious/urgent/emergency requests to the project area would be less than five minutes. However, as the project sites are presently located within the unincorporated ' Kern County area, Bakersfield Police Department does not respond to calls for service on the project sites. Kern County Sheriff's Department. Police services to the project sites are provided by the Kern County Sheriff's Department. The Kern County Sheriff headquarters, located at 1350 Norris Road, serve the unincorporated areas of the Metropolitan Bakersfield area (a population of approximately 164,728 persons). The patrol force forthe Sheriff's Bakersfield patrol division consists of 88 uniformed officers, which include six designated for the project area. The current response time to the project sites is approximately five minutes, depending on the time, day of the week and priority of the call. ~~ Schools Forgrades kindergarten through eight, the project sites are within the jurisdiction ofthe Beardsley School District (BSD) and Fruitvale School District (FSD). For grades nine throu h 12 the ro'ect sites are within 'urisdiction of the Kern High School District '~' g p 1 ) (KHSD). Table 5.10-1, School Facilities, details the school facilities which would serve the project sites. As is evidenced in Table 5.10-1, the elementary and intermediate schools are presently over capacity. In order to meet the existing need, portable classrooms have been `~ located on these school campuses adjacent to the playgrounds.' Plans for construction -" of a new school are currently in the early stages of development.2 jj ' Telecon: Ken Chapman, District Superintendent, Beardsley School District, January 24, 1999. z Ibid. Services and Utilities )N 10-100278 5.10-2 May 24, 2000 w 1 1 A t ~' GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.10-2 SCHOOL FACILITIES School Grade Level Maximum Capacity Present Enrollment' Average Class Size North Beardsley Elementary' K - 3 755 786 20 Beardsley Intermediate' 4 - 6 450 517 31 Beardsley Junior High' 7 - 8 525 348 25 Discovery School' K - 6 6"6;0 651 North High School2 9-12 2,042 30 Fruitvale Junior High School3 7 - 8 .756 631 Centennial High School3 9 - 12 2,147 30 Source: teardsley School District, I-ruituale School District and Kern High School District. 1. These schools are located approximately one mile from the project area. 2. Approximately four miles from the project area. 3. Approximately two miles from the project area. ~ Libraries The proposed project is located in the service area of the Southwest Branch of the Kern County Library system. This library facility is located at 8301 Ming Avenue, in the City of Bakersfield. According to the Kern County Resource Management Agency, this library currently serves three times the population for which it was designed.3 As a result, the Agency currently has plans to alleviate the existing overcrowded conditions by adding library capacity in the Rosedale area at such time as funding is identified.4 Roadway Maintenance Roadway maintenance in the project area is currently provided by the County of Kern Public Works Department. Roadway maintenance and repair from curb to curb throughout the incorporated areas, however, is the responsibility of the City of 3 Correspondence: Tina Burke, Special Project Manager, Resource Management Agency, September 1, 1999. 4 Ibid. JN 1 0-1 002 78 ,~ Services and Utilities 5.1.0-3 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 1~~ 5 walk areas !'' Bakersfield Public Works Department. Maintenance and repair of the side are the responsibility of the property owners, although, the City provides some assistance, dependant upon budgetary constraints. RECREATION '~ According to the 2010 General Plan Parks Element, parks in the City are generally categorized as either local (serving a population within a 0.75 mile radius) or regional (serving a population living within one hour's distance). Local parks include mini- parks (one to 2.5 acres), neighborhood parks (five to 10 acres), and community parks (approximately 30 acres). Pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code 15.80, project applicants are required to either dedicate land, or pay in lieu fees, for development of park land. Developers of new residential uses are required to provide 2.5 acres of land per 1,000 population. Maximum park acreage for community parks pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code 15.80 is upwards of 20 acres. Applicants are also required to pay park development fees of $670 per each new single-family residential building permit. Policy 1 of the Parks Element also "require[s] that neighborhood parks be developed at a minimum rate of 2.5 acres per 1,000 population". Policy 8 requires the following minimum site size standards in planning and acquiring of local parks and playgrounds: Mini parks (public) - 2.5 usable acres Neighborhood parks/playgrounds - 10.0 usable acres Community park/play field - ~ 20.0 usable acres There are no local parks situated within 0.75 miles of the project area. The park situated closest to the project is Olive Park East which is located southeast of the intersection of Reina Road and Coffee Road. According to Table XI-1, Existing Public Parks and Facilities, of the Parks Element, this 2.5-acre facility includes game courts, open turf and picnic tables. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Wastewater The North of the River Sanitary District (NORSD) No. 1 owns, operates and maintains the sewage collection systems for the City of Bakersfield. Currently, there is a 33" sewer line which is located along the northern boundary of the LR and GC sites. The ;~. s Telecon: Mike Conner, Streets Supervisor, Ciry of Bakersfield Public Works Department, January 18, 1999. ,~ Services and Utilities jN 10-100278 5.10-4 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~~ abandoned District offices and facilities are located on a portion of the GC site. Additionally, a pump station is currently proposed by the District northeast of the LMR ~~, site. Raw wastewater from the project area is delivered to the recently opened (August ~, 1999) NORSD Treatment Plant located at Seventh Standard Road in the City of Shatter. This wastewater treatment facility was designed to provide secondary treatment for ~, peak daily flows of six million gallons per day.b - The District has established connection fees at a rate of $1,693 per dwelling. There are currently no assessments for the project area. ~' Water -~ In Kern County, Improvement District No. 4 of the Kern County Water Agency purchases water from the State Water Project and wholesales to public water systems. Tlie California Water Service Company is a major purveyor to the Bakersfield metropolitan area including the project sites which are located in Bakersfield District. The California Water Service Company obtains most of its water supply from groundwater wells, and also uses imported water from the State Water Project. The five year annual average of total water use for the District is 70,170 acre-feet. The five year average daily demand for the District is 63.6 million gallons. The five year average, maximum daily demand for the District is 114.2 million gallons. Currently, the Bakersfield District can produce a total of 170,900 gallons per minute flow at any ' time. However, not all of this production capacity can reach the project area due to tl~e isolated portion of the District's system. Water facilities which exist in the project vicinity include a 12" ductile iron main located along the north side of Hageman Road and terminating east of Palisades Circle. Also, four wells are located within one mile of the project site. Additionally, three ' tanks exist at two separate locations within approximately one mile of the project sites with a combined storage capacity of 1.825 million gallons. i' The North Garden area of the District where the project sites are located is 100% reliant on groundwater. The typical groundwater quality of wells in the North Garden area consists of detectable levels of hydrogen sulfide and nitrates. On some occasions several volatile organic compounds (VOC) compounds have been detected. As a result, treatment facilities are regularly included in the construction budgeting for new ~r wells to serve this area. 6 Telecon: Donald O. Glover, Manager, North of River Sanitary District No. 1, January 14, 1999. ~' ~ Services and Utilities JN 10-100278 5.10-5 May 24, 2000 ~~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR q, ,.~ Currently, there are no distribution lines that enter the protect sites. The District standard for development of additional groundwater wells in Bakersfield is one new wel I for 350 new residential services. Additionally, the District assesses a "Per-Lot Fee" ;~, applicable to all new development that is intended to fund new sources of supply. These figures are as follows: ~~ • $450 per single family residential service (1" service) • $225 per each multi-family residential unit ,n • $1,440 per each 2" service connection u_ • $4,500 per each 4" service connection • $9,000 per each 6" service connection • $14,400 per each 8" service connection ` Additionally, the developer is responsible for any required main extension into the project area. The District may serve any property immediately adjacent to an existing ~~ main and any over-sizing of mains to improve general circulation. Solid Waste Solid waste collection service for the project area is provided by the City of Bakersfield Sanitation Division and by private haulers. The Shafter-Wasco and Bena Landfills are the facilities used for disposal of wastes generated in the project area. Pursuant to the Kern County Waste Management's Solid Waste Infrastructure Plan (August 1, 1995), ~~, the remaining lifespan of the Shafter-Wasco Landfill extends to the year 2019. The remaining lifespan of Bena extends to the year 2040.' ,~ All projects within the Bakersfield area must comply with Bakersfield Municipal Code, Chapter 8.32, which provides the authority for mandatory services, pickup times, etc. ~~' In addition the City of Bakersfield must comply with Assembly Bill 939, the State law mandating a 50% trash diversion rate by the year 2000 and State Public Resources Codes governing illegal dumping. ;~ Electricity ,~ Electrical power within the Bakersfield area is provided exclusively by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). PG&E has numerous substations throughout the City ;~ and provides power for both commercial and residential uses. Electric facilities exist in the project area and consist mainly of substations located near the intersection of According to the City of Bakersfield Public Works Department, the Kern Coun will be a I in for ~' PP Y g an extension to the remaining life of the Bena Landfill. Services and Utilities '~ )N 10-100278 5.10-6 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 1 Coffee Drive and Rosedale Highway. Accordingto PG&E, the electrical facilities in the area are currently nearing maximum capacity.$ Natural Gas The project site lies entirely within the service area of "--~`~~'-'-~ --~' ~'--`--~-"Southern California Cas Com an SCG'. Gas service mains existin in the ro' r r p y( ) g p lectaeaae ~ located within Victor Street, Krebs Road and Mohawk Street (north of Krebs Road). Telephone Pacific Bell provides telephone communication services to the project area. Pacific Bell can provide service to the project area. IMPACTS Significance Criferia Pursuant to Appendix G, Environmental Checklist of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, a project would normally have a significant adverse impact on public services if it results in any of the following: Public Services A significant impact would occur if the project would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or result in the 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 ob jectives for any of the public services incl uding fire protection, police protection, schools, or other public facilities. ~, Recreation ~' A si nificant im act would occur if the ro'ect .. . g p p 1 • Increases 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. ,t t s Telecon: Amador Galvez, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, October 8, 1999. Services and Utilities JN 10-100278 5.10-7 ~. May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ' nal facilities or re uires the construction or expansion ^! Includes recreat-o q of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on ~~ the environment. Utilities and Service Systems A significant impact would occur if the project.. . • Exceeds wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional '~ Water Quality Control Board; • Requires or results in the construction of new water or wastewater ~~ treatment facilities or expansion of existing facil ities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. n • Has insufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlement and resources, and new or expanded entitlement is needed. • Results in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments. • Is served by a landfill that does not have sufficient permitted capacity ,~ to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. • Does not comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. PUBLIC SERVICES Fire Protection h ical im acts to fire ~~ 5.10-1 Protect -mplementat-on may result -n adverse p ys p protection facilities. Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. The project does not propose new or physically altered facilities, nor does . if create the need for construction of new facilities or alteration of ~ ' existing facilities. ~ ~,~. As stated above, a significant impact would occur if the project would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physical ly altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which would cause significant 1~ environmental impacts. While project implementation would increase development Services and Utilities JN 1 0-1 002 78 5.10-8 May 24, 2000 ~; GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR -~ beyond existing conditions and increase the existing demand for fire protection in the form of additional calls for service, the anticipated increase would not warrant the construction of a new fire protection facility, nor would it warrant alterations to the existing facilities. Further, the project as proposed would not necessitate the addition of new facilities or equipment for the Fire Department.9 Therefore, project implementation would not result in significant fire protection impacts. Additionally, any development on-site would be subject to the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code and local amendments, the California Safety Code Regulations Title 19, 22, and 27, the Bakersfield Municipal Code, and the National Fire Prevention Association Standards. It should be noted that the Fire Department has expressed concern with respect to the ~, proposed development being located immediately adjacent to a heavy industrial area. Refer to Section 5.6, Human Health/Risk of Upset, for an analysis of the potential public safety impacts associated with the proposed development in consideration of ,~ the existing industrial uses. Police Protection r 5.10-2 Project implementation may result in adverse physical impacts with !~ respect to police protection. Less Than Significant Impact. The project does not propose new or physically altered facilities, nor does it create the need for construction of new facilities or alteration of existing facilities. Impacts tothe Police Department resultingfrom project implementation are anticipated to occur in the form of increased calls for police service due to population increases. At build-out, the proposed project has the potential to increase the City's existing. population by approximately 2,036 persons.10 Based on the Police Department's goal ~~ of providing 1.33 police officers peronethousand population, this population increase would create the demand for an additional three sworn officers to serve the project at bui Id-out. This increase in population would also generate the need foradditional non- ~- sworn officers, clerical personnel and administrative personnel. The number of support personnel required can be determined by using the same formula of 1.33 support personnel per one thousand population, resulting in an increase of three additional support personnel. In consideration of the "vehicle take home program," each new officer hired for the project area would require a vehicle as well as all other necessary equipment. 9 Correspondence From: Kevin H. Scott, Assistant Fire Marshal, Kern County Fire Department, September 1, 1999. 10 The project proposes the development of approximately 727 dwelling units. The population increase of 2,036 persons is based upon an average household size of 2.8 (California State Departm_ ent of Finance, January 1, 1999) ~, Services and Utilities JN 10-100278 5.10-9 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR new olice facilities nor does it The project does not propose the construction of p , propose the physical alteration of the existing facility. Further, while project implementation would result in an increase in calls for police service, as well as create a demand for additional officers and equipment, it would not warrant the construction of a new police station, nor would it result in the need for alteration of the existing station. Accordingly, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts with respect to police protection. Upon implementation of the proposed project, the Sheriff's response to calls would be limited to on-site emergencies or response to requests for assistance from the Bakersfield Police Department. ,~ Schools - 5.10-3 Project implementation may create the need for additional ~ 'U. public facilities. Significance: n -~ Pofent-ally Significant Impact. pfrpsi~ Go~ernmenf Code',`Secfion 65995 is currently deemed o provide fuH and complete mitiga ion. } ~ , ~ - , ~ , v - , ~` .r ;.. u~. r ~. , . Services and Utilities ~~ )N 10-100278 5.10-10 May 24, 2000 1 ~L I LJ 1 1 1 1 1 1 A GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Gi'Ytflf' del f~v48XtT1Tt711'1 E1~' Pi'e$e11t fTt A~Cnlzrvic E8~8e1{y {~Pri'ef?t- ~#-ai f"reserrt f3~i111~ted ~ttt~t izi~ 7~VE'1"dgt' 018"33 Sr~e ~ B~YIC9 fdeede~{- ~C"°~ 7Z JJ 7~~7 °3'~ ~~~6 Z~g ~ Z~ ~Z ~EJ ~JB rJ"1-~ ~7'>Z ~1"~6 '~8' 3'~' rJ' 7Z'T8' rJ"~ J ~$ ~'7 ~ ~"}'~6 ~ 21rJ 9 X1'2 fl3 ifid 19~ 7R`d ~~ ~ {z ~~ ~} • r v i ~ Beardsley School District The number of potential dwelling units within the Beardsley :School District is°218. The Kern County Superintendent of Schools identifies a'`studentgeneration rate per household for Kindergarten through 8'r' grade of 0.5972 students per household. This would mean 1..30 new students for the Beardsley School District. The District' has been, and continues to be, o~~ercrowded especially in grades K-6. Current overcrowding is exacerbated by other development t~~king place in the District. The 130 additional students from this project cannof be accommodated by adding relocatable classrooriis to 'existing sites. F or example, North Beardsl,ey`School already has seven relocatables on-site and another two will be added this summer. More classrooms at this Site c;ar-r oply be 'seen as a temporary measure_unti) a new elementary school is constructed: The District and this project's proponent have been in discussions regarding the District's acquisition of a school site in,the project area. The school site would make it possible for the district to construct the new school necessary to accommodate the remaining students who would come from this project Services and Utilities JN 10-100278 5.10-11 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR v Fruitvale School District The proposed development within the Fruitvale School District is :estimated at 509 dwelling units. The` student generation rate, based upon data from the Kern County ~- Su'perintendent of Schools, is 0.5865, per household. This would mean. 298'new students for the Fruitvale S`chool;District. Thee project would create 236 K-6 students a who would create severe ..overcrowding of Discovery School. Fruitvale Junior High School, vvitli seven relocatables' alrE~ady on-site, has a capacity of 756 and a current ' enrollment of 631. >In isolation, °,there would appear to be capacity to accommodate the remaining 62 new junior high students, however, when-combined with other development in the District, the cumulative effects would be'significant at the junior , high level as ....well. ' The.: overcrowded status of the District's facilities has ..been ~~ recognized by the State Allocation Board which has determined that the... District is eligible for new construction funding at all grade levels. Depending on when these 29$ students arrive,' it ispossible that at least"some of them can, be accommodated by adding relocatables_ at existing schools. However, based on current enrollment ,,, projections, the district would have to construct at least one new elementary school to accommodate students from this project and other- students expected to enter district schools`in the future:. Kern High School District The total number of residences proposed in this'project is 727. The Kern High School District student generation: rate per household for grade 9 through 12 is 0.1825. This / would mean 133 new students forthe Kern High School District. The District has been and .continues. to be overcrowded. While the district's high schools. have been ~, permitted to go over theircapacity in the short-term by u ing relocatable classrooms, ~.. the overcrowding of specialized classrooms, rest rooms, cafeteria, and''athletic facilities means thatthis can only be seen as an ihterim measure until a new high school is built to accommodate students'from this project and other students expected to enter district schools in the<future'. ~' Libraries 5.10-4 The proposed project may increase the demand for library facilities and ~'" may contribute to an existing need for construction of new facilities or alteration of existing facilities. Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. Property faxes accrued from project development would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. ~; Based upon the estimated population increase from the proposed project, it has been determined that a significant impact upon the southwest branch library may occur. Property tax would be generated by the proposed development. From the property tax _ ` generated, a percentage would be submitted to the County for library services Services and Utilities )N 10-100278 5.10-12 May 24, 2000 1 1 L t 1 A 1 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR throughout the Metropolitan Bakersfield area. Therefore, the potential increase in services can be paid for by the property taxes generated by the proposal and, therefore, impacts are not deemed significant. Roadway Maintenance 5.10-5 The increased usage of area roadways may result in increase maintenance requirements. Significance: Less Than Significant/mpact. Development of the proposed project would increase the demand for roadway maintenance services. The increased volume in paved areas resulting from the proposed street improvements would result in greater maintenance requirements, as well as an increase in the costs associated with providing these services. However, according to the Public Works Department, these are not anticipated to significantly impact the City's ability to provide maintenance to the roads.12 Further, the increased demands for roadway maintenance associated with project implementation would not warrant the construction of new governmental facilities. Therefore, project development would not result adverse physical impacts in this regard. RECREATION 5.10-6 Project implementation may create a demand for additional park land which may result in an adverse physical effect on the environment and may increase the use of existing recreational facilities. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Compliance with the Quimby Act and the City's standards and regula tions would offset the increased demand for park land thereby reducing potential impacts to existing facilities. At build-out, the proposed project has the potential to increase the City's existing population by approximately 2,036 persons. This projected population increase would substantially increase the use of existing recreational facilities, as well as create a demand for additional park land. As noted above, the applicant would be required to either dedicate land, or pay in lieu fees pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code 15.80 which requires developers of new residential uses to provide 2.5 acres of land per 1,000 population. ~g~q; Based upon this criteria and an estimation of 2,036 ne~ti~ residents associated with a maximum 727 dwelling units resultingfrom the project (2a3 persons `~~er dwelling unit as'cited in Section 6.3 of this EIR),: project implementation wed may create a demand for approximately five acres of neighborhood park land. The project applicant would be required to provide the additional five acres to the City or pay an in lieu fees for park land acquisition and ,~ 1999. 12 Telecon: Marian Shaw, Civil Engineer IV, City of Bakersfield Public Works Department, January 19, Services and Utilities JN 10-100278 5.10-13 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR development. The applicant would also be required to pay a park development fee of $fr~6'$'615 per each new single-family residential building permit. Payment of park development fees, as well as compliance with Bakersfield Municipal Code 15.80, would offset the increased demand for additional park land, thereby minimizing potential impacts upon theexisting recreational facilities, and reducingthe project's impacts with respect to recreational facilities to a less than significant level. In the event a park is proposed outside the project limits, it's development would not be considered a significant. impact provided it is subject to further environmental review to ensure that significant environmental effects, if any, are mitigated on a site specific basis. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Wastewater (Sewer) 5.10-7 Project implementation may generate additional wastewater beyond current conditions and may require an incremental expansion of the existing sewerage system. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Implementation of the specified mitigation measures would reduce impacts with regards to wastewater systems and facilities fo a less than significant level. Project implementation would increasethe quantity of wastewaterwhich is attributable to the project sites. According to the District, the projected flow from the project would be 320,000 gallons per day which is not considered a significant increase in service demand.13 Further, there is available capacity in the trunk line and treatment plant to serve the project area.14 The applicant would have the responsibility of conveying any wastewater generated by the project to the nearest local sewer and/or trunk sewer. Assurance of sewer service for the proposed development is contingent upon the issuance of the a sewer permit prior to construction of any improvements. The sewer permits are only issued once payment .of all applicable connection fees are made. The project would be subject to all applicable District rules, regulations and ordinances. Project ,implementation would generate additional wastewater beyond current conditions and would require an incremental expansion of the existing sewage system. This required system expansion is not considered a significant impact since these 13 Correspondence: Donald O. Glover, Manager, North of River Sanitary District No. 1, August 23 1999. "Ibid. 1 1 1 i r 1 Services and Utilities )N 10-100278 5.10-14 May 24, 2000 ~~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR \r- facilities would be installed within the project's limits as a part of project construction. Payment of District fees would offset the costs to construct an incremental expansion a_ of the existing sewage system. Further, project implementation would not necessitate modifications to the existing treatment plant. Water 5.10-8 Project implementation may increase the demand for water beyond -- current conditions and may require an incremental expansion of the existing water system. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. \~, Implementation of the specified mitigation measures would reduce impacts with regards to wafer systems and facilities to a less than significant level. .~_ ' Project implementation would increase the demand for water to the project site. Table 5.10-4, Water Demand Estimates, provides a breakdown of the expected water demand that would be created by the proposed project based on factors provided by the District. As shown in Table 5.10-4, the proposed development would create a ' demand for approximate-y 514,467 gallons per day on a typical day. ~~ It should be noted that assurance of water service for the proposed development is contingent upon the issuance of a water permit prior to construction of any ~~' improvements. Water permits are issued only upon payment of all applicable fees and charges and in accordance with and subject to all applicable District rules, regulations and ordinances. Project implementation would generate additional water demand beyond current ~~ conditions and require an incremental expansion of the existing water system. This - required system expansion is not considered a significant impact since these facilities would be installed within the project's limits. Payment of District fees would offset the ~~: costs to construct an incremental expansion of the existing water system. Solid Waste ~~ 5.10-9 Development of the project site may result in increased solid waste generation. Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. Although . sufficient permitted capacity exists at the landfills to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs, implementation of the specified mitigation measures would reduce the volume of solid wastes which are ultimately disposed. ~~ ' Services and Utilities JN 10-100278 5.10-15 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Table 5.10-4 WATER DEMAND ESTIMATES Average Deman Land Use Quantity Water Demand Factor (GPD)' Per Water Demand Estimate (GPD) Commercial(SF)Z 116,800 390 s 1,000 SF 45,552 Residential (DU)° 727 645 s DU 468,915 Total - - - 514,467 Notes: 1. GPD =Gallons Per Day 2. SF =Square Feet 3. Water factor obtained from the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 Genera! Plan, dated September 1989, page 2 272. 4. DU =Dwelling Unit 5. l~~ater factor obtained from correspondence with Thomas Salzano of the California Water Company on January 31, 2000. Based on a solid waste generation rate of 1.57 tons per year per residence, the proposed residential uses are projected to generate approximately 1,141 tons per year.'' The projected increase in solid waste generation would increase the demand to provide disposal service and would incrementally shorten the lifespan of the Shafter- Wasco and Bena Landfills. According to the City of Bakersfield Public Works Department, significant impacts are not anticipated with respect to solid waste disposal.' Additionally, it should be noted that the volume of the project's solid waste which would be ultimately disposed of at the Shafter-Wasco and Bena Landfills would be reduced due to the requirements of AB 939. Further, the proposed project's incorporation of design features for the storage and collection of recyclables, as well as the required compliance with federal, state, and local statutes (i.e., Bakersfield Municipal Code, Chapter 8.32) and regulations related to solid waste would reduce impacts in this regard to a less than significant level. Project implementation would not result in a significant impact with respect to solid waste generation since sufficient permitted capacity exists at the landfills to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. 's A projection of the solid waste generation associated with the proposed commercial uses is not provided as only limited data regarding the design of the proposed commercial uses is available a this time. According to Kevin;~arnes, Solid Waste Director, projecting the solid waste generation associated with the proposed commercial uses would be speculative at this time (Telecon: January 18, 1999). 16 Correspondence: Howard Morris, Solid Waste Superintendent, Ciry of Bakersfield Public Works Department, August 26, 1999. Services and Utilities JN 1 0-1 002 78 5.10-16 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Electricity j 5.10-10 Project implementation may result in an increase in the demand for electrical service beyond existing conditions and may require expansion ~! of the existing electrical system. Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. The project would be subject to Title 24 of the California Administrative Code regarding energy conservation and shall conform to required mitigation measures relative to expansion of the electrical system. ~. The proposed development would result in an increased demand for electrical service at the project site. According to PG&E, the electrical demand for the proposed project is 13 to 15 million watts (mw). As previously noted, the electrical facilities which exist `>~ in the project area are operating near capacity. Project implementation would require expansion of these current facilities, as well as the addition of new facilities, in order to serve the proposed development. All new facilities would be installed in accordance with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) rules and would be located within public right-of-way or utility easements. ~~ In order to provide service to the development area, short-term project-related impacts are anticipated to occur, such as the temporary disruption of existing power service. These impacts are not considered significant, as disruption to electrical power would be short-term. The project would be subject to energy conservation measures in accordance with Title ~~° 24 of the California Administrative Code. The installation of new electrical facilities would not result in a significant environmental impact since these would be located within public rights-of-way or utility easements. Natural Gas '~' 5.10-11 Project implementation may result in an increase in the demand for natural gas service beyond existing conditions and may require expansion of the existing gas system. Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. The project would be required to conform to SCG requirements relative fo expansion of the gas system. An increased demand for natural gas service would occur at the project site as a result of the proposed development. As detailed in Table 5.10-5, Gas Consumption, the ~~ proposed development would consume approximately 5.2 million cubic feet of natural gas per month. According to SCG, gas service could be provided from the existing ~. mains." However, extensions to these existing facilities would be required in order "Correspondence: Louise Parham, Pipeline Planning Assistant, The Gas Company, September 1, 1999. Services and Utilities ~~ JN 10-100278 5.10-17 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR to provide service to proposed development. Service would be provided in accordance with SCG's policies and extension rules on file with the CPUC. As facility extensions would occur within public right-of-way or utility easements, significant impacts would not occur with regard to natural gas services. Table 5.10-5 GAS CONSUMPTION Use Units Consumption Rate Per Month Per Gas Consumption Per Month Residential 727 6,665 CF Unit 4.8 Million CF Commercial 116,800 2.9 CF Square Feet 338,720 CF Total 5.2 Million CF Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, revised November 1993, Table A9-12. CF =Cubic Feet Note: Lo~v Density Residential (LR) and Low-Medium Density Residential (LMR) uses were calculated assingle- family residential uses for purposes of this analysis. Telephone 5.10-12 Development of the proposed project may increase the demand for telephone service beyond existing conditions and may require expansion of the existing telephone system. Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. The project would conform to Pacific Bell requirements relative to expansion of the telephone system. Pacific Bell has indicated that project implementation would temporarily impact telephone service due to interruptions in service and relocation of facilities. Pacific Bell telephone facilities that are within the project area would need to be rerouted to meet the needs of existing customers in the project vicinity. These temporary inconveniences, however, are not considered a significant environmental impact. New customers generated from the proposed development can be accommodated and it would be the responsibility of the developer to provide the substructure work. Future telephone service forthe project area would need to be coordinated with Pacific Bell's engineering department for a comprehensive plan as to levels of service required. The installation of telephone facilities would not result in a significant environmental impact since these would be located within public rights-of--way or utility easements. Services and Utilities )N 10-100278 5.10-18 May 24, 2000 1 -~_ 1 1 1 w 1 i GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 5.10-13 Cumulative development -may result in an increase in the demand for public services and in increase in the consumption rates for public utilities, potentially requiring expansions of the existing utility systems. Significance: Less Than Significant Impact. Analysis has concluded that cumulative development is subject to standards and requirements of reviewing agencies and no additional mitigation is required. Although there would be a substantial increase in the demand for service and utilities attributable to the extent of the cumulative development, coordination and discussions with the appropriate services and utility agencies during the preliminary design stage has determined that the proposed project would not have cumulative impacts to public services and utilities. Each cumulative development project would also coordinate with affected agencies to minimize impacts in this regard. M1TlGAT/ON MEASURES The following mitigation measures directly corresponds to the identified impact statements provided in the Impact subsection. PUBLIC SERVICES Fire Protection 5.10-1a An approved water supply system capable of supplying required fire flow for fire protection purposes shall be provided to all premises upon which buildings or portions of buildings are constructed. The establishment of gallons-per-minute requirements for fire flow shall be based on the "Guide for Determination of Required Fire Flow" published by the Insurance Service Office. 5.10-1b Fire hydrants shall be located and installed per Fire Department standards and approved by the Fire Chief. On-site fire hydrants shall be provided when any portion of the building protected is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, or as required by the Fire Chief. Police Protection 5.10-2 No mitigation measures are required. ~' JN 1 0-1 002 78 Services and Utilities 5.10-19 May 24, 2000 ,, GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR h ols Sc o 5.10-3 I n accordance with A. B. 2926, the developer shat I pay development fees ~~ levied in accordance'with Education Code Section 1.7620. and Government Code Sections 65995, 65995:5 and;65995.7. Library ~~ 5.10-4 No mitigation measures are required. Roadway Maintenance 5.10-5 No mitigation measures are required. RECREATION 5.10-6a Incompliance with the Quimby Act, the developer shall either dedicate land, or pay in lieu fees pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code 15.80 which requires developers of new residential uses to provide 2.5 acres of land per population projections of 1000, based on fair market value. Accordingly, project implementation would create a demand for approximately eight acres of neighborhood park land. 5.10-6b Development of park land off site, if necessary, shall be subject to U -further environmental review to ensure that significant environmental . effects, if any, are mitigated on a site specific basis. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Wastewater 5.10-7a The project applicant shall pay the appropriate connection fee to the North of River Sanitary District No. 1. All newwastewaterfacilitiesshall be located within public rights-of--way or utility easements. 5.10-7b Wastewater system design and all public mains, meters, and appurtenances shall be installed and constructed in compliance with the applicable standards, specifications, policies, and regulations of the North of River Sanitary District No. 1. Services and Utilities JN 10-100278 5.10-20 May 24, 2000 ~~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~~, 5.10-7c Development of wastewater facilities off site, if necessary, shall be subject to further environmental review to ensure that significant ,~, environmental effects, if any, are mitigated on a site specific basis. Water _ 5.10-8a The developer shall pay the appropriate connection fee to the California Water Service Company. All new water facilities shall be installed within public rights-of-way or utility easements. 5.10-8b Water system design and all public water mains, meters, and appurtenances shall be installed and constructed in compliance with the applicable standards, specifications, policies, and regulations of the California Water Service Company. 5.10-8c Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the developer shall install ~~, low water use fixtures, plumbing fixtures and appliances, to the satisfaction of the California Water Service Company. These "`~ fixtures/appliances may include the following: ~' Interior: ~~ Supply line pressure: Reduce water pressure greater than 50 pounds per square inch (psi) to 50 psi or less by means of a pressure-reducing valve; • Drinking fountains: Equip drinking fountains with self-closing valves; and • Ultra-low flush toilets: Install 1.6 gallon per flush toilets in all new construction. ~, Exterior: • Landscape with low water-consuming plants wherever feasible; ;~, Minimize use of lawn by limiting it to lawn-dependant uses; • Group plants of similar water use to reduce over irrigation of low- water-using plants; • Use mulch extensively in all landscaped areas (mulch applied on top of soil will improve the water-holding capacity of the soil by reducing evaporation and soil compaction); • Preserve and protect existing trees and shrubs (establ fished plants are often adapted to low-water-using conditions and their use saves water needed to establish replacement vegetation); - Install efficient irrigation systems which minimize runoff and ,~, evaporation and maximize the water which will reach the plant Services and Utilities r JN 10-100278 5.10-21 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR roots (drip irrigation, soil moisture sensors, and automatic irrigation systems are a few methods to consider in increasing irrigation efficiency and' may be feasible for individual development projects; and • Use pervious paving material whenever feasible to reduce surface water runoff. 5.10-8d Development of water facilities off site, if necessary, shall be subject to further environmental review to ensure that significant environmental effects, if any, are mitigated on a site specific basis. Solid Waste 5.10-9 The proposed project shall incorporate design features for the storage and collection of recyclables pursuant to federal, state, and local statutes (i.e., Bakersfield Municipal Code, Chapter8.32) and regulations related to solid waste. Electricity 5.10-10 No mitigation measures are required. Natural Gas 5.10-11 No mitigation measures are required. Telephone 5.10-12 No mitigation measures are required. Cumulative Impacts 5.10-13 No mitigation measures are required. LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION No significant impacts related to public services, recreation and utility and service systems have been identified following implementation of mitigation measures and/or compliance with applicable standards, policies, and/or City of Bakersfield codes. Services and Utilities JN 10-100278 5.10-22 May 24, 2000 1 1 1 t 1. 1 6.0 LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT r t 1 w t J 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~' 6.0 LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT 6.1 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAN'S ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY ,~ If the proposed project is approved and implemented, a variety of short-term and long- term impacts would occur. During project grading, construction, portions of '~ surrounding lands may be temporarily impacted by dust and noise. Short term erosion may occur during grading. There may also be a minor increase in dust and vehicle ~~ emissions caused by grading and construction activities. However, these disruptions would be temporary, and can be mitigated to a large degree through mitigation cited in this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the standards for construction as cited ~! in the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code (refer to Section 5.0, Description of Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures). .- The long-term effects of the proposed project and subsequent development would impact the physical, biological, aesthetic, human and fiscal environments. Long-term physical consequences of development include: increased traffic volumes, additional noise created by traffic generated from the project, incremental increased demands for public services and utilities, increased energy and natural resource consumption. ~. Long-term biological and aesthetic consequences associated with grading, construction and landscaping would also include the replacement of on-site vegetation with other - plant varieties. Incremental degradation of local and regional air quality would also ,, be a long-term impact. 6.2 IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES THAT WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE PROPOSED ACTION SHOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED Approval of the proposed project would cause irreversible environmental changes. Implementation of the proposed project would result in the following changes: r, • Commitment of land, which would be physically altered. • Vegetation removal associated with grading and construction activities. ,~, Long-Term Implications of the Proposed Project JN 10-100278 6-1 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ••• Alteration of human environment as a consequence of the development ~~ • process. The project represents a commitment to residential and commercial uses which intensifies land uses on the project sites. • Utilization of various new materials, such as lumber, sand and gravel for construction. Some of these resources are already being depleted worldwide. The energy consumed in developing and maintaining the site may be considered a permanent investment. ~ • Incremental increases in vehicularactivity in the surrounding circulation '" system, resulting in associated increases in air emissions and noise levels. ~~ 6.3 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS Section 15126.2 (d) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires a discussion of the ways in which a proposed project could foster economic ,~ or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Growth-inducing impacts include projects which would remove obstacles to population growth and projects which may ~~ encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively. Potential growth-inducing impacts are also assessed based on a project's consistency with adopted plans that have addressed ,~ growth management from a local and regional standpoint. The City of Bakersfield Initial Study Environmental Checklist form was used during preparation of the project Initial Study as contained in Appendix 15.1 of this EIR. The Initial Study includes questions relating to population and housing. In addition, Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines has been utilized for thresholds of significance in this Section. Accordingly, a project may create a significant environmental impact if one or more of the following occurs: • Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure); • Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the Q construction of replacement housing elsewhere; and/or - ' • Displace substantial n~~mbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housin~~elsewhere. Long-Term Implications of the Proposed Project ,~ JN 1 0-1 002 78 6-2 May 24, 2000 P ZCP9-42 G A/ 9 0 8 PROGRAM EIR .~. Potential growth-inducing impacts from the proposed project are analyzed below as \~ they relate to population, housing and employment factors. Also refer to Section 5.7 Land Use Compatibility, for additional analysis. REGIONAL AND LOCAL SETTING Population According to the California Department of Finance, the County of Kern had a January 1, 1999 population of 648,400 persons. Approximately 60 percent, or 389,000 \~ persons, of the County population resides within the Metropolitan Bakersfield area.' According to City of Bakersfield population estimates, Metropolitan Bakersfield has grown by over 17 percent since 1990 (based on 1990 Metropolitan Bakersfield population of 320,000 persons and 1999 population of 389,000 persons). The area is anticipated to continue this population growth trend by increasing to 440,100 persons in 2005, and 480,000 persons by 2010.2 The above population projections published by the City of Bakersfield in May 1999 have been adjusted based on recent growth trends in the area and vary from those ~~. projections contained within the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. For example, the General Plan anticipated a Metropolitan population of 384,639 persons by the year 2010 (this figure is substantially below the City's 1999 adjusted 2010 population of 480,000 persons). The Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan Housing Element also included population figures based on population growth trends ' as of May 1990. The Housing Element estimates a year 2000 Metropo-itan Bakersfield - population of 414,085 persons (above the 1999 adjusted forecast of 400,300 persons .- for year 2000) and a 2010 population of 519,811 persons (above the 1999 adjusted forecast of 480,000 persons for 2010). Thus, the 1999 adjusted population projections indicate a slower rate of population growth in the Metropolitan Bakersfield area than anticipated in the General Plan. ~' Housing ~, The California Department of Finance estimates that 85,480 dwelling units were located within the City of Bakersfield as of January 1, 1999. These units represent approximately 37 percent of the total number of dwelling units within the County of ' 1999 population data was obtained from Report E-s, California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit, 1999. Figure of 60 percent obtained from the City of Bakersfield Planning Department, prepared on May 7, 1999. The Metropolitan Bakersfield populati~~n is estimated covering the 2010 planning area and ' includes unincorporated lands (Kern COG/City of Bakersfield estimates). ` z Bakersfield Population and Area, prepared by the City of Bakersfield Planning Department, May 7, 1999. Projections are based on the linear regression model. .~' Long-Term Implications of the Proposed Project JN 10-100278 6-3 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Kern which contains 231,629 dwelling units. The average number of persons per ~, household in the City was 2.82 with 5.60 percent of the units vacant.3 The Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan estimates that approximately 153,856 dwelling units would be located within the Metropolitan area in 2010.4 , , Employment In December 1999, the City of Bakersfield had a labor force of 100,190 persons and contained 92,270 jobs.s These figures translate into an unemployment rate of 7.9 percent. This unemployment rate is lower than the County average of 10.7 percent. The Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan anticipates that approximately 244,406 jobs would be located within the Metropolitan area at buildout with approximately 144,411 of these jobs within the commercial sector.b Estimates of employment in the Bakersfield Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) (which ~~ includes all of Kern County) were obtained from the Labor Market Information Division of the California State Employment Development Department. According to these statistics, there were 234,700 jobs in the MSA as of December 1999. This figure represents an increase of 5,700 jobs or 2.5 percent above December of 1998. As of December 1999, the County's unemployment rate was 10.7 percent which was higher lhi that the State and United States unemployment rate for the same period (4.6 percent ~' and 3.7 percent, respectively). _ PROJECT IMPACTS Site Growth Potential With Current Industrial Designations The project sites are currently designated for light industrial, service industrial and heavy industrial by County of Kern General Plan. Assuming development of industrial .\Q uses on-site under the existing County land use designations, there would be no direct impact with regard to housing and population growth would not occur on-site. .~ 3 1999 housing information was obtained from Report E-5, California Department of Finance, .~ Demographic Research Unit, obtained May 1999. a Final EIR for the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, September 1989, Table 7-1. s Employment data obtained from the California Employment Development Department, Labor Market Information Division. Data is based on the 1998 benchmark and is not seasonally adjusted. County data is for December 1999. 6 Based on General Plan buildout of 144,41 1 employees in the commercial sector and 99,995 employees in the industrial sector perFinal EIR for the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, September 1989, D_ Table 7-1. ' Long-Term Implications of the Proposed Project JN 10-100278 6-4 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR However, if developed as industrial uses, the project area could generate approximately 6,390 new jobs upon buildout.' Site Growth Potential With Proposed Project r The proposed project would result in changes to the Land Use Element of the #° Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan from the current County designation of light industrial, service industrial and heavy industrial to low density residential, low medium density residential and commercial. The proposed project would directly result in increases in the local population and housing resulting in a maximum of 727 dwelling units. Utilizing the Department of Finance factor of 2.8 persons per dwelling \~ unit for the City of Bakersfield, the site would introduce up to 2,036 residents into the City. It is also estimated that 116,800 square feet of commercial uses assumed on the 14-acres proposed for commercial uses would generate approximately 351 new jobs onsite.8 A Impact Analysis The Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan includes the project sites within the City's Sphere of Influence and anticipates future industrial development to create an estimated 6,390 new jobs within the area.9 However, the project proposes an amendment to the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan which would affect the overall housing, population and employment which was anticipated for the area. 1 1 1 A 1 Housing. As stated previously, the California Department of Finance estimates that 85,480 dwelling units were located within the City of Bakersfield as of January 1, 1999. The proposed project would directly increase the current housing stock by on estimated 727 units or 0.9 percent. Population. As stated previously, there are currently 389,000 persons residing within the City of Bakersfield. It is estimated that the proposed project would increase the current population of Bakersfield by 2,036 residents or 0.5 percent. Employment. The proposed project includes an amendment to the General Plan to allow commercial uses on-site, resulting in additional employment opportunities that ' Employment generation factor for general industrial obtained from Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), August 24, 1999. BTable II-3 Estimated General Plan Buildout: NetChange in Development, Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, March 1990, page II-16. 9 Employment generation factor for general industrial obtained from Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), August 24, 1999. Long-Term Implications of the Proposed Project JN 10-100278 6-5 ~' May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR were not directly anticipated in the General Plan and regional employment projections. ,~, The project would consist of removing the current industrial uses employment potential from the County and transferring the new commercial employment into the City of Bakersfield. According to the California Employment Development Department, as of December 1999, 92,270 jobs occurred within the City of Bakersfield. It is estimated that the proposed commercial uses would generate approximately 351 new jobs or increase the employment in the area by 0.4 Percent. Conclusion. The project is located within the designated Urban Northwest Planning , Area of the Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. The 2010 General Plan notes that the City's sphere of influence boundaries were utilized to help define the boundaries of planned urban growth within the Bakersfield area. Table II-2, Existing Development, 2010 Demand Development and Plan Capacity, of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 -- General Plan, provides a buildout forecast for residential, commercial and industrial uses. Due to the fact that the proposed project was not known and considered for the 2010 projections and amends the 2010 General Plan, thus removing an obstacle to residential growth in the project area (the obstacle being the current County Industrial land use designation of the project site), approval of the project would create agrowth- inducing impact. Since the proposed project is situated within the City's urban service boundary and is within the City's Sphere of Influence, as referenced in the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, impacts are concluded to be less than significant. 1 Long-Term Implications of the Proposed Project JN 10-100278 6-6 May 24, 2000 1 1 1 1 1 1 A 7.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT 1 t G A t 1 ~~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~, 7.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT In accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15126.6, the following Section describes a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project which could feasiblely attain the basic objectives of the proposed project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of each alternative. The analysis focuses on alternatives capable of eliminating significant adverse environmental effects or -" reducing them to less than significant levels, even if these alternatives would impede, to some degree, the attainment of the project objectives. Potential environmental impacts associated with four separate alternatives are compared to impacts from the proposed project below. These alternatives include: ,~ 1) "No Development" Alternative; 2) "No Project" Alternative; 3) "Reduced Density" Alternative; 4) "Off Site" Alternative; 5) "Environmentally Superior" Alternative. 7.1 "NO DEVELOPMENT" ALTERNATIVE Description of Alternative Implementation of the "No Development" Alternative would disregard the proposed project application and retain the existing land use and zoning designations for the project site. This alternative assumes that no new land uses (including infrastructure improvements) would be added to the project site. Portions of the project site currently under agriculture production would remain and crop rotation practices would continue. Im act Com arison to Pro osed Project P P P 1 The "No Development" Alternative would not result in any of the environmental impacts associated with development of the project. This Alternative would avoid potential impacts resulting from alteration of the project site's physical characteristics, ' health and safety impacts and construction of new structures and impervious surfaces. Maintaining the project site in its existing condition would also eliminate potential impacts to any unknown cultural resources that may exist and would not alter the visual characteristics of the project site. The "No Development" Alternative would not result in the construction of uses associated with the proposed project; therefore, aesthetic, air quality and noise impacts resulting from construction and operation of the proposed land uses would be avoided. Alternatives )N 10-100278 7-1 May 24, 2000 • ~~• ` ~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR i i i I w l n r w i h i I '~ Traffic and c rculat on mpacts a so ou d of occu t th s A ternative, as vacant land would not generate traffic. By not constructing the proposed uses, increased demands on public services and utilities would not occur; therefore associated impacts would be avoided. Implementation of the "No Development" Alternative would avoid the environmental ~, impacts identified for the proposed project, however, this Alternative would not preclude the potential for development of the property at some future date. Ability to Meet Project Objectives The "No Development" Alternative is considered to be environmentally superiorto the proposed project. However, this Alternative would not realize any of the project objectives as indicated in Section 3.0, PROJECT DESCRIPTION, thus, this alternative is not under any further consideration. 7.2 "NO PROJECT" ALTERNATIVE Description of Alternative As required by Section 15126 (d)(4) of the State CEQA Guidelines, a "No Project" Alternative has been included in the EIR. With the "No Project" Alternative, the project area would be developed to the maximum intensity allowed under the existing land - use designation. Implementation of this alternative would consist of development on 64.58 acres of a mix of light industrial, service industrial and heavy industrial land use designations. In addition, development of 91.84 acres would develop under the heavy industrial designation and 14.48 acres would develop under the service industrial designation. `~ Impact Comparison to Proposed Project n, The following is an analysis of impacts associated with the "No Project" Alternative when compared to the proposed project. It is noted that the intensity of future industrial uses and the type of operations which would occur onsite as a result of this alternative (i.e., light, medium, heavy industries) is unknown at this time. As such, site specific considerations such as building orientations/setbacks, square footage, parking, and lighting cannot be quantified. Thus, areas such as traffic, air, noise and public services and utilities are discussed qualitatively. Aesthetics/Light and Glare. Development of the industrial uses associated with this ~ alternative would alter views of and across the site from surrounding uses. Views of vacant land currently in agricultural production and open space would be replaced with views of industrial developments. However, the Bakersfield 2010 General Plan __ Alternatives JN 1 0-1 002 78 7-2 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~` EIR states that develo ment in accordance with the General Plan would convert p -- existing open space to urban uses, resulting in the incremental loss of open space within Bakersfield. This conversion was considered an unavoidable adverse impact. Thus on a cumulative level, implementation of this alternative would result in a similar adverse impact due to the loss of open space as compared to the proposed project. When compared to the proposed project, this alternative may result in increased light and glare impacts both on- and off-site areas as a result of industrial activities during evening and night time hours. Air .ualitx. Since this alternative would increase the intensity of development, PM,o impacts related to construction activities compared to the proposed project, would increase under this alternative. Project-related traffic both on- and off-site would increase. In addition, the industrial development may increase overall emissions, depending on the uses. Therefore, compared to the proposed project, this alternative may result in greater air quality impacts. Biolo ical Resources. Similar to the ro osed ro'ect this alternative would result in r r r J , the loss of 170.6 acres of non-native habitats and its associated wildlife. It would not substantially diminish habitat for wildlife in the region. Overall, when compared to the proposed project, this alternative may create similar impacts on biological resources due to the similar size development areas. ,~ Cultural Resources. Neither site CA-KER-2873 nor site CA-KER-2874 are located within 1 the limits of the proposed development areas. Thus, when compared to the proposed project, this alternative may create similar impacts on cultural resources due to the similar development areas. Geology and Soils. Onsite characteristics include soils with a low to marginal potential for soil expansion, seismically active and a low occurrence of high ground water. Overall, the intensity of future seismic activity onsite is expected to be no greater than for other sites in the immediate vicinity. Thus, when compared to the proposed project, this alternative would have a similar impact due to similar size development areas. Human Health/Risk of Upset. Similar to the proposed project, implementation of this alternative would result in potentially significant human health and risk of upset impacts. This alternative would expose individuals, primarily employees,tosimilaroil- field related activities and their associated affects (i.e. gas migration, blowouts, and soil contamination). However, this alternative would consist of industrial uses which would be located inclose proximity to similar uses and precludes the development of residential uses onsite. Therefore, when compared to the proposed project, the ___ potential for human health and risk of upset impacts may be less with development of this alternative. Alternatives JN 10-100278 7-3 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Land Use Compatibility. When compared to the proposed project, this alternative would not require a General Plan Amendment and zone change to allow industrial uses onsite. This alternative would be consistent with land uses identified in the 2010 General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Implementation of this alternative would result in an increase of industrial uses within a primarily industrialized area, therefore, when compared to the proposed project, the development intensity and subsequent land use impacts may be greater. -- Noise. Noise impacts from vehicle trips would be increased in comparison to noise ~ levels identified with the proposed project. The substantial increase in the amount of , trips to and from the industrial uses under this alternative would increase the project- ~ related traffic and, therefore, substantially increase traffic noise. Additionally, ~ stationary noise impacts would result in an increase in the ambient noise level onsite and throughout the general area under this alternative when compared to the proposed residential uses as varying industrial operations which may occupy the project site under this alternative. Overall, when compared to the proposed project, this alternative may result in greater noise impacts. Traffic and Circulation. Development of industrial uses would result in an increased number of average daily trips (ADTs) primarily associated with employee trips to and from the site including trips associated with shipments and deliveries. Since this alternative would result in an increased number of trips when compared to the proposed project a greater impacts to intersections and roadway segments may occur. Overall, when compared to the proposed project, this alternative may result in greater circulation impacts. Services and Utilities. Develo ment of this alternative ma result in an increased need p Y for water, electrical, gas and telephone services associated with industrial uses. Additionally, this alternative may have the capacity (depending on the type of use) to generate additional solid waste and wastewater when compared to the proposed ' ' project. Since this alternative consists of industrial uses there would not be a direct impact to the increase in population, demand on fire services, police services, roadway maintenance, schools, and an increased demand on parks. Overall, when compared to the proposed project, this alternative may have increased impacts to utilities (i.e., water, electricity, gas, and telephone). Conclusion Implementation of the "No Project" Alternative may result in a similar in impacts related to most issue areas, particularly aesthetics/light and glare, biological resources, cultural resources, geological resources and public services. Imp~ts associated with air quality, land use compatibility, noise, utilities and traffic and circulation may be greater when compared to proposed project. However, the impact to human health Alternatives JN 10-100278 7-4 May 24, 2000 l GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR and risk of upset, when compared to the proposed project may be less of an impact for `~ this alternative project. Ability to Meet Project Objectives Due to the "No Project" Alternative proposed industrial uses, this alternative would not. meet the project objectives. In turn, this alternative would create more jobs within the Bakersfield area instead of residential uses. 7.3 "REDUCED DENSITY" ALTERNATIVE Description of Alternative The "Reduced Density" Alternative results in the elimination of the Low-Medium Density Residential development proposed for the southwest portion of the project area. Therefore, this alternative considers development of two separate development pockets , consisting of the proposed Low Density Residential and General Commercial pockets, which would require an amendment to the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General~Plan with concurrent zone change. One development site consists of 64.58 acres, requiring a general plan amendment from Light Industrial, Service Industrial and Heavy Industrial to Low Density Residential. ~~ The second development site consists of 14.48 acres, requiring a general plan amendment from Service Industrial to General Commercial. Impact Comparison to Proposed Project The following is an analysis of impacts associated with the "Reduced Density" ,' Alternative when compared to the proposed project. This alternative assumes that the Low-Medium Residential development site would remain vacant. Aesthetics/Light and Glare. Development of the Low Density Residential and General Commercial developments associated with this alternative would alter views of and across the site from surrounding uses. Views of vacant land currently in agricultural production and open space onsite would be replaced with views of residential and - commercial developments. Overall, the Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR states that i development in accordance with the General Plan would convert existing open space to urban uses, resulting in the incremental loss of open space within Bakersfield. This conversion was considered an unavoidable adverse impact. However, when compared ~~ to the proposed project, implementation of this alternative would result in fewer aesthetic impacts due to the Low-Medium Density Residential portion of the proposed project remaining undeveloped. It is noted that future development proposals on this _ undeveloped portion of the project would be required to comply with the requirements of CEQA and consider potential aesthetic impacts associated with development. _ _ __ _ .. _ Alternatives JN 10-100278 7-5 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR When compared to the proposed project, this alternative would result in less impact in regards to aesthetics/light and glare. l Air uality. Since this a ternative would decrease the intensity of development, PM,o impacts related to construction activities compared to the proposed project, would decrease. Project-related traffic both on- and off-site would be decrease due to the reduced densities. Therefore, compared to the proposed project, this alternative would - result in reduced air quality impacts. Biological Resources. This alternative would result in the loss of 79.06 acres of non- native habitats and its associated wildlife which is considered to be an adverse effect, however, it would not diminish habitat for wildlife in the region. Overall, when compared to the proposed project, this alternative would create less impacts on biological resources as approximately 91.84 acres would be excluded from development. Cultural Resources. Neither site CA-KER-2873 nor siteCA-KER-2874are locatedwithin the limits of this alternative development areas. Thus, when compared to the proposed project, this alternative would create less impacts on cultural resources. Geology and Soils. Onsite characteristics include soils with a low to marginal potential for soil expansion and a low occurrence of high ground water. Overall, the intensity immediate vicinity. Thus, when compared to the proposed project, this alternative would have a similar impact. of future seismic activity onsite is expected to be no greater than for other sites in the ~' Human Health/Risk of Upset. Similar to the proposed project, implementation of this ~" alternative would result in potentially significant human health and risk of upset impacts. This alternative would expose individuals to similar oil-field related activities and their associated affects (i.e. gas migration, blowouts, and soil contamination). ~- Although this alternative would result in a reduction in the number of persons living within the project boundaries, public health and safety impacts for this alternative ~. would be similar to the proposed project. Land Use Compatibility. Similartothe proposed project, this alternative would require a General Plan Amendment and zone change to all allow the residential and commercial uses onsite. Implementation of this alternative would result in a substantial reduction in the number of dwelling units; therefore, the development intensity and subsequent land use impacts would be less when compared to the proposed project. Noise. Noise impacts would decrease in comparison to noise levels identified with the - proposed project. There would bean increase of noise generated both on-and off-site D' from the proposed residential. and commercial uses when compared to existing ~ " Alternatives JN 10-100278 7-6 May 24, 2000 1 1 1 1 C t GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR conditions. However, when compared to the three development areas considered under the proposed project, this alternative would result in reduced noise impacts. Traffic and Circulation. When compared to the proposed project, this alternative would result in less impacts to intersections and roadway segments as the number of proposed residential dwelling units is significantly reduced. Overall, when compared to the proposed project, this alternative would result in less circulation impacts. Service and Utilities. Development of this alternative would result in an increased need for fire services, police services, roadway maintenance, water, electrical, gas, telephone service, solid waste and wastewater for the site-when compared to existing conditions. As such, this alternative would create an increase in population, thus resulting in a greater demand on schools and parks in the surrounding area. However, as approximately 918 dwelling units would not be constructed under this alternative, a proportional decrease in the demands for public services and utilities would occur. Therefore, when compared to the proposed project, this alternative would have less impact on service and utilities. Conclusion Implementation of the "Reduced Density" Alternative would result in less impacts related to most all issue areas, particularly aesthetics/light and glare, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, human health/risk of upset, land use compatibility, noise, traffic and circulation and services and utilities. However, the impact of geology and soils, when compared to the proposed project would result in a similar impact. Ability to Meet Project Objectives Under the "Reduced Density" Alternative, with the elimination of the Low Medium Residential site, this alternative would partially meet all of the project objectives. 7.4 "OFF SITE" ALTERNATIVE Pursuant to ~ 15126 (d)(5)(B)1 of the State CEQA Guidelines, "the key question and first step in analysis is whether any of the significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the project in another location: Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR." Alternatives JN 10-100278 7-7 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Description of Alternative The "Off-site" alternative assumes the development of the project within another area ~~ of the City of Bakersfield or within it's sphere of influence. According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, approximately 82 percent of the General Plan Study Area is undeveloped land inagricultural/open space and/or mineral/petroleum use. Therefore an adequate amount of available land exists which may be used as "off-site" alternative site. Impacts would vary depending on the site location and surrounding uses. As the proposed project site contains no substantial site constraints that would preclude development, any project would be expected to have similar impacts. No alternative sites were suggested by potentially effected agencies, as part of the early consultation process. It should also be noted that development of the project on a different site would not preclude development of the proposed site in accordance with the existing General Plan. Ability to Meet the Project Objectives ]~ While the "Off Site" Alternative may meet the primary objectives established for the - proposed project, based on general site information contained in the City's General Plan and General Plan EIR, it does not significantly eliminate or reduce any of the significant impacts identified for the proposed project. The viability of an alternative site with regard to suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general ~' plan consistency, jurisdictional boundaries and property ownership also remain in question. n 7.5 "ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR" ALTERNATIVE CEQA Section 15126(d)(2) indicates that if the "No Project" Alternative is the ;q "Environmentally Superior" Alternative, then the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. The "No Development" Alternative (Existing Conditions), in this case, would not result in the environmental impacts associated with construction of the proposed residential and commercial projects to be less than the proposed project. Among the other alternatives _ assessed in this EIR, the "Reduced Density" Alternative would when compared to the proposed project, result in reduced environmental impacts, while meeting to some degree the project objectives and not increase the significance of anticipated impacts. The "Reduced Density" Alternative would result in reduced noise and air pollutant emissions, would generate a reduced numberof average daily trips, and would require less of a demand on public service and utilities. As a result, the "Reduced Density" Alternative may be considered an Environmentally Superior Alternative. Alternatives )N 10-100278 7-8 May 24, 2000 i 1 8.0 INVENTORY OF MITIGATION MEASURES 1 L 1 ~' GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM,EIR 8.0 INVENTORY OF MITIGATION MEASURES AESTHETICS/LIGHT AND GLARE Short-Term Aesthetic Impacts 5.1-1a Construction equipment staging areas shall be located away from existing residential uses and appropriate screening (i.e., temporary fencing with opaque material), shall be used to buffer views of construction equipment and material, when feasible. Staging location shall be indicated on project Final Development Plans and Grading Plans. 5.1-1 b Hours for construction shall be consistent with the City of Bakersfield Construction Noise Standards. Long-Term Aesthetic Impacts 5.1-2 No mitigation measures are required. Light and Glare 5.1-3 No mitigation measures are required. Cumulative Impacts 5.1-4 No mitigation measure are required. AIR QUALITY Short-Term Impacts 5.2-1 a Prior to the approval of a grading plan for any residential tract, multiple family project, and commercial project, the project applicant shall submit a letter to the City of Bakersfield Planning Department from the SJVUAPCD stating the dust suppression measures that shall be completed during construction activities in order to comply with SJVUAPCD Regulation VIII. At a minimum, these measures shall include: the replacement of ground cover in disturbed areas quickly; proper maintenance of construction equipment; watering of haul roads two times per day; reduced speeds on unpaved roads of 15 miles per hour or less; and the use of low volatile organic compound asphalt. Inventory of Mitigation Measures JN 10-100278 8-1 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 5.2-1 b Prior to the approval of a grading plan for any residential tract, multiple family project, and commercial project, the project applicant shall submit a letter to the City of Bakersfield Planning Department from the SJUAPCD stating the measures that shall be completed during asphalt paving in order to comply with S)VUAPCD Rule 4641. 5.2-1c The construction grading plans shall include a statement that all construction equipment shall be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacture's specifications. 5.2-1 d The construction grading plans shal I include a statement that work crews shall shut off construction equipment when not in use. Long-Term Impacts ~__ 5.2-2 The project applicant shall incorporate the following in building plans: • Solar or low-emission water heater shall be used; • Central water heating systems shall be used; • Double-panned glass shall be used in all windows; and • Energy efficient low-sodium lighting in parking areas shall be used. Conformity with Air Quality Attainment Plan 5.2-3 No mitigation measures are feasible. Cumulative Impacts 5.2-4 Mitigation measures beyond those contained in applicable plans and policies would be implemented on aproject-by-project basis. No p additional mitigation measures are required. u BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ~~ Sensitive Natural Community 5.3-1 No mitigation measures are required. Candidate/sensitive/Special Status Species 5.3-2a The project applicant shall pay aone-time mitigation fee due and payable to the City of Bakersfield at the time grading plans are approved ,~ or building permits are issued. The mitigation fee is currently $1,240 Inventory of Mitigation Measures JN 10-100278 8-2 May 24, 2000 ~~ GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR per acre (Burns pers. com. 2000) and may be increased to keep pace with inflation (City of Bakersfield 1994). The mitigation fee shall apply to the project sites in their entirety. 5.3-2b Prior to construction activities, focused surveys for the San Joaquin kit fox shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if any known kit fox dens are located on the project sites. If an active den is not found, no further mitigation would be necessary. However, if an active den is present, kit foxes shall be relocated by a qualified biologist using CDFG-and USFWS-approved methods. If the biologist determines that relocation is not practicable, he/she shall destroy the den according to CDFG-and USFWS-approved methods to allow the foxes to relocate on their own. Results of the surveys shall be provided to CDFG. - i nstruction activities a ualified biolo ist shall 5.3 2c Thirty days pr or to co q g conduct a survey to determine if the burrowing owl is present on the project sites and the nesting status of any individuals present. If nesting is not occurring, construction work shall proceed after any owls have been evacuated from the project sites using CDFG-approved burrow closure procedures. If an active nest is present, to protect any active burrow site, the following restriction on construction shall be required between February 1 and June 30 or until nests are no longer active as determined by the project biologist: clearing limits shall be established by the biologist in any direction from raptor nests/burrows depending on the species and existing conditions. Results of the surveys and relocation efforts shall be provided to CDFG. 5.3-2d Thirty days prior to construction activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey to determine if any raptors are nesting in trees on the project sites. If nesting is not occurring, construction work shall i proceed. If an active nest is present, to protect any active nest/burrow sites, the following restriction on construction shall be required between February 1 and June 30 or until nests are no longer active as determined by the project biologist: clearing limits shall be established by the biologist in any direction from raptor nests/burrows depending on the species and existing conditions. Results of the surveys shall be provided to CDFG. Wildlife Movement 5.3-3 No mitigation measures are required. Inventor of Mitigation Measures 1 )N 10-100278 8-3 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ,~ Conservation Plan ~~ 5.3-4 Refer to Mitigation Measures 5.3-2a and 5.3-2b. Cumulative Impacts 5.3-5 No mitigation measures are required. CULTURAL RESOURCES a On-Site Archaeological and Historical Resources ;~ 5.4-1 a Priorto construction, the project applicant shall implement the following measures as outlined in the February, 1991 Archaeological Assessment for the project area: • Recorded sites CA-KER-2873 and CA-KER-2874 shall be mapped and surface collected. • Two backhoe trenches (minimum depth: 1.5m. [5 ft.]) and two test units (1 x 2 m.) shall be placed at each recorded site to determine the presence and content of any intact subsurface deposit. Further recommendations, if any, will depend on the results of these tests. • Efforts shall be made to locate, borrow, and record artifacts previously removed from the project area. 5.4-1 b In the event that a material of potential cultural significance is uncovered during grading activities on the project sites, all grading shall cease and the project applicant shall retain a professional archaeologist to evaluate the quality and significance of the material. Grading shall not continue until resources have been completely removed by the archaeologist and recorded as appropriate. Compliance with this measure is subject to periodic field inspection the project applicant. Cumulative Impacts 5.4-2 No mitigation measures are required. 1 1 Inventory of Mitigation Measures JN 10-100278. 8-4 May 24, 2000 1 1 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR GEOLOGY AND SOILS Geology/Seismicity 5.5-1 a The proposed project structures and improvements shall be designed in accordance with all applicable requirements of the Uniform Building Code and the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code. 1 1 1 5.5-1b Engineering design for all structures shall consider the probability that the project area will be subjected to strong ground motion during the lifetime of the proposed developments. Construction plans shall be subject to the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code and shall call for standards which address horizontal bedrock accelerations of at least 0.24 gravity. Soils 5.5-2a Pursuant to City of Bakersfield Municipal Code Sections 9 '.16.16.1.00, prior to site grading or excavation, the project applicant shall submit to the Engineering Division for review and approval, an Erosion Control Plan. 5.5-2b Incompliance with the Kern County California Soil Survey, a community sewage system shall be designed and implemented in association with the proposed low-medium density residential housing (LMR Site), to the satisfaction of the City of Bakersfield Engineering Department. 5.5-3 No mitigation measures are required. Cumulative Impacts 5.5-4 No mitigation measures are required. HUMAN HEALTH/RISK OF UPSET Agricultural Use of Property r t 5.6-1 Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the project applicant shall perform soil tests to determine concentrations of pesticide and fungicide residues which may be present within the project site. Should contaminant levels be in excess of acceptable Federal, State and/or County levels, the project applicant shall identify and implement remedial action, subject to approval by the City of Bakersfield and Inventory of Mitigation Measures JN 10-100278 8-5 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR responsible regulatory agencies to reduce contaminants to acceptable levels. 5.6-2 No mitigation measures are required. Oil Production Facilities 5.6-3a Pursuant to the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (Division), active wells which would remain upon project completion and associated equipment within the project area shall be enclosed by an eight-foot block wall. Appropriate gates shall be installed and climbable landscaping around the perimeter of the facility shall be avoided. The inside grade of the facility shall be constructed so that potential spillage will be confined to the enclosure. Improvements are the responsibility of the project applicant/developer. 5.6-3b Sufficient access to the existing and abandoned wells shall be maintained in order for the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (Division) to investigate the conditions of the wellheads and check for leakage. If any reabandonments are required, the Division shall furnish necessary specifications to the property owner. 5.6-3c If any abandoned or unrecorded wells are uncovered, or damaged during excavation or grading activities, remedial plugging operations pursuant to Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources requirements would be required. 5.6-3d Prior to issuance of building permits, any discovered oil contaminated soil shall be remediated to the satisfaction of the Local Unified Program Agency (the Office of Environmental Services-Bakersfield City Fire Department) in conjunction with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and/or California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 5.6-3e Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall provide sufficient evidence that the existing groundwaterwell has been properly closed pursuant to the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCG) requirements. Hazardous Materials/Substances 5.6-4a Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the project applicant shall remove all above ground storage tanks and oil storage drums from the sewage treatment plant facility. Areas beneath the storage drums and _ .- Inventory_of Mitigation Measures JN 1 0-1 002 78 8-6 May 24, 2000 1 1 i~ 1 1 u 1 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR storage tanks shall be re-inspected to verify if additional staining has occurred. All reported stained soils as well as newly identified staining shat l be tested, removed, and properly disposed of off-site in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations. 5.6-4b Prior to demo) ition work, the applicant shall sample structures within the sewage treatment area (i.e., equipment shed, truck shed, maintenance shop, engine room, and office building) to determine the presence or absence of asbestos containing materials (AGMs). Any demolition of the existing buildings shall comply with State law, which requires a contractor, where there is asbestos-related work involving 100 square feet or more of AGMs, to be certified and that certain procedures regarding the removal of asbestos be followed. 5.6-4c If during demolition of the structure, paint is separated from the building material (e.g., chemically or physically), the paint waste shall be evaluated independently from the building material to determine its proper management. Should the LBP materials require disposal, the applicant shall contact the landfill operator in advance to determine any specific requirements they may have regarding the disposal of LBP materials. Proximity to Adjacent Heavy Industrial Uses 5.6-5a Prior to approval of final development plans, the City shall confirm that appropriate setback distances for future residential units from the existing heavy industrial area to the southeast are applied pursuant to the criteria established by the City of Bakersfield and County of Kern Fire Departments. The greatest bufferdistance calculated in accordance with these criteria shall be the minimum set back distance approved without consideration of other potential safety programs. The requirements include the following: • 330 feet; or • The endpoint distance shall be based upon the chemical specific, Emergency Response Planning Guide 2 (ERPG 2) concentration, using the alternate release scenario (i.e., the most credible accidental release scenario) for an airborne Acutely Hazardous Material (AHM) toxic gas release from any facilities in the adjacent zone; or • The endpoint distance of a one pound per square inch (1 psi) over pressure, based on the alternate release scenario (i.e., the Inventory of Mitigation Measures JN 10-100278 8-7 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR most credible release) of a flammable substance vapor cloud ,. explosion from any facilities with more than 10,000 pounds (2,500 gallons) of a flammable gas in a process in the adjacent , zone; or • The end point distance shall be based on the radiant heat exposure that potentially could cause second degree burns, to a person forthe duration of the fireball resulting from a BLEVE from any facility with more than 10,000 pounds (2,500 gallons) of a , flammable gas stored in multiple containers; or • The endpoint distance of the zone of impact of a one in ten , million lifetime cancer risk from a facility subject to Section 44300 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code. This criteria would only apply to construction adjacent to existing facilities that have reported continuous releases subject to the (Air Toxics Hot Spots Act of 1987). ~ 5.6-Sb Prior to project approvals for future industrial uses located between the future residential development and the existing heavy industries, the City shall utilize the distance criteria developed by the City of Bakersfield and County of Kern fire departments and provide sufficient setbacks for the industrial uses. Refer to criteria outlined above. ' Electric And Magnetic Fields 5.6-6 No miti ation measures are re uired. , g q Air Traffic And Rail Line Hazards Air Traffic Hazards 5.6-7 No mitigation measures are required. Rail Line Hazards 5.6-8 No mitigation measures are required. Valley Fever 5.6-9a Refer to Section ~.6, Air Qualit , re ardin fu itive dust miti ation Y g g g g measures. Inventory of Mitigation Measures D )N 10-100278 8-8 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 5.6-9b All areas with bare soil exposed as a result of grading activities shall be landscaped at the earliest time possible or stabilized by watering when winds exceed 25 miles per hour in order to reduce the potential inhalation of spores causing Valley Fever. Cumulative Impacts 5.6-10 No mitigation measures beyond those identified on aproject-by-project basis are required. LAND USE Conversion of Undeveloped Land 5.7-1 No mitigation measures are required. Conversion of Agricultural Land 5.7-2 No mitigation measures are required. Loss of Mineral Resource 5.7-3 No mitigation measures are required. Refer to Section 5.6, Human Health/Risk of Upset. Land Use Compatibility 5.7-4 No mitigation measures are required. Refer to Section 5.1, Aesthetics, Section 5.8, Noise, Section 5.9, Traffic and Circulation, and Section 5.6, Human Health/Risk of Upset. General Plan Consistency 5.7-5 No mitigation measures are required. Circulation Designations 5.7-6 No mitigation measures are required. Refer to Section 5.9, Traffic and Circulation. Cumulative Impacts 5.7-7 No mitigation measures are required. - Inventory of Mitigation Measures JN 10-100278 8-9 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR NOISE Short-Term Construction-related Impacts a 5.8-1 No mitigation measures are required. Long-Term Traffic Noise Impacts a On-Site Vehicular Noise Impacts O 5.8-2a To reduce significant traffic noise impacts to below 65 dBA CNEL at proposed low density and low-medium density residential locations a situated adjacent to collector and arterial roadways, the project applicant shall incorporate sound barriers, along cited roadways (Knudsen Drive, Hageman Road, Mohawk Street, and Krebs Road). Since lot design and grading plans are not yet available, the exact height and location of barriers cannot be accurately determined at this time. Therefore, prior to Final Development Plan approval; the project applicant shall prepare an acoustical analysis to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, which provides location and heights of future sound barriers. Off-Site Vehicular Noise Impacts 5.8-2b No mitigation measures are required. Long-Term Stationary Noise Impacts a 5.8-3 Prior to Final Development Plan approval, a subsequent noise analysis shall be prepared, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, which a demonstrates that site placement of stationary noise sources associated with future commercial uses would not exceed criteria established in Chapter 9.22 of the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code, for adjacent residences. To demonstrate commercial noise source impacts are below the City's standards, the project applicant may need to include project design features such as setbacks, barriers, building location/orientation, acoustical design of buildings, etc. Oil Production Equipment Noise Levels D 5.8-4 No mitigation measures are required. Q Cumulative Impacts 11 5.8-5 No mitigation measures are re uired. D q Inventory of Mitigation Measures JN 1 0-1 002 78 8-10 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION Opening Year 5.9-1a The following improvements shall be implemented off-site in conjunction with the proposed development: • Krebs Road shall be constructed adjacent to the project site at its ultimate half-section width as a Collector (2 lanes undivided) in conjunction with development. '~ Mohawk Street shall be constructed adjacent to the project site (south of Hageman Road) at its ultimate half-section width as an Arterial (4 lanes divided) in conjunction with development. • Landco Road shall be constructed adjacent to the project site (north of Hageman Road) at its ultimate cross-section width as a Arterial (4 lanes divided) in conjunction with development. • Hageman Road shall be constructed adjacent to the project site (west of Mohawk Street) at its ultimate half-section width as an Arterial (6 lanes divided) and as an Arterial (4 lanes divided) east of Mohawk Street in conjunction with development. 5.9-1 b Traffic signing/striping within the project boundaries shall be implemented in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the project. 5.9-1c Sight distance at each intersection shall be reviewed with respect to Caltrans/City of Bakersfield sight distance standards at the time of ~ preparation of final grading, landscape and street improvement plans. 5.9-1 ~~ ~)penngday mitigation measures i n sections 5.9-1 a through 5:9-1 c sha~l! be required`to be implemented with `the first phase of development.:. Cumulative: Year 2020 5.9-2a The project shall participate through payment of fees in the phased construction of off-site roadway improvements and traffic signals forthe Year 2020 follows: Olive Drive Knudsen Drive to Roberts Lane • Six lanes divided Inventory of Mitigation Measures JN 10-100278 8-11 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Ha eman Road '~ g West of Patton Way to Mohawk Street • Six lanes divided Mohawk Street to SR-204 Freeway • Four lanes divided Rosedale Highway (SR-58) West of Patton Way.to Mohawk Street • Six lanes divided Mohawk Street to east of Oak Street • Eight lanes divided Fruitvale Avenue Hageman Road to Rosedale Highway (SR-58) • Four lanes divided Mohawk Street Ha eman Road to Rosedale Highway (SR-58) ~~ g • Four lanes divided South of Rosedale Highway (SR-58) • Six lanes divided Landco Road u' Olive Drive to Hageman Road • Four lanes divided Hageman Road to Rosedale Highway (SR-58) • Four lanes undivided Gibson Street Gilmore Avenue to Rosedale Highway (SR-58) • Two lanes divided n Buck Owens Boulevard SR-204 Freeway to Rio Mirada Drive • Six lanes divided !~ 5.9-2b The traffic signals required within the study area at buildout shall ll specifically include an interconnect of the signals to function in a coordinated system. 5.9-2c The project shall contribute on a pro-rata basis to the construction of ultimate intersection lane requirements for Year 2020 as follows: Inventory of Mitigation Measures a JN 1 0-1 002 78 8-12 May 24, 2000 t~ GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Patton Way (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) ' Traffic signal Hageman Road (EW) • Traffic signal • Eastbound left turn lane • Eastbound through lane • Westbound through lane 1 Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) • Traffic Signal Fruitvale Avenue (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) • Northbound right turn overlap ' Hageman Road (EW) • Northbound left turn lane • Northbound through lane • Northbound right turn overlap ' Southbound left turn lane • Southbound right turn overlap Eastbound dual through lane • Westbound through lane Krebs Road (EW) • Traffic signal • Northbound through lane • Southbound through lane Downing Avenue (EW) • Traffic signal ' Northbound through lane • Southbound through lane Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) • Southbound left turn lane • Eastbound through lane • Westbound through lane Mohawk Street (NS) at: ' Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) • Traffic signal • Northbound dual left turn lane ' Inventory of Mitigation Measures JN 10-100278 8-13 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR • Northbound dual through lanes • Northbound right turn lane with overlap • Southbound dual left turn lanes D • Southbound dual through lanes • Southbound right turn lanes with overlap • Eastbound left turn lane 0 • Eastbound dual through lanes • Eastbound right turn overlap • Westbound left turn lanes • Westbound dual through lanes • Westbound right turn overlap a Landco Road (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) • Southbound left turn lane • Eastbound left turn lane • Eastbound dual through lanes • Westbound dual through lanes Knudsen Drive (NS) at: Norris Road (EW) • Traffic signal • Northbound shared, left turn lane a Olive Drive (EW) • Northbound left turn lane a • Northbound right turn overlap • Southbound left turn lane • Eastbound through lane • Westbound left turn lane • Westbound through lane Gibson Street (NS) at: Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) a • Northbound left turn lane • Southbound left turn lane • Eastbound left turn lane • Eastbound dual through lanes • Westbound dual through lanes SR-99 Freewa SB Ram s (NS) at: Y P Olive Drive (EW) • Traffic signal • Eastbound through lane Inventory of Mitigation Measures a )N 10-100278 8-14 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR • Westbound through lane State Road (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) • Eastbound through lane • Westbound through lane Roberts Lane (NS) at: Olive Drive (EW) • Northbound left turn lane • Southbound right turn lane with right turn overlap • Eastbound left turn lane • Eastbound right turn overlap ( _ Buck Owens Boulevard (NS) at: Rio Mirada Drive (EW) • Traffic signal SR-99 Freeway NB Ramps (EW) • Northbound right turn lane • Southbound right turn lane • Eastbound left turn lane • Eastbound right turn lane • Westbound left turn lane Rosedale Highway - SR-58 (EW) • Southbound free right turn lane • Eastbound through lane • Westbound through lane • Westbound free right turn lane The project shal I contribute to off-site improvements in accordance with the Capital Improvement Plan and establishment of transportation impact fees for the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan Area (Kern County Resolution 92-196 and 92-195). 5.9-2d The off-site roadway system shall be improved to roadway classifications as shown on the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan Comprehensive Circulation Plan. The implementation of off-site improvements shat l be determined as future entitlements are granted for development in and around the project area. 5,9-2e The developer shall be required to pay his proportionate share of ail the year 2020 mitigation measures as specified in sections 5.9-2a through Inventory of Mitigation Measures JN 10-100278 8-15 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR a 5.9-2c of the DEIR. A fee schedule shall be prepared: by thee.. developer with a requirement for approval prior to ;.recordation of a subdivision map or final occupancyof any commercial°.development with fees being paid at time of building permit on a?per unit basis. 5.9-2f The traffic impact fee schedule shall also incl ude computation of fees foi• those facilities on`the Phase 2' RTIF list which are not included-in the improvements specifically listed for Year 2020. These`°additional - facilities shall include all faci'Iities on the'RTIF list within the influence area of the project which is generally the area bounded by Coffee Road, Norris Road, Roberts Lane, Freeway 99 and Rosedale Highway..,. The additional facilities include, but are''not limited to, the following: • Olive Drive from. Knudsen Drive to Coffee Road '+ Mohawk Street from California Avenue to Rosedale Highway • Mohawk Street Bridge'"over the Kern River • Various other signals, bridges, culverts and improvements within ,~ the study area which are on the RTIF list. - - SERVICES AND UTILITIES a Fire Protection 5.10-1a An approved water supply system capable of supplying required fire flow for fire protection purposes shall be provided to all premises upon which buildings or portions of buildings are constructed. The 4 establishment of gallons-per-minute requirements for fire flow shall be based on the "Guide for Determination of Required Fire Flow" published a by the Insurance Service Office. 5.10-1 b Fire hydrants shall be located and installed per Fire Department standards and approved by the Fire Chief. On-site fire hydrants shall be provided when any portion of the building protected is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, or as required by the Fire Chief. Police Protection 5.10-2 No mitigation measures are required. Schools 5.10-3 In accordance with A.B. 2926, the developer shal I pay development fees 1~ Inventory of Mitigation Measures IN 10-100278 8-16 May 24, 2000 ~' L 1 C 1 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Library levied in accordance with Edacati~n Cede Section 17620 and Government Code Sections 65995, 65995:.5 and 65995.7. 5.10-4 No mitigation measures are required. Roadway Maintenance 5.10-5 No mitigation measures are required. Recreation 1 t 1 r 5.10-6a In comp) lance with the Quimby Act, the developer shat l either dedicate land, or pay in lieu fees pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code 15.80 which requires developers of new residential uses to provide 2.5 acres of land per population projections of 1000, based on fair market value. Accordingly, project implementation would create a demand for approximately eight acres of neighborhood park land. 5.10-6b Development of park land off site, if necessary, shall be subject to further environmental review to ensure that significant environmental effects, if any, are mitigated on a site specific basis. Wastewater 5.10-7a The project applicant shall pay the appropriate connection fee to the North of River Sanitary District No. 1. All newwastewaterfacilitiesshall be located within public rights-of--way or utility easements. 5.10-7b Wastewater system design and all public mains, meters, and appurtenances shall be.installed and constructed in compliance with the applicable standards, specifications, policies, and regulations of the North of River Sanitary District No. 1. 5.10-7c Development of wastewater facilities off site, if necessary, shall be subject to further environmental review to ensure that significant environmental effects, if any, are mitigated on a site specific basis. Inventory of Mitigation Measures jN 10-100278 8-17 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ater a W 5.10-8a The developer shall pay the appropriate connection fee to the California Water Service Company. All new water facilities shall be installed within public rights-of--way or utility easements. 5.10-8b Water system design and all public water mains, meters, and appurtenances shall be installed and constructed in compliance with the applicable standards, specifications, policies, and regulations of the California Water Service Company. 5.10-8c Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits, the developer shall install low water use fixtures, plumbing fixtures and appliances, to the satisfaction of the California Water Service Company. These fixtures/appliances may include the following: Interior: • Supply line pressure: Reduce water pressure greater than 50 pounds per square inch (psi) to 50 psi or less by means of a pressure-reducing valve; • Drinking fountains: Equip drinking fountains with self-closing valves; and • Ultra-low flush toilets: Install 1.6 gallon per flush toilets in all new construction. Exte rior: l • e; Landscape with low water-consuming plants wherever feasib • Minimize use of lawn by limiting it to lawn-dependant uses; • Group plants of similarwater use to reduce over irrigation of low- _ water-using plants; • Use mulch extensively in all landscaped areas (mulch applied on top of soil will improve the water-holding capacity of the soil by reducing evaporation and soil compaction); • Preserve and protect existing trees and shrubs (establ fished plants are often adapted to low-water-using conditions and their use saves water needed to establish replacement vegetation); • Install efficient irrigation systems which minimize runoff and evaporation and maximize the water which will reach the plant _ roots (drip irrigation, soil moisture sensors, and automatic irrigation systems are a few methods to consider in increasing irrigation efficiency and .may be feasible for individual development projects; and I f Mi i i M nventory o gat easures t on J N 10-100278 8-18 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC PP99-0482 PROGRAM EIR • Use pervious paving material whenever feasible to reduce surface water runoff. 5.10-8d Development of water facilities off site, if necessary, shall be subject to further environmental review to ensure that significant environmental effects, if any, are mitigated on a site specific basis. Solid Waste 5.10-9 The proposed project shall incorporate design features for the storage and collection of recyclables pursuant to federal, state, and local statutes (i.e., Bakersfield Municipal Code, Chapter 8.32) and regulations related to solid waste. Electricity 5.10-10 No mitigation measures are required. Natural Gas 5.10-1 1 No mitigation measures are required. Telephone 5.10-12 No mitigation measures are required. Cumulative Impacts 5.10-13 No mitigation measures are required: Inventory of Mitigation Measures JN 10-100278 8-19 May 24, 2000 1 t 1 1 1 1 i fl 1 9.0 INVENTORY OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR t~; 9.0 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION AESTHETICS/LIGHT AND GLARE No significant impacts related to Aesthetics/Light and Glare have been identified following implementation of mitigation measures and/or compliance with applicable standards, policies and/or City of Bakersfield codes. ~ AIR QUALITY ~; The following air quality impacts would remain significant and unavoidable following mitigation: • NO.~ emissions from construction activities; 4~~ • ROG and NOS emissions from project operations; The project would be inconsistent with the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Quality Attainment Plan; and • Cumulative development would also result in significant and unavoidable impacts to regional air quality levels of ROG, NOS, and ' PMio. If the City of Bakersfield approves the project, the City shall be required to cite their findings in accordance with Section 15091 of CEQA and prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations in accordance with Section 15093 of CEQA. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES No significant impacts related to Biological Resources have been identified following implementation of mitigation measures and/or compliance with applicable standards, policies and/or City of Bakersfield Codes. ~~ CULTURAL RESOURCES ' No significant impacts related to cultural resources have been identified following implementation of mitigation measures and/or compliance with applicable standards, policies, and/or City of Bakersfield codes. GEOLOGY AND SOILS '~ No significant impacts related to Geology and Soils have been identified following implementation of mitigation measures and/or compliance with applicable standards, policies and/or City of Bakersfield codes. ' Level of Significance After Mitigation JN 10-100278 9-1 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR HUMAN HEALTH/RISK OF UPSET No significant impacts related to human health/risk of upset have been identified, including impacts associated with agricultural uses, oil production facilities, adjacent heavy industrial uses, and the NORSD sewage treatment facility, following implementation of mitigation measures and/orcompliance with applicable standards, policies, and/or City of Bakersfield codes. LAND USE No significant impacts related to Land Use have been identified following implementation of mitigation measures cited throughout Section 5.0 and/orcompliance with applicable standards, policies and/or City of Bakersfield Codes. NOISE No significant impacts related to Noise have been identified following implementation of mitigation measures and/orcompliance with applicable standards, policies and/or City of Bakersfield codes. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION No significant impacts related to traffic and circulation have been identified following implementation of mitigation measures and/orcompliance with applicable standards, policies, and/or City of Bakersfield codes. SERVICES AND UTILITIES No significant impacts related to public services, recre_ ation and utility and service systems have been identified following implementation of mitigation measures and/or compliance with applicable standards, policies, and/or City of Bakersfield codes. Level of Significance After Mitigation JN 10-100278 9-2 May 24, 2000 t ~~ 1 i 10.0 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT 1 r n 1 1 t l GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR '~ NIFICANT 10.0 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIG The City of Bakersfield conducted an ,Initial Study in August 1999 to determine significant effects of the project. In the course of this evaluation, certain impacts of the project were found to be less than significant due to the inability"of a project of this scope to create such impacts or the absence of project characteristics producing effects of this type. In accordance with California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15128, the following section provides a brief description of effects found to be less than significant. A-copy of the Initial Study is contained in Appendix 15.1. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Wetlands No wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act exist or have been identified on-site. Thus, the project would not result in impacts in this regard. Tree Preservation ~; Tl~e City of Bakersfield does not have any local policies or ordinances in regards to tree preser~~ation and no other draft plan is in existence or proposed. Thus,, the project would not result in impacts in this regard. CULTURAL RESOURCES Paleontological No unique paleontological resources or geologic features have been identified on site. Therefore, no impacts to paleontological resources would occur with implementation of the proposed project. Human Remains No human remains have been found on-site. Should human remains be discovered during construction, work shall cease and appropriate City representatives shall be informed and consulted with. The County Coroner is required to be contacted within 24 hours of discovery. Effects Found Not To Be Significant JN 10-100278 10-1 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~~' EARTH ~~ Soils ~~, The soil types prevalent on the proposed project site are identified in the Kern County California Soil Survey for the Northwestern region. The soil associations underlying the western portion of Bakersfield are generally sandy with high percolation rates. Based on the soil survey the project site includes soil types of Cajon Sandy Loam, Milham Sandy Loam, Kimberlina Fine Sandy Loam and Wasco Sandy Loam. The n characteristics of these soil types include moderate to rapid permeability and very slow !~ to slow runoff. Due to the characteristics of the on-site soils and the relatively flat on- site terrain, implementation of the project would not result in significant erosion or dis lacement of soils. The ro~ect would be subject to Cit ordinances and standards. ~~ p p l J Y Standard compliance requirements include soils and grading reports prior to issuance of building permits and adherence to applicable building codes in accordance with the Uniform Building Code. Geologic Hazards Although the project site is located within a seismically active region, there are no known or suspected earthquake faults traversing the property. No fault rupture hazards are expected in the project area. Tlie site, however, is located near several earthquake faults ~vl~ich would be potential sources of groundshaking hazards. These faults and their distance from Downtown Bakersfield, which is located within a few miles southeast from the project site, include: the White Wolf fault (19 miles); San Andreas fault (38 miles); Pond-Poso fault (8 miles); Garlock fault (35 miles); Sierra Nevada (39 miles); and Breckenridge-Kern Canyon fault (25 miles). The impact of earthquakes on the project site depends on several factors including the particular fault, fault location, distance from the project site, and magnitude of the earthquake. Each of these factors can help determine the degree of shaking that would occur in the project area. Current development standards require the project applicant to comply with appropriate seismic design criteria in accordance with Uniform Building Code. Erosion/Sedimentation Grading activities would expose soils to short-term erosion by wind and water. Development on-site would be subject to City codes and requirements for erosion control. Due to several factors, including the characteristics of the on-site soils, the relatively flat on-site terrain, the implementation of erosion control measures pursuant to City codes and the construction of drainage facilities (i.e. curb and gutters, retention basins), the proposed project would not result in significant erosion or displacement of soils. Effects Found Not To Be Significant ,~ JN 10-100278 10-2 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ~. ~~ Topography The topography of the project site and surrounding properties is flat, with no unusual geographic features. The proposed project would not significantly alter the on-site topography. Mineral Resources Several active and abandoned oil wells have been identified throughout the project site. According to provisions in the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code, recovery of oil from the active wells will continue in conjunction with development of the proposed project. Thus, implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of oil produced from the project site. ~,~ WATER Quality/Quantity-Surface Water According to the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR, surfacewaterquality the city and region-wide is generally considered good to excellent and well within limits for both domestic and irrigation uses. Implementation of the proposed project could result in short-term and long-term impacts to surface water quality. Short-term surface water quality impacts may occur from water erosion of soils during ~~~ construction, ~vitf~ long-term impacts on surfacewaterquality occurring primarily from the addition of project related automobile trips which generate urban type pollutants ,~; (i.e. oil, tire particles, etc). However, surface water quality is not expected to be - significantly affected because the proposed project would be required to implement best management practices (BMPs) to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater quality requirements. Flooding/Drainage r Accordingto the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, Figure VIII-2, the project site is not located within the 100-yearflood plain (Zone C-Areas of minimal flooding). ~' In addition, according to the General Plan Figure VIII-2, the project site is located ut~ithin the Lake Isabella Dam Failure Inundation Area. It is estimated that it would take 4 hours for waters released from the Lake Isabella Dam, should it fail, to reach the project site. The existing Flood Evacuation Plan for the City of Bakersfield provides for the protection of life and property through evacuation of areas that would be inundated. The rate and volume of on-site surface runoff would increase due to the implementation of the proposed project which would introduce impervious surfaces on the project site. The proposed project would include the expansion of all storm Effects Found Not To Be Significant JN 10-100278 10-3 May 24, 2000 :l GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR drain facilities that would be required to serve the project. No significant impact on drainage facilities are expected to occur. AIR v ~~ Climate/Air Mo ement Due to the nature of the proposed development, the project does not have the capacity ~' to significantly alter air movement, moisture, temperature or change local or regional v c I i mate. r ~~ Odo s The project, as proposed, does not include odor-producing land uses and is not anticipated to create objectionable odors. ~` TRANSPORTATION ~~ Parking ~r Development of the proposed project is not expected to significantly affect existing parking. In addition, adequate parking for the project uses would be required pursuant ' to City of Bakersfield parking standards. s~' PUBLIC SERVICE Solid Waste Disposal Existing solid waste collection services for residential and commercial uses are provided within the City of Bakersfield by City forces or by contracts with a franchise refuse collector. All solid waste generated in the City is disposed of in County- operated landfills. The "Bena" Landfill is located 18 miles east of Bakersfield and has a projected lifespan of 65 to 75 years with a capacity of 70 million cubic yards. , Implementation of the proposed project is not expected to significantly affect the '~, existing solid waste facilities: Solid waste disposal is in accordance with the City's AB 939 requirements. ~- Facility Maintenance S.;reet and other public facility improvements associated with develo ment of the 1~ p proposed project would result in an increase in maintenance responsibility for the City of Bakersfield; however, this increase is not expected to significantly alter existing ~, facility maintenance operations. The City Corporation Yard on Truxtun Avenue, west _ ~, Effects Found Not To Be Significant JN 10-100278 10-4 May 24, 2000 1 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR of State Route 99, would provide necessary facilities, personnel and services to accommodate public works efforts. ~` UTILITIES ,. Storm Drainage A ,~, ~I Development of the proposed project would add increase the amount of storm water exiting the site. The proposed project may include the construction of on-site sumps to reduce peak flows and would include the expansion of all storm drain facilities that would be required to serve the project. No significant impacts on drainage facilities are expected to occur. Drainage facilities would be subject to review and approval by the City of Bakersfield. Natural Gas The property is within both the Pacific Gas and Electrical Company and the Southern California Gas Company sen~ice area for natural gas service. Development of the proposed project would increase the demand for natural gas service to the project site and require extensions of existing utilities. The natural gas demand from the proposed project is not expected to substantially affect existing services in the project area. Electricity r_~ The property is within tl~e Pacific Gas and Electric Company ser\~ice area forelectricity. Development of tl~e proposed project would increase the demand for electrical service to the project site and require extensions of existing utilities. The electricity demand from the proposed project is not expected to substantially affect existing services in the project area. Communication 1 ~I The property is within the Pacific Bell service area fortelephone service. Development of the proposed project would increase the demand for telephone service to the project site and require extensions of existing uti I ities. The telephone service demand from the proposed project is not expected to substantially affect existing services in the project area. NATURAL RESOURCES Project construction and operation would require the use of natural resources. New development would require an increase in the consumption of energy resources for lighting, heating/cooling, vehicular fuel, etc. Implementation of energy conservation measures would reduce to acceptable levels the increase in energy consumption as a Effects Found Not To Be Significant J N 10-1002 78 10-5 ''. May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ,- result of the ro osed roject. In addition, non-renewable energy resources would be ~` p p P consumed directly in conjunction with site preparation and construction activities and indirectly in the manufacturing of building materials. Due to the short-term nature of ~~ construction activities, it is anticipated that the proposed project would not result in non-renewable resources being utilized in a wasteful and inefficient manner. '~, ENERGY USAGE The proposed project would result in the use of energy in the form of electricity, ~~ natural gas, and fuel during construction and long-term operation of the project. The increase in energy use resulting from the implementation of the proposed project is not considered to represent a significant use of energy resources. In addition, development `~~~ on-site shall be subject to State Title 29 Energy Regulations which establishes energy performance building code requirements. Nofurtherenvironmentalreviewisdeemed necessary. __ ~~ 1 1 1 1 1 Effects Found Not To Be Significant ~r JN 10-100278 10-6 May 24, 2000 w 1 1 11.0 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED 1 1 w 1 Ci 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 11.0 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED -LEAD AGENCY City of Bakersfield 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, California 93301 ~' Mr. Marc Gauthier, Principal Planner Mr. Jim Movius, Principal Planner Mr. Martin Ortiz, Associate Planner PREPARERS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates 14725 Alton Parkway Irvine, California 92618-2069 Mr. Glenn Lajoie, AICP, Project Manager Ms. ~~felanie Smith, Environmental Analyst Ms. Rita Garcia, Environmental Analyst ~1r. Bruce Grove, Jr., REA, Environmental Analyst Ms. Adrianne Fasone, Environmental Analyst Ms. Linda Bo, Document Preparation/Graphic Artist Mr. lliilliam T. Rice I1, Environmental Analyst Mr. Edward Torres, Assistant Environmental Analyst ~' SUBCONSULTANTS BonTerra Consulting 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, California 92626 ~~ Insight Environmental Consultants 1200 Twentyfirst Street Second Floor Bakersfield, Ca 93301 Robert Kahn, John Kain & Associates 1601 Dove Street, Suite 290 Newport Beach, California 92660 ,• Organizations and Persons Consulted )N 10-100278 11-1 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR OTHER CONTACTS Arvin-Edison Water Storage District 20401 Bear Mountain Boulevard Arvin, CA 93203 ' ~, Baker Hughes Incorporated 3900 Essex Lane, Suite 1200 Houston, TX 77027 Mr. George p. Bernhardt Bakersfield Fire Department '~ 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 Ms. Leslie Divitt ~~' Bakersfield Police Department 1601 Truxton Avenue -' Bakersfield, CA 93301 Mr. Tim Taylor, Lieutenant Bakersfield Public Works Department 1501 Truxton Avenue Bakersfield, Ca 93301 Mr. Howard Morris ~, Bakersfield Recreation and Parks Department , 1 715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, Ca 93301 -_, Mr. Mike Doyle Bakersfield Sanitation Division 4101 Truxton Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93309 ,~ Mr. Howard Morris Beale Library 701 Truxton Avenue '~ Bakersfield, CA 93301 ,~ Ms. Diane Duquette Organizations and Persons Consulted JN 10-100278 11-2 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Beardsley School District 1001 Roberts Lane Bakersfield, Ca 93308 Mr. Ken Chapman California Water Service ~_ 3725 South "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93304 Mr. Mike McMasters California Water Service Company 1720 North First Street San Jose, Ca 95112 - ~' Mr. Thomas Salzano Department Of Conservation 801 K Street, MS 24-02 ,~ Sacramento, Ca 95814 Mr. Jason ~~larshall ~- Department of Transportation 1120 N Street, Room 3300 P.O. Box 942874 ~( Sacramento, Ca 94274-0001 _ Ms. Sandy Hesnard ~ Equilon Enterprises LLC P.O. Box 1476 Bakersfield, Ca 93302 Mr. W.T. Purves Greenfield County Water District 551 Taft Highway Bakersfield, CA 93307 Mr. Donald Patrick Kern Council of Governments ,._ 1401 19'h Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, Ca 93301 Ms. Marilyn J. Beardslee Organizations and Persons Consulted JN 10-100278 11-3 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Kern County Airports Department 1401 Skyway Drive, Suite 200 Bakersfield, Ca 93308 Nfr. Raymond C. Bishop Kern County Environmental Health Services Department 2700 "M" Street, Suite 350 Bakersfield, Ca 9330-2370 Mr. Steve McCalley Kern County Fire Department 5642 Victor Street Bakersfield, CA 93308 Chief Clark Kern County Resource Management Agency 2700 "M" Street, Suite 350 Bakersfield, Ca 9330-2370 ~-1s. Tina Burke Kern County Roads Department 2700 "M" Street, Suite 350 6akersfield, Ca 9330-2370 Mr. Craig M. Pope Kern County Sheriffs Office 1350 Norse Road 6akersfield, CA 93308 Mr. Carl Sparks, Sheriff Kern Mosquito and Vector Control District 4705 Allen Road Bakersfield, CA 93312 Mr. Rob Quiring North Bakersfield Recreation and Park District 405 Galaxy Avenue Bakersfield, Ca 93308 Mr. Colon G. Bywater North of River Sanitary ~~istrict No. 1 5001 Olive Drive Oildale, Ca 93308 Mr. Donald O. Glover Organizations and Persons Consulted JN 10-100278 1 1-4 May 24, 2000 >~ GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Pacific Bell 5101 Office Park Drive, Room 201 Bakersfield, CA 93309 Mr. Ric Lopez Pacific Gas and Electric Company 410 Wible Road Bakersfield, Ca 93313 Mr. David Lee San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2700 M Street, Suite 275 Bakersfield, Ca 93301 Mr. Joe O'Bannon School District Facilities Services 1300 Baker Bakersfield, CA 93305 Mr. Louis Varga Southern California Gas Company 404 North Tipton Street Visalia, Ca 93292 Ms. Louise Parham Organizations and Persons Consulted JN 10-100278 11-5 May 24, 2000 1 1 1 n r 12.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY t 1 1 1 L 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 12.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY The following references were used throughout preparation of the Environmental Impact Report: An Archaeological Assessment of 450 Acres of Land Owned by North of the Sanitation District Northwest of Bakersfield, Kern County, California. Prepared by Peggy Murphy, California Resource Facility, February 1991. Buena Vista/Kern River Ranch Program Environmental Impact Report, Prepared by Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates for the City of Bakersfield, February 1998. City of Bakersfield Municipal Code, Title 16, April 1996. City of Bakersfield Municipal Code, Title 17, October 1998. ~_ Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Marketplace Shopping Center (Vol. I), Prepared by Robert Verlaan Associates for the City of Bakersfield, December 1995. Draft Environmental Im act Re ort for the Market lace Sho in Center Vol. II- Technical Appendices), Prepared by Robert Verlaan Associates for the City of Bakersfield, December 1995. Draft Initial Study for the Marketplace Shoppin Cg enter, Prepared by Robert Verlaan Associates for the City of Bakersfield, October 1995. Final Environmental ImpactReportfortheMetropolitan Bakersfield2010General Plan, Prepared by the Planning Center for the City of Bakersfield, September 1989. Geological Hazards Investigation, Prepared by Dayne L. Frary, Geologist, October 1991. Grand Canal Protect Final Environmental Impact Report, Prepared by Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates for the City of Bakersfield, December 1997. Level I Environmental Site Assessment for "Vesting Tentative Tract 5799" Bakersfield, California. Prepared by Soils Engineering, Inc., January 1995. Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, Adopted March 1990, Prepared by the City of Bakersfield. Bibliography )N 10-100278 12-1 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Metro olitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan, Prepared by the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan Steering Committee for the City of Bakersfield, April 1994. North of the River Project Hazard Analysis. Prepared by Insight Environmental , Consultants, January 2000. North of the River Sanitation District Project Draft Biological Resources Technical Report. Prepared by BonTerra Consulting, January 2000. N O.R.S.D. Propel (GPA/ZC P99-0482) Traffic Impact Study Report Bakersfield, California. Prepared by RKJK & Associates, Inc. January 2000. North of tl~e River Sanita~ District Site; Initial Study/ Environmental Analysis. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment North of the River Sanitary District Property. Prepared by WZI Inc., February 1999. , Soil Sampling Results North of the River Sanitary District Property. Prepared by WZI Inc., April 1999. 1 1 ~ Bibliography JN 10-100278 12-2 May 24, 2000 1 i 1 13.0 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ' 13.0 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Section 2.0 of this Final EIR identifies the mitigation measures that will be implemented to reduce the impacts associated with the GPA/ZC P99-0482 Program EIR project. The California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) was amended in 1989 ,to add Section 21081.6, which requires a public agency to adopt a monitoring and reporting program for assessing and ensuring compliance with any required mitigation measures applied to proposed development. As stated in Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code, "...the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project which it has adopted, or made a condition of project approval, in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. " Section 21081.6 and Section 15097 rovide eneral guidelines for im lementin p g p g mitigation monitoring programs and indicates that specific reporting and/or monitoring requirements, to be enforced during project implementation, shall be defined prior to final certification of the EIR. The mitigation monitoring table below lists those mitigation measures that may be included as conditions of approval for the project. These measures correspond to those outlined in Section 2.0 and discussed in Section 5.0. To ensure that the mitigation measures are properly implemented, a monitoring program has been devised which identifies the timing and responsibility for monitoring each measure. The developer will have the responsibility for implementing the measures, and the various City of Bakersfield departments will have the primary responsibility for monitoring and reporting the implementation of the mitigation measures. ~'. 1 Mitigation Monitoring Program JN 10-100278 13-1 May 24, 2000 N O a U N Q a W U Z i Q ca J ~ a d o ~ U LL O Z O -= m Q V ~ o W > N ~ y .~ d ~ C ~ ~L ~+ N O ~_ !_' _ C c a V c _ C c a L E t _ C c a. ~ E t t6 O c O ~ ~ ~ d °' ~ m -' m °' a a m~ o 0 0 ~ o ~~ ~_ :~ C - _ C . O w = -- C _ _ E- C -- a C C E =a ~ ., n U a .. H o _~ G ~ -U< G J ~ E ?UQ ~ ~~ >~ U V a` >-o ._ c ~ ~ D ~ r, O ~ C t9 ~ ~ :.c ~ c y - E~ 3 'o cc 4' c c i s E z ; i i N c C a d cc p ~ =. U~ a ~~ p ~ ~ u >, c 'C O v O d O -~ >-a' Y c -~ ~ ... ~ 1 >- ~ a G «. ~ ~ a j~ ~ s ~ v~ p ~_ ` c o E v ~ ~ a Ov LL~ c s V Ov I c a LLa ti ~ U io ~ c c o~ a c • ~ ~ ' c c~ c ~ a> p_ E o o c -o ~ c ' > ~ cn m ~ ~ 3 o m co ~ c -a y ~ ~ c p ~ ~ ~ o Q' E c ~ `~ c c o v T3~ a Q a~ ~ ~ o ' ' . o~og E 0 ~ cu o•-~cU " o o ~~vco~~cE ~' " o v~ m o o- ~ ~ c~ o mc~~~c io a a a w •;~ a~ m a •~ a~ ~` .U Q E c _ ~~ E a~ c ~ °~ ~' c °c'?~~ a~~~ °. y ~.a~ aco w S ~ :: ~ E o a>i ' a o ~ '~ i~ ~c V ~ _c ~ ~ ~ ~ T o~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ _a p __U ~~o co m~ m C in C L O C c9 L c9 N a 0~~ ... O> -O O U i E~ C~ O (n ~~ CO O U (n ~ c4 m= 7 w N O ~ a ~ •~ '~ y vi . . ~~ o~ ~ w w N co ~~ N c •~ ~ 3 o m a ~ ~ ° °~ f° ~ m o a N ~ y m c °- ~ o 0 o a`°i .U ~ ~ ~ ° o ~ ~ E `U ~- o~ o 0 a` ~ c ~~ T of9a~~o~oc ~o ` w ~ o ~~coNQ~>~~~voi _ c`o ~ w ~ -a o T~ .. ~ O ~ v > m o ~ o ~ ~ ° R ~ o as c`u ~ ~ o m ~ ~......~ CU ~ ~E c m..: ocu~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c a? ~ c ~ ~ ( y ~ o ~ c 3 L ~ ~ L ' o ~ a ` ~ o o f° ~ cn o w a o - ° ~ ~ o _ a i . Uom3>3~m =~~ i ' ~ n i > j c6 ~ c ~ ~ n.m~~p~-03wa>Eoomm ~ ~ •_, C O ~ L ~ r2 O Z U ~ r N ~ ~ ~ o 0 0 N ^T 2 ~J 1 i i _ r N O O Z 1 i 1 1 1 a ~! 1 W Z Y Q ~ J E ~ ~ O U LL O Z O °' Q ~ U D LL _ f~ W ~ N ~ .~ d ~ c ` ` 'C TN O ' ~= c ;cy ~ c ~ y ~ ~ c ocy ~ ~ c c ~' ~ ~ ~ C t4 O c _ r = c -t ~ c ~~ c ~C a I n. n.° = ~ ~~ '° 0 ~ 2 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 o ~ C 1 _ y{ _ ^{ CG O 'v ~ U~ lV ~ m~ I y •~ ~ ~ ~ C rC- ~ C O 'a -O ~ 3 y ' i 3 C O 01 ~ ~ i i ~ C H ,Y ~ z ~ C ~ d O v ~ a a. n. d I ~ y or. :c x :c c ~ a O = - ` _ ~ ~ -c ~ U V U m f0 C C (9 C L N j f9 w O w L L CO L Z o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O :: (9 C N ~ C'D O ~~~ C c c N L N ~ • O Q ~ •o .U ~$ C~ E U N O p N m ~ C Q Q 3 o _ °'aa;~ N» _ cv~~-~ r o c o ~ E o ~ ~~ a> co N~~> y ~~ NL~ ~ z a; n E a~ v, a~ ~ O ~'E~Ya°~~ ~ =cam ~ c N a~ >. `~ ~ ~a~ ~.~nN «, E cv .o cv Q ~ co o v co c - m L o N ~~ o c ~ a~ °c~/~ 0 3, m2:o•° ~~ 3 N ~ o E vNi o.on ~, ~ ~ U ~ _ O :_. L O V n ~ E 7 U in O U ~ ~ .C N Y C f0 ~- O C~ f9 fl N N ~ L cti - N m L ~ O C .O O L f0 O~ E 3 ~ ~~ E~ = °'"co °'3n - °c ' aEi ` C ~ o ~ ~ o ~ ~ •o 0 0 ~ ° o m •~ a o ~ a. _ n-v 3 m io N v c ~ ~ ~ NCa. ~ c ~ = a " i E ~' ~ io ~ ~L o ca • ~ o 3 ~ m ~ co v i. o> m o a ~ c ~~ ~ ~ n~ o ~~ ~ L~ c E `~ c v 0 ~ au; a~ 3 Tm _ te: a~ E a~ E m a~ w ca •~ ~ ~ ~ c . i c v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ i.E a •o m ~ ~ c ~ ~ '~ a~ ~ o ~ ~ f° 19 O C J ~ 7 D1 O N~ ~ O w ~ E n .C O N N N O C C f9 ~ O E O i rn S E E ca N c ~ ~~~ a i N 3 cn ~ U~ 3 W a o c? o •_ . ' - ° ~ ~ E v ~ ~ E a v 1L- ~ n E ~ ~ ° FL- ° • • • • - a o ~ a ~ . c . c o ~ 'O +' C O L U ~ 'O N et ~ U Z N N N N N lf7 to lC) l17 ~ 0 0 0 7 N T N O O O Z W Z Y a J ~ Q' 0 U LL Z O ~ d U ~ O LL W y ~ ~ •~ d O C T 1/f O = c y ~ Ci U R O c ~ t ~ ~ a ~~ n ,? v u ~ o w ~" ° rn~, c c - - ~ ~ L .o ~ a C d O ~ - - E d o c ~ C ~ = i' L G u o u r1 C (Q ~ ^ LL "~ T y ~ ~ V T ~ QJ ~ H C n U ~ U `n ~ y i O V ~ ` s y ~~ O ~ ~ a ~ ~ V. v ~ C C~ o T ~ ~ m " v m `~ _ ~ m d a~ ~ a .-: ~ ~ ~ O O L cn >. -- c c c ca ~ ~ y ~ a~ a~ ~ d Y f0 O ~ "' "" C o o a~ >, ~ y m ~- a~ c .> O •C "' ~ O O • h O m >. O L LL O V ~ ~ ~ L O ~ CO .` ~ ~ T ~ O 0 C. V C U C 'p •~ O O . O p _~ > ~ p U C~ 3 0 '~ a c" o r o c c a~ o f9 o N A n ~ o a, •- ~ a~ ~ o ~ o m~ ~ a~ U o a y~ C~ ~ ~ ;° ~ L o co ~ io ~ ~ o ~~ c a u~ c co o a a> ~ C d O~ ~ d U Y w o O~ O~ w ~- N C O 'a LL- . O U N y .D O N O •`+ ~ ~•omT "" N > yam.=n0~~~ y~r3V ~ L E N 0 ~~3•c~°o~o-~ U O. t , cD .O ~ N~ 0 0 N C N- 3 '~ •~ x `~ ~ O q b 0 0 U C a~ V S O U ~ N T f9 T (D ~ ~ ~, a ~ E U- C '° O L L ~~ O N ~°~ o? 2 v, a~ ~ o~ ~ O C C C V m •3 o w l° o a~ o d c9 N O) N 'O L _ ~ Y~~ O ~ N~ ~ O C> O~~ •«L~ O N a jLr, ~ V O p p •U 7~ (0 O V O p O~ O a y d O .y .D C~~ O L a L .r ~ d f0 ~ O N O fq ,~ j, ~ 7 ~ O UO C N ~, _O > f4 N f0 fU ~ w ~ •C ~ N fU ~ O V Q °j 'N > ~ c ~ w N ~ O ~ U ~ -o ° • • ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ O rn ~ Y ~ Q c c - ay ~~ c L O ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ a c ~ ~' {- ac• O o ~ C p 'O C~~ p) C °.~~~.~0'3; ~' c~ ~ o U f9 y N O O C~ O C L~ Vf,. v);cc~°~Na~v)• v,~o~. >, ~ y.o c f0 C N (6 O a N -ate. >joco> o ~ ~ c x ' • ~ x m t• m a - o cv L F-EmcoEaal-.E c ~ O ~ a~ a~ c o a~co°co3.'?om~LCa~v, L 7 a~ °~ o N c o --~va~VSUc~.n C O ~' N N V N 2 U Z c~ c%> c~i ~ Sri ~i o 0 0 N C~ C 1 1 1 7 ~ ~, N O O Z i 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 Li W U Z .` Q ~ J ~ ~ ~ U LL O Z O H d U ~ O W ~ y ~ ~. .~ d ~ C L •C y cc ~ ~+ Vl ~ - C ~ ~ ~ ~ T ~ a ~ d ~ O .,-. a1 c C . - L O O _ _ - - - .r N ~ c a c _ ~ ~ p V M V ... Y C Q~ - ~ ~' >~ c y c ~ x C ~ U .` O V - V y u. O 0 0 ~ ~, ~ s J C a d O O~ C c ~ `~ V ~. O O) >+ C O C (0 O C~ O ?r C d r Q1 >+ C D - C~ ~ N R~ c6 O > C C O L co to ~ c = - ~ ~ O > O C O C C O C ._ O O •` c9 h ~ -~ co ~ ~' ~ ~ L ~ O ~ N E U W co 'C ~ c .a f0 p O f0 y y c ~ w ~ ~ O CO 7 ~ p 7 c j ~ • ' ~ y C cn c N y 7 Q `~ a i y ii ~ `-' in c a ~ U ~ y ~ c > j i a • i c a ~ a Q C ~ ~. Q> ~ Q' N p U to C O ~ ~ C ~ f0 .. p7 fl. ~ (7 ~ O r O U O y ~ ~ w ~ y N _p • C O~ O LL- ~ .U ~ C U a h Q C C "a (0 1/1 C ~ O ~ D ~ C ~ C O N 3 O O C +•. •_ C > C (0 m _O L N ~ j N tq ~ O` C O N~ • ~ fU ~ f9 ~ '~? C ~ ' O O L~ L w ~ ' _ U _ O p C C U O d O L~ O~ U O y 0 O N ~ O C ~ v> ~~ O C O ~ O) O b O d C O C lL O U~~ O N ~ 0 0 O- ~ O_ C 'j y O~~ OU io C U fD ~ a f0 .i C C O U~ °~ a E ~ ~ W f9 Y E U ~ c a s N ~' o i ~° .c N ~' o ° ~n i c~~~ a w~ ~•c~.o `.y ~ o ~ a w a~ a~~ ~•~' a~ c'3Q U~ ~ 0 ' af0i t p~ ~ m~ ~ti -o ~ c ~ g Q,~ ~ 0 3 ~ a~ >,a~i ~~ ~a . 3 ~ o ~ c cL ~ao ~ o~ ~ ~ ~ v~ m ~L ~ G No ~,., p O E ca cn U C D L O v> >. ~ ~ O~ y 0 0 •~ - N~ c9 w U C h '~ ~ ~. ~ 'O O U N L a y~ v C ~ O • O N E ~ w p O C- w ~ O~ C U~ -O >` O U .~ N ~ C y- ,~~. N T C • ~ 'O = C C O C j p O~ a 0~ U ~ O N 7~ U L ~n.oa~~a~ d tq 2 . O 7 O' w L ~~ ~~~~~ a~•E~Oa~ . :_- O p ~~m N coo ~' N U _~ N C ~ •.N• U ~ 0 0 0 C cII ~ ~ U ~ ~ . ~ ~ - O ~ .N. O C iq pr (9 ~ O O 7 ._.~ _~ ~ w ~"•~ fl- O~ _ pU r l0 '~ ~ .L.. .L.. fl.. L ~ ~ Q'D w OU C fn N ~M 'D '~ ~ w ~ Q. .~ w ~ • +' C O N ~ N f9 ~UZ c~ o `~ `* ~ U ~ I,n 0 0 0 N 7 N T O O 0 Z e W Z x Q ~ J ~ ~ U LL Z O H m Q ~ U p LL_ Q' W y ~ ~ .~ d ~ c - .a ~V ~ C C y, C c ~ C _ C C fD O C T t C_ L _ C to L a s ~ m i m y a' C w ~ a ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ c c = ~ n = C . 4_ ;~ > . _ ~ O ~ H U i _ p- ~ - c ~ V c = ~ y a- i c ~ p ~ c ~ c V ~ Y _ .. C r C ~- C1 = y C a d c? - c c 3 c .o i c 3 a c O ~ O a ~' :i. ~ v> i v> L ..da L U i~ ~ ~, ~ C ~ O L Q c C N C ~ V V V f0 L ^ ~ C O .gyp.. C ~ ~ C~ CO ~ ~' (d QCj C ~ w w C U ~ ~ ~ (6 w ~ O O U 3 " G~ ~ N w N~ C (9 ~ C w '0 ~ •~ 7~ O f6 ~ Cti C p . ~ C _T O a -°xyo~o 30 c inwo ~~a,~aa~ U ~c~ Y ~•~EU~a~i `° ~ Q ' m o v ~ = ~ ° i ~v ~ ~ w ~ > o ~ a ~ ° ° c O ~ ~ a w _ U ~ '. O O ~ p C y L C C m (D ~ y C w 'O p y O C C U U .y ~ ~~ ~ ° ~ N • f6 ~ N ( O ~ O O_ O ~ L .- .O y p C ,~ O O O ~ .O ~ ~ ~~ ~ V O j a c E ~ ~ o- ~ a~ a 3 ~ a~ m c ~ ~ a i ~ a~ ' ~ a~i~ ~ N ~ m~.` ~ y °' C9 ' ' t o o T y~ ~ p~ ~; H ~ c ~ 0~ p vi ~ a~ 'O p O :> p p U U c c G N U . _ Y 'n 'v ~ t ~ c 0 y O ~ p C C ~ > O fD U ~ 2 O2 O~ ~~ d .0 ~ ~ ... °... O O w ~ •` O y f9 y ~ y .~ N ~ ~~ ~ p (9 O y N -p V) N ~~ O a~ O N O V C L y O y "O > f0 O ~ uj f9 ~ p . ~> ~ ~ >, ~ O f6 ~ ~ U O ~ t0 Q Y ~ N O Q1 - U O O` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' . ~ w . ~ ~ Q't o a~ ~ a w .~•ao ~ ~•o.o o Q a. ~ ~-o . Q1 f9 c~ c ~~ n~ a~ _ _ ~ m r ~ m i ~ ~ w - coo cd c c ~o ~ ~c w a io vi a~ °' ~ a~ ° a a~ ~ a~ ~ ° E a ~ •- ~ ~ .n a~ c~ n~ m a~ o y z cco .c ~ ~... -o ~ o -~ ~ o ~ c ° _ ° c y a~ r ~ ~ n~~' E° yca w w ~ cv c a~ ~ m ~ ~ oc mccoi° yy• y w v ~ ~ oc• po a -- °• ~ z y ~o~,~c 3c c . ~ ~~ y~ ~ ~ ~ o~ c;c.S >,m ~ a ~° aUU c~ °' O.g~ o ° ' ~ o ~ ~ ° c~ o ~ o ~ •o H ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ m ° a ~ ca v> a i ~ ;~ 'n m a~ ~ a ~ ~~~.~m~ w~a --~=a~aNiy° i-aNC> m',r _ o~c~ ~~~Eti~~a~ • • c .m ~ af0i ° c o o ~ a~ o E L ~ • > > c p ° w o c~ ~ ° y co p a co c v~ a F- . 3 m~ w° a_ U m y co w .C O ~ ~ 'a ~ ~ r ~ o Z U ~ c o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o 0 0 N 7 N C? 1 i~ s 1 1 t 1 t N O 0 Z ~1 1 W U y Z Y: I Q ~ J a. y ~ `:r. ~ U O Z O H d U ~ 0. ~'" W `N ~ '., N:': ~., ,~ d ~ ~.•L T;y O _ ~ C ~ ~ _ ~ C ~ ~ _ C cco ~ C ~ ~ .L a~ C y E C a~ E E C oo a~ f6 O O, 4. Q- ra 'no °- C N ~co °- ~ ~ _~ a d ~ C .C ~ w w ~ w ~ p iO. ~rd: o bc oc ro ~ ao v c v -0 c c ~ ~- ~ ~- .L ~.. - ~ .~ _ T j r~ N ~ ~ ~ _ ° C~ ~ Q Q ~.... w O O Q ~ ~ ~ Q ~ c ~ d d ~ R 3 a3i c ° rn a v '> v ~ •~ ~ ~ v Y C.. ~ O~ ~~ O v 'Q'~ : c a~ ° ~> U c ro a N ~ ~ d a p , ~ i ~ = 0 g 0 w ~ a v ~ U 00 ~ c ~ m° ~ m-L ~~. 'c m. ~, a~ o•o c c o,z+o-v a~ w c~ c v -o v~v N-~ o o ~o ai °~ c c~~ c ~~ ~ • ,'o m o U~'•n~ o L U o ~~ O ca °-a m~ ~ = y 3 y ~~ m ca o 3 m o o m c ~ ~ o ~ ~ o 0 0 a ~ ~~ ~ L . •m o~«. yw U ~ o E °:v c a~ -~ ~ UY~ vi m > ~ o o a~ E °7nc a, •~ ~ +L. C O V O ~ +•+ ~ ~ ~ L O ` ++ Q • C~ ~ fl' O L w a ~ L ~ ~' o ~ o ~ ~ T C 3 o N ~ ~~ ~ ~N a°'mcn c cY ~ vi ° a~ °o ~ ° ~ o~'~v, p , ~ :, ~ ~co c~~v:"a~ '°Co ` ~~nc°v,~acia~ T o~ocrn.nc~~°v°i "C. w O) C 7 a~ c V T ° C Y f 0 0~ O N`~~ i O~ O N~ O Y ~` N - L U W II O O C 3 C f0 ` ~~ t m 0 0> y C~~ 0~ C ~~ U O O 0~ N L 7~ _ ~ ~ m `~ ~ U C + .+ N Q V d~~ 7 p > o ~ ~ '~ m~ ° ~ ~ ~ a L ~ ~ ~ 3 °' o °~ c o c yL:6 a~ o ~ c c°~i o~ aai~~.w aim ° c Ev a`~i c~a a~ a~ ~v ~ y•° ~a~ m o~~ o ~~ d , .- ~ O N C9 C ~ ~ (0 U O .~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ y U ~ N U O ~ ~ ~ - L ~ (0 y ~. o O ~ L ~ ' ~ C >, ~ N~ O cn a~ ~ ~ ~ y w O N L O C y Q ° d c ~ f9 ~ -a C~~ y y N d ` w 3 E °~ . ~ 3 .. ~ a m ~ o ~ a - ~ .m a~ ~ ~ = E o °? a> ~ N °•°- L ~ a~i o ~ a~ °- •v~ ca U ~ a°i ~ ~ o. aNi c o oa ~0 3 w L ~ - o ~ m co 0 o y a ' ~~ 7 N •~ Q~ d (~ Q C6 ~ •O N O O m ~ (n ~ .~-. L O •O O N O X ~ C Q~ p d Q 'O .~~.. ~ N U t0 (0 ~ U 0 j N L N L d~ O O •Q ~ (7 ~ (p tq Q UL.. y N ~ fl. ~; '6 y, C 0 f0 N L N r N M ~ V Z l!") L!j CO (O ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 N 7 N T m fh n O O O Z W Z ,, Y Q.. ~.. J <:~, a > ~, ,~ ~ O - ,v <o z O v Q ~; . U ^. Ll. Q' W'' , N ~ . ~ ~C d ~ - - a y .-. ° .a'L _ O ~~, O b~, ~c_: ~Uv one C: c ~o a~ o c ca a~ o L ~ ~ ~ E v a~ ns ~ a t9 O d O Q. o~ y ~U a~ o o~ ~, ~U ~ ~ ~ o i ~ ~ a u `~O._ ~ o~ c 'a 00v ~- ~ - ~ d W m L.L d ~ N C O ~ N M y C C ~ ~~ ~ ~ O y 7 m = rtf x ~ ~~ 7 m= 7 U= •C d.. O .. W V 'v O .. O ... da ~ ad an- 'B c c o c 0 c o ~ o c ~ v ~ ~ ~ C ,,y ~ m m o o ~ c C ~ v ' O o a~ c v c a~ c c- ~ V ~~' Q'~ m ~= o -° '~ d v -o v ~. lL LL LL. J ~ C tq O T = ~ t N ~ tq f0 >' N f9 O ~ ~ m U L U ('-6 >` ~' ~ . j' -' N L y C~ V + y~ ~ O E C ~ N U LL :~ U X O O - ~ t +' N O y o c ° L m oy~ y= nU oQ ~ ~ _ ~ L ~ ~ U ~ ~ _ ~ N O ~ ~ ~ ~ O y~ ~ O ~ C O ~ ~ 'O Q~ ~ d O C c o'-' 30~ y c c o c ~~ ~ m o c 3 ui~ -o ~ ~ ~ a i.c c; X c ~ O U o ~ U 3 ~ c m a >, m o ~ 3~~ U ~ j a~C7 m U 3 c~ ~ o yO ~ c U U ~ ~ f- m rnm ~ ~ ~ y a; C9 Y a~ m ~ c U a~ rn w e o ~ o o w p O yQ v•~~ ~ m o oU .D o L m 3 •~~_rn ~ C C y U O y ~ m m N (O L O N ~ o~ y U y N U 7~ ~ m.~ 3wd 0 0~ O fyp' y •m > y ~ C "O y •y ~. C +'' ~ (n C (~ i C N O. 7 ++ ~ y U O U O~ b N ~p f0 ~~ O C U 0 > ~ ~ C ~ U U O y y O .+ _ >> O y 'O ~ a N C U ~ N 7 ... y y~~ :- ~ . C~ C~~ C L (4 d (6 C U > O~ f9 ~~ fd C O N C C fl. m ~' ~a~,~ mo~3 ~ c~~o •cy~cca>a>co ' • •cQOOo cq 3 0 3 ~w o `~ o rna~ v ~ ~wo~ mv) d a m~ ~U ~ +-' C'.0 ~ M M M O M ~ U Z co co co cp ~ci Sri Sri iri o 0 0 N '7 N 1 1 ,~ i Z ,~ I~ 1 1 1 ~J 1 1 i~ ii W V Y Q tC J a m O ~ U W O Z O a: a U R O LL ~ _ W N ~ ~ w .~ ~ m ~. C ~'~ ° H c ~ `c v "~c C v ~c C ~ ~ ~ c. c` E t ~ E v E t6 O O =~ c C c ti d y '~ w Q c a c adi Q~ ~ ~ W L: W ~ U C c y C c y C c ~ . c c ~ O E _. E s. E ~ Q Q Q o ~ C ° E E L °_° C ' a ~ n. ~ ~ Q1 c E ,~ v ,- r c n ~ E ~ c ° c ~ H Q1 ._ N ~.~ ~ cy ~ v~ a°' o v~ a~' o O O.O ~.~~ ~.~_. c.~-o ~ .,, n W ~ .t a t y ~ C~ ' y ai % ~ U W i g ~ J y y y - J .v J .v J ~ _V J f0 w C L f0 ~ N CO ~ -- ~ (0 ~ ~ U_ U C D. O C _N L ~ Q1 L C_ C L '- C m ~ o p~ N O L tq .0. ~ °' a~ •v i ` E c ~ N E L~~ Q E U> '~ ` `~ ° ~ o ~ 0 ~ ~ C~ (0 'O O w O O J E E ( m a ~ o v o> E o ~~ `p.c ~ ~~ cco ~Y'p m~ ~ c ~ ~ c ' 0 L j aio `~~ °~o ~.~ o L O L C~ (9 O O~ ~ 'C ~ C Q a 7 f0 ~ a~ ? d am N N O f0 ~ O Q N O O O~ a ~ 7 f6 3~~ '0 ~~ O m c c-~Qc 'o-~ o~~ ~~~nma~m ( q ° EU~,N 3 ~ 3 0~ mv~.avi .D vE a~V=oo' ~ "~~~ ' : - a~ mw a~ o~ ~ ova o o ~ ~ ° ~•`c°~.~' m~ ~ o mU~3 ~ S ~ U ~ m'~ o a ca~0~ a~a~ _• v m. ~ ° E ~ m ~ "y ~ a N L Via;-° o n °~ ~ ~ w ~' c °- C0 ~ y ~ ~ a ~ ° n w ~ O E O~ O~~ C 'O _ . a i Y O E ~ i O y 0 U .L. O ?+ w to ~ >, ~ S] (9 (~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ r- .O '~ >' U -~~ ~- O ~4 ~ O ' O L C ~ "" 0) .~ L O ~ O N 3 O O U y O '- L C ' T C ._ O U ~ - O p~ 0 ~ m oL o a~~r ~ o. ~ . ~ c 3 aac c-XS~ E nN 3 ~ c~ ~ c•c m c.5 a~ • y O h ° y '- a ~ L O y 'O 0~~ 0 Vi ~ C~ ~ y d E E O E~ . O C C ~ .V Y~ 'O O Q O O~ C E U N~ w~ w U f0 y O N N O f9 d '~ ` C 'O J L ' O ' N 'O O „ U C .~ d „ ~ _ 'O ` Gj C~ O O W O O ~, Q1 U m m O U ` ~ > ~ f6 p ~ .O. C L (n O Q.L.. j d 0 ~ .C N .U (0 .c0 TJ U C E c6 7 O O L N C6 ~ V) o L C~ 0 O ~ O IO E O 4; ~ .d ~ O . a>i io r > co L ~ n ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ .~ o c ~ c a ~ a vf°i c`a E .n o ~ 3 3 ° c o ~ f9 ~ ° o_ i a ~ ~ U N E (~ f9 (0 L. E ~ 'O "-' C O (9 ~ L ~ U V ~ U Z cn ca co iri ~n Sri 0 o . 0 N 7 N 2 r~i N O O 0 Z W Z Y Q ~ J ~ Q' U W O Z O f= m 'V D LL_ Q' W N w .~ ~ .~ _ c ~_ •C ~.c >~ 1/1 ~ C y O ~ t a n Q ~ Q C Q7 ° W C ~ ~ = C C [ C L O L n` ~ N = ~ .`, C d ~~ n. y4 D ~ `c C y ~ Q1 c N C'C d ~> 'C O u > ~ w m ~ n c C~D_ ~a O c ~ "- f0 ~ U L N O~ U N O .. L O N C E •O •f0 .C _ [[~~ ° o ca o o ~ °: _ n (p N 0 7 0 O~ ~ n_ ~ O O C~ U~ •U N Q w n 0 N N N.T. ~ •~ O C U C .. O N C E U O C j w (0 ~ U •~ L >, C f9 O O >, O N N •~ C~ (9 0 7 N C 0 d E n s • N~ V C fa ~~ L ~ U_ y ~co n~ O f " O N tp O N 9 ~. c ° ~~~~~3cYi°°' oW~c~c?'N o ~ mo ~ .5 ~° m ~ ~ ciw ~~.~' ~ o ~ 0 c m N ~~ c o H -a ~° O~ ~ a° c co Q N o ~~ N M .D O ~ C 7 f0 « O ~ N U 7 > ~" m C ~ O ~ y O U~ f6 ~• O T7 Q j ~ ~ X m co c n w~~~~ ~_ c _ o U ~ ~ E U ~ o, f o a~ o c a~ ~~ ~ o c ~ ° R ~ v o~a o O~s~o`~°.3 `n~•c~LO M a i a i c o• o ~= a~ H~d~E~Qw w S~ . O W N •cn N O U" .C O O .C X ~ >+.~ N N ~ aU~ o m.cti U.n 3 n~ ~ C ~ O L_ ~ O fl. O O U' ~~ ~:°. 3 N C y O N N 0 •C 7 t9 ~L:r D.L - y - N y U ~ to O 4? (d p O N ~ ._ O .~ O U O N O_ cp c ~. fd ~ ~ ~ fU N n `~' a C ~ ~ (n ~p O ` O c0 O ~ vUi w .'" c c com`,~°oo. ~0 .-. N O •y n cn •.`a n ~ a~ a ° °~ o ~ ~ N O _ X aj •~L «~ ~'O~a O U f0 O O C f0 N °' S c o ca ~ C y~ 0 U .L- E N ° c`o is ~ o ~-~° c°o z ' ~ ° n ° F- ~ ~ > E cv c~v +j c C ~n ~VZ `° Sri 1 1 1 1 I U 1 W Z ` Q (~ J a m ~ ~ O U LL O Z O °' a U ~ O LL W y ~ ~ :. .~ m ~ C ~, to O c E c_ ~ cue O p ~r ~ ~t a d~ ~o nc ~ o w ~ ~ V ~ y _ = .~ i C p ' CC C _. w y '~ d O C ~ ~_ ~ ~ Q ~ T cc U ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~~ 1I! ~v _~ ~ ~ y C'C d 7 ~. ~~ c ~ u a .`- O V O Q. ~ ~~ c c ~ a , O ti a ii C ~, f6 ~ ~ O ~ v ~ N w S ~ ~ O f0 CO Vi .~ w C .(0 ~ 0 w m O ~ fC ~ _ O _ _ ~ '~ ~ d 3 ~ a ~ ~ O N ~' - fD U ~ C w ~ O U .~ 'O ~ ~ O y ~ a ... N~ _ w 0 O ~~ O~ a N O Q ~ "O ~ 7 V (~ ~ () N y f0 ~p ~ N O . f6 O` O C 7 -O f9 `~ ~ 'U f9 U N ~ a C y~ O C y O O ~ ~~ 3 C y `a H CO >. C f w >, O C C O 7 (a ~ ~ ~ ~ T C CO '00_ O ~ ~ y N L O O ~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ ~ O .X C O _ O ~ ~ ,~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ a' 7 L - fD to ~ 'O 'O- ~ ` Q C ~, ._ L N ~ C ~ w N (n N ~_ y j 0 0 `O y O ~= O= O p C t~ ` p ` a ~j O ~ O 'p O ~ d 7 ~ C _ N O O I L fl. C ° •O ~ o ~ ~~ W j y o a ~ 3 o _ y ~ •~ r ~ coo ~ u " .= ~° °' ~ ~ ~ •i p U U c ~ a~~ w o y ~_ a~ E g o .o H N 0 'O J O_ (0 f0 ~ O •C. U N` ~ m~~ ~ .X ~ O O O C b o Q ~ C a m '~ ~ O L ~ y ~ (9 p O m 00 0 y E N f0 .«' C O Q O d O N N ~_ N j l!7 O ~ y L ~ N C y L 3 Y! C L ~L• fd ~ O p ~~ >, U U~ N N `~ C E O f0 ~ '-' 7 U ~~ f9 O "O (4 ~ ~ N (6 y d • O M C +L., y O d C 7 O~ f9 uj 'O .C .U LO d U L C .L-~ a N O L ~ .~ y N C L .O-. O U 0~ O . . ~ CD (E ~ (9 ~ N O" O w H U > ~ ~ O -p L T ~ .• • > ~ y ~ . L '> ' O O ` N o C "" 7 0 C C U C~ E C ~ o c~ o ~ ~ L ~ o ".. c~ • ~ ~. O N C y L O o. m o -o ~ ° ~ ~ ~ d E -ya a> > 3 ~ •~ ~ D ~ 0 3~~ D~ C L w O~ O C f9 L~ o ' O U~ >. O `~ y o a r n ~ ~c -o U O 'p . to C A N cv ~ ti rn ~~°a~Ecv° --o.~v iU~~of° ~~~c ~y~ ~? ~~~c~~ «% c c in ~ ~ rn rn ~ V Z cD Co ca cD cD l(~ U lA l!7 In 0 0 0 N G t•'1 0 0 0 Z W U Z Q J a O U LL O Z O H Q U _~ W N Y t0 d m R O a w .~ y ~ L C ~_ •` ~ c ~, fA O :t ..t f4 O ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ y Q O ~ ~ ~ ~ O w W O C ~ O a+ y cC C_d G C C C c - c a > c .= C cn ? C ~ ~.. y, 0 '° C cv ~ c ~ ai v •p ~ O •°~a 0 F~ r 3 c'.7,,a: c 'i'"' c ~ ~~ = y ~N aQ~ C v. ~ C 61 c ._ ~ c e c t y r ~ c ~ v oc p W c - a S LL C [-`` J v y O ~ " a v; ~_ ~ - ~ Q d > n v. 3 c '- a~ _~ > c '~ y c ~ c C c C V ~ s a c~ a Q .D n R O~~ .L.. j .~ N p C w O p L ~ (O O U~ U C a~ L O N D ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ x°,01 ~•°- m n~ o ~ > ~ 3 0 ~r•~ v, 3 ~ ~•~o a Q'N•y ~ c~ m ~~ o ac p ~ co `•~ ~ ~n ~ o y ~ ~ ~ o a~ 3'~ o ~ ~ f° c°'~ E o ~ c~~a o cao a~ o ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ o O _ c D v~ N c0 c0 ~ C N ~ O ~ ~ a Y ~ ~ ca ~ ~ ~n C ~ c c ~`°, ~ in ° v~ `? _o O w C C~ O f6 p ~~ L O C U~ N N O_ W O> •f9 N~ U a t0 (9 N O U ~ ~ ~ C ~ ~ ~ •d ~ ~ Q O ~ .~ ~ ~ w ~ L ~ cYV N d f0 " ~ ~ c ~ a~~ 3 Y ccv z o o caa t° c`o o~ U cVO •3 v m c •~ v c = o_°~~~m°~~•-~o°-~ E'en a~.po~a~•°''v~ ~ ~~~o ~~~~~ a>.sp >cuwwoxo_~~ ~o V C . y W•~ °~~'°co3v' oo°~'~ow~ a"i~c y •cV ~?~ ~ ~ ~ o ai•° o~ ~ ~ ~ `a c~ ~ ow ~.'? vi •o•a> o~ N Q -O U C O O L O O N 7 f9 C .O y p C O f9 O '~ ~ ~- •~ ~ CO E p a O~ C •~ C N> U C~ C C U '~ V A N ~ C~ a L 'O 0~ 7 (0 f0 (9 N L 0 w. LL ~.- f6 ~ p C 0 w 7 L!7 ~= N (9 ~ (6 N~ a~ C~ O O 7 'N N O O~ O~~ p Y •V ~ ~~ O O U ~- E ~ n O W N Q (0 C V7 3 w O h U 3~ ~ o .~ a~ ~ ~, .~ c~ s ~~ '~ O m y a ai E~ ~ co 3 0~ 3~~ f0 p 0 0 (4 E~ C T •~ ~ •O j 0~ '~ y L ~ O •~ ._ ~ O H~ ~ m a~2~ c~:.n. caUL a hw~ c ~UU ~U ~ cn co ~ fD +' C O N ~ V Z ~ c+~ ao o 0 0 N V CT G 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 `1 1 1 ~I 1 1 1 ~ ' N O Z 1 1 1 1 i u 1 1 W U Z Y Q ~ J ~, ~ ~` ,O U ti, O z O '' Q ° U 0 ~' ~` 111 ' > y m 'c d ~ c" .Q 'C O ~c _ ~ ~ ~ a~ °~°c ~ ~ ~ c~ c rt O a Q 0 c~ .~ °- 'on n ~°° a ~. :.y W ~ a i w ~ a i w 0 ~ ~ o ~ y ~ ~ o ~ a o ~ ~~~ a -aka `o - .c ~ ~ Q o m ~ O ~ o ~ ~ ~ rn E > n~ ~ ~ N y v N.: : 'O N- v p cc d ~ s ~ L i s ~ ad c0 ~ L e n ~ a~ ~ > na ¢ S`" a c Q o Q ~ a `dQ C V U LL -~ Q E ~ ~ a ~ y u '~ ~ a ~ ~ E 3 ~, 'C O U 0 0-° _ ~ 'j 2~ ~ > ~~ ~ -~ > a Q' U 3~ ~ ~ ..C~a 0 c O R'j ro y~ O ~ U V .c ~ w ~ °_ N R N N a~ O C C •-o. 'd '~ C C a~oo•- fQ L acim }. 'O Y tp C Y u~3caca3 U C °o~ N e d 'd a ~c o, -t ~ aUi ~ ~~ ~~° cook m c ' ~.cw ~.c 0~ N p d •p'j m 7~ p -~+'. m fl r fl- Q (0 y N N E y 0 0~ O C L O y , . U .L c ~L c ~vt~ m~ 3 ~ v° o~ o o w yr o m u~,'n y; _N'+-. o ~ d~ 0..: °°~ c c N N N p C _ ~ p C C o~ N O N~ (NO > 3 ° o ~ O cv~.- U N'O m °m , d C y~ O Q ~ U E~ Q ~,= 0 ~~^ n ti o r 0 ~ U L *t ' ~ C w U N ~ a+ ~° ° ~ o ~~ ° m oyv' ° °~ N -° - ( tYL~v 3 - ( 6 3 E °- _ ~ ~ ~' m O ' c ~ ~ ~ - N •- N - _ 6 ~ ~ O" ~'~' (_ i a ~ ~ ~ O U_N tq N O O ~ N ~ fl 0 N ~ V U C ~ C ' , ~ ,:: E ~ O a~ L a~ s ~ ~ ~ C ` r ., U O co a ~. - w , a •- ~ a~ N w c ~- O ~ •~ ~ w L di _ O "'' (9 Q ". ~ y V1 (/~ N p c O N 7 (O ~ 7 ~ +~+ O .+ ,.. N 4- C ~ -O tp O- V1 M (~ 3 C O C ~ (n ~~ (0 C ~ U fU C C 0 y E~ N .t.+ Y (6 C ' U ~ ~_ C C f4 pp N w. O O E ~_ C O N 3~°~ f9 U f0 ~o~~ Y~fII~~ 3 a 00 O f°~~6° ~ ~~v ~ c3yoa c o o ~a c-o L c ~a~~ 3 o E c m°a~s ~ . o m o -oa~~•co E a>^~ m.. a~°a~Q•ca~ w a~ 'v~a~•~ ;o ~° y.ao~a '~ a ~~ vyi m s :° o Y` 3 _ ° v m ~° o ~ cv2 3 v N o ~~ ~ mQ-o m~ ~ c~ w = m(n mQcn v -Op o ~° w o n 3 ~ o n .. v .. ~ c a> i o L,a a ~ ~ no ~ • • • • m o~ F- ~ 3 ~ a~~ ~ (n m o v> n F- . ~ ~ U Z o~ ~ o~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 N 7 N T R N O O 0 Z W ' U y Z L Q R' J ~ d! d ~ ~ U LL O Zr'; O 1-- m U ~ LL ~ ~ ;,.. N. ` ~ . Y <•~ ~_ •L O ~ C ~ ~ C ~ v ~ y ~: d Q- ° a °° v `° a d a~ N ~ w ~ ~ ~' °, ~ ~ a c u , C ~ rd ~ =a~ O, -' ` N" S v c o c ~ u N O ~ Cd' ~ , p. ~n O v O ~ U d O d O a` '~ ' c ~ n.a ~ rn. ~ d u~ E 3 N LL a c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ° ro. o a i ~ ` J o O Q O ., y L v E ? a~ ~ ~ U 3~ o a~ E c~ a o ~;~~ a ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ N a w ~ > O O O O U ~ ~ C ~ ` N ~ O v.+ ... ~ ~. Q 'C} Q ' cp' ~ O T w y ~ ~ _ ~ O 3 ~ a~ _ N _ y C ~, O O O U P J = ~ U 'C O N N ~ U • N O ~~ O ~~ ~ U . . ~ 'O C M Q O y O O 3 N v., C N (n ~ N ~~ O "" N C y ~ m ~ a ~ ~ N > ~ O ~ ~ f6 CO ~ ~ O N ~ •~'t3' tno ° Di ° aiv ~° L (0 ~av v W ~~ i ' s ° )u . c o 0 3 ~ i . 0 3 a> m ~ i c ° ~oa~ ~ ~~~ o ~~ . - ~ . m • = • m . E Q • •~ ~ ~ a~: o ~ •~ o ~ o •~ ~ c m ~ o m m o ~ a~ o,.~ • ~ Q O> n- L N (Q N •~ N O •L Oui.~ ~w0.. ~~ O 2 ~ LL. '•' ~ p ~ N ~UZ a~' O O O N N 1 1 1 A ,~ Z ~. i II 1 1 1 1 1 1 L~ ~~ 1 W U Z Y Q ca J a d O ~ U LL Z O ': Q m U LL _ ~ _ W N :. .~ d ~ ~ 'C A H Q ~ c - ~ `c ~ ~ ~ ~ Q. ~- ~ ~C,L Q _~ G y~ w G a ~ ~ O w ~ d T c v v T c y v C C . ,: c - ~ c ` O O _ V y C _ O ~ ~ y v a a d ~ C ~ ~ to 1 ~i ~•~ w C~ m c 3 o ~, o U O o '~ ~, ~ E .. a i a ` c ~ ~ >' ~ U d G ~ ~ ~ m c .~ ca Q p ~ m ~~ c ~ c -. a c O ~ w ~ 0 r c N ~ ~ ~ o o ~ o o _ ~ ~ _ -o = A , w s o ~ m~ ~ m ~ 3 0 ~ o~ -o > ~ m ~ ~ ~~ ~ L ca w~ ~ c o ca O ~~ O ~ O ~ C 0 ~ ~ N C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O~~ O~ 0 0 O O N ~ N '~ N N ~ `. N o ~ ' L ~ ~mc m~~ = ~ m c f° m~,a~ > m C Q N- N ~ C A N ~ -~ ~ U ~ N m O mica j v~ gym Q U O ~ > ~ C ° O ~3ca 7 p ~~E N= ~ oo} U _ m W~ m ~ ~ opx u.~v~ o~ ~~ o ~ ' Q 3 F-- omx mein mwwcn o -o`- r o ° ~ Z ~F- ~ ~ ~" O ~ ~ ca ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ . C O ~ (n O • ~ • ~ ~ • N • ~ O • C O ~ • N 3 U O N O U b p~ >. Q . ca • rn 2~ cn ~O =~ NC~~ YOB ~~ ~~ QUp.~ 00 L J p ~ m H m .~ U ~ w~ 0.. L +-' C O m N~ ~ N N O Z U ~ c o ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 N '7 N T M W O 0 0 z W V Z Y Q ~ J ~ a O m ~ U LL Z O ~Q w U ~ O W ~ N ~ :. ~C _d ~ C ~ 'C O ~ N = A O C a N ~ O w C) y C C C O a C d C 19 ~ N ~ ~ N Ord .~o~ o ° ~ . a ~~ 0 ~ O. o_ a ~ a~ ~ m c a Q N O C~ C ~ ~ ~ c~ 0 C G ~~ O~ C C f0 C f9 ~ f0 C C O C ~ c6 O W ` f9 f9 ` _ ` ] (4 (Q f0 ~ W ~ ~ (0 C L ~ i O) ~ ~ ~ ~w ` ~ ~ L ~ 7 = ~ _ L ~ ~ ~ ~ t w O) ~ O ~ O ~ I w ~ ~ . a + + .. ~~ ~ ~ n ~ ~ '6 O _ ~ L ~ C- - ~ ~~ L ~r ~ ~ W'O~~ 3 ~ c~ ~ L'~"~ ~ w w O ~ 7W ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U O O W ~ c c ~ ' 7 "~ ) + C ~ ro ' y ~>>o cn ~- ~ D ~-.o~-ooooooo Z ~ W ooo v~ooo v~oo ~ ~ ~ N . ~ ~ ~ ~~ w ~ O ~ ~ ~ 7 7 ~ ] ~ ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ ] l6 ~~ f6 f0 N= ~ F-W W~ ~ ~ 0 0~ O O O O O (0 O~ Z ZZZ(n(AW~ o ~ 0 0~~ 0 0= O (9 O HZ(n ~HZ(A (nW ~ C O ~ N cD ~ • • • • ~ • ~.i ~ ~ ~ ~ Q • ~ • • • • • • • h O C ~ • • • ~C • • • ~ • • • :: O~ ~ O N ~ ~ ~ ~ h o~ 2 ~ > O = Y O ~ :- +-' C O N ~ O Z V ~ c O ~ o 0 0 N ICY G i 1 1 =~ 1 1 N O O Z , 1 1 1 1 ~i~ W U L a m J a d ~ O U W O z O °: Q m U O LL _ Q, W y :.:. .~ d ~ ~ 'C O y M cv O ~ a ~- ~ m ~ `o w rnd ~ c ' 0 0 .+ y C d7 C R ~ y ~ ~' d V .p ~ O . a ~~ 0 L L > ~n~3 m a~ ~ ~~3 ~ y y a~ y y a~ a a ~~m mc~ o~ ~~ ~~ ~~ c -~° ~ ~ j O) C 7 j m O '_ > C Q1 > ~ ~ m C 0) ~ ~ C O~ C C C O ~ W O j ~ O~ O (p ` C c6 .7 W- m o o ~ N C ~q (0 m ~ w w ~ w ~ ~ ~ w ~ O ioiaL ~ 7 7 •~ ~ ~oL ~ Y w 7 > 7 w ~ O m L ~ w s o ~ ~ N ,O (~ 'p "d ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ N 'a •C ~ ~ 7 ~ y 'O ~ y ~ ' ~ C w w _ V 1 C ~ ~ 'O C C C C C C "O ~ ~ 'O 'B 'O C C C ~ C ~ "O ~ >, 7 C C C .. C 'O __~ C ~ ~ 'O C ~ '0 "O C C O C C C m m •- 3 ~~°~°~° n• ~°~o~° fl- o 0 0~~ °n iv 3aO7o o~ m~ ~~~ D~~ °~~ 3 IA (n L .V L L L~ Z .~ ~~ r~~ ~ w w~ 7 7 O O .~ ~~ .D N y~ O N O L L L .a ~ '~ ~ N y~ (n W •- L Z~~~ W L L •w ~ ~~ 7 y N O m ~ --= o 0 0> I-ZZZ O ~ o 0 0> (n(nlA O m m m W W W ~~~ Z 2 o m m O(nW W ~ ~ o~ ~ oHZ o 0 o m ZZln W ~~ ~ m ~ m m i 'L ~ p ~ cq ~ • • • • • • • • • • • • . O ~ • • • • ~ ~ • • • • • • • • O ~ ~ C L > w ~ L ° ~ ~ ~ J Y +-' C O N ~ O Z U ~ C o ~ 0 0 0 N 7 rv T L M N 0 0 0 z W U Z Y Q ~`p J ~ ~ ~ U LL Z O H Q d ~ U p LL Q' W N .~ d ~ c L 'C T N ~ ~ C t 0 O d ~N d ~ O .,.. rn y = C ~ O ._. V1 C d _ C f4 ~ N C ~ d7 'C O v w Q O 'C d• ~ O ~ L_ c N N o 3 a ~ c co c~ _ ~ a ~ co ~ c Q '~ L -. a~ o ~ c c co c o> °~ 0 a~ c c a~ c c a~ o c c o> co c o 0 -~ ~ co o c c ~ ~ ~ cco00 W C ~ ~co ~co d ~o wc~ ~ C w ~ ~ t (n ~~ ~~ w `~ h `w o ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ L d ~ .. ~ Q " ,C w .~ U ~ ? ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~ ~ ~~ j - c ~ .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~m > > ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~Z o O a o.~ ~~ sL~~~ z 3 m ~ o~ ~ ..~ o~ ~ L ~ ~~.~~~ o o L~ ~~ ~ ~ o o ~.` V ~~w~L~ ~ =ao~~~ ZtnW W~ ~~ cv > ~~~ f-W~ ~~~ > W~ Z z~oo~~~ >Z(n~cW W o~~~oo~~~ m~H ~ZCnW W~ c ~ ~ ~~ a3i0 . ~~ o, c~ c m ~. ~ ~ .> o ~ ~ N rn 3 rn o~ ~'O ~p . ~p 0 O-- ~ ~ U ~ (~ ~ CD +" C O N ~ ~VZ °~ o lI~ U O O O N 7 N T L ,~ ~li n N O O z t W (~':`;` N Z' L Q ~. J ~' ~ ,' d U LL, 0 Z O F- m ,. Q ~ `U p LL ~< W ' y' > ~ '~ m ~ c ~ c ~ c ~c r ~c r •c r ~a yQ O ~ Q ~ a ~ a a 0 a 0 a ~ a ' ai ~, ~ p „-. ~ o 0 U v rv a ~ ., ~ d ~ ~ p~ u'i c E c O O. ~ O C~ A~ °~ N N 'L O u N o c Q~ a a ~ o ~ ~ Y o m .~ u E o aco O d' _ -O v~ U O y ~O YO E ~ p> O U y ~= a ~. ~ c Q m n`. v~ ~ v ~ c v f4 N " N ~ ~ LL p _~ ~ p1.._ N". p c ~ O c ~'d O "O .O Q. G-. ~ .~ L C ~ O O'a b ~ N i ;.. ~ N `~ c c O N C O N `- v> O* N t6 (9 >. m ~ ~~ 0 0 0 Y N L L ~ t N d > O~ "a O c ~ ~~~ Q Y ~ c ~' A N N ~ N ~ L •~ o~ ~Q . fl. ~ ~ O V N O O ~ O N y~ N Q~ O U. L '~. O 0.~. Q X 0 0 .C.. O I L y~ l17 E c C c C O V ~ T d3 '.41 II. ~" U~ .a.` S~ccw ~gQrn 3a~ma~~~ ~n~op'c.a,.. O LL1t~`-°" ~~oc .noC7aEco~ ~a~c a~a~in,cn'e c N ~` _C O~ 3 3 y Y O ~ y O > ~~ a' T, O O: U A L a, in a ma ~ ~ o m La-o L ~ c ~ acis ~~ ~'~y'o c>"' a ~ ~ o ~ ai b a ~ cco N cyo N o °" ~ .~ a~ co v W a> ~ o ~_ Q c ~v~~~ omcaNi~cD ~ ~~~c n;~Yfl.~o3a o ~ c-a~-° a~ c9 m c°~ ~ ~~-° a a?'_ a ~ o y a ~,c ~ o U U' N rn. ~ N ~ N O'i -~ L ~ ~ d f0 ~ ~ (0 O >' (6 N U O ~ ~ ~ cU N O ~ Q O Q ~ 3 ~ "' +..' (n t4 L ~ O- O ~ ~ U Y w w ~ (n L ~ U O fl- ~ N R _ ~ ti a>~ a>> ~ cn. _~ 0 3». m O c9 N a~ ~ ~ no n: d; ~ W > > ~ O ~ C6 y m ? C "' C ~ to a (6 `. (B > aS ~: N .+ r w C N O f0 'tA ~~ r. Q m ~,C~ m O: E -Op C<, O f0 U C C O y L U C K (6 (4 C '.O +-' tf') '~:. O ~ • • • • O O N '~ '6 O Y }U O C ~ N N C ~ al Q N; OO ~ •~ ~~ LEE~cYao rm~oo_~a>i ~°~o~~~oE. ~ w m U H ~ ~ U ~ '6 'O F D. E N t/) ~ cA '. v ~~. -p U -0 0. +_~ c O N ~ N tV l!) U In lfJ O O O N V' N rn M W O O O Z W U y' Z Y Q m J d N ~, Q.' U Z O' F=' m U ~ D ~ _ W > w < ~ ... '~ m` c ~<~t~ o C c° C o n ~ C E ~ C E ; ~,w ~,c' E ~~~ c_ ~ ~~r ~ ~r ~ air t9 O= d n O c~ ca Q c~ A Q c m '~ n c ca •~ n Q~ : C C .O O Y In: C ~ ~ '~ C ~ `°N, O)•- ~A ~ "C U O _~o n ~ ~.,m C Q, a- 0 O O C c fl- ~'~- c c~ ~ c E o < a a cc O C G N O O Q~ N o aE~ ~~ C ~' t0 _ > .- ~' f0 - > '- M 3 O O E O O iV V _ O ~ n _ O ~ Q C >pU > =o ~ d o oQ oQ . _ ~ a~ ~ ca c ~ m O O ~ ~ c Q N W a. a a a~ y LL ~ ' i ' ~ O ~ W ~ K ~ ~ c ~ O O N c c ~ c ~ v a~ a d N ~ T ~ ~ d ~ ~ ma~a~ ~carov~m fl. ~o°~ ~m~~ro•- (D C ,~ n O ~ N ~ oa ~ ~ a~ -0 3'- O - U -~ G -_ O C- ~ L.wO.. ~- (6 O,.N U3 O ~ O ~ O c ~ U~.+ C .- c4 O '.7 lA ~ C p` "d 7 ~ • ~ c ~ ~ aim3Uwu-:e'om~ m Qom ~, o o ~~,~=' c ~ ip~'~'~ ~;a ~'~ ° m ~ ~~~ ~ ~ CAD O O_~ ~ (6 a~ m c o rn ~°~.o>omo~~o= ..... a ~, o cn .= ~ c ai::... o a>~c6aa>•~ ~cao ~ ~ ':. UO Q ~ : I- w O...S J: N ~ '. m o at N ~ C U: c, ~ ~! 3 O w O C O ~ Q N > N ~ Y u N' m ~ ~ ++ O, O C ~ ~' ~ c o' a~ b N 'fl~-~ O ~ Y E ~ ~' c o > ~ ~ . •~, ~ o ~ ~ ~= OL':;0 ~: ~ ~ o 0 ~ o,~ 'Y (B 'Y to ,O ~ b ~ 7. ~ C 0 ~ ~ L..y ~ ,O Q 0. 0 0 0 o m ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U fD a~ O y N~~ ~ y L f0 QN~ O~•~ U N n O m,~ ~ N` O C 3 0 N ~, O f0 O O G U N Q N ~ ~ ~ t0 n ~` •p ~ y ~ •~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ y ~ w .0.. ~ n O N C Q T m N 0 N O L~ ~ N L E O 'O 3.3- rnE- ow o -o ~~ S ~ mL N ~L-p 'p 7~ fn ~ C N .a U ~ ~ 7 n- y 7 ° n m a°L v ~w 3 n°'~ C c Q vii n3 c°> E oti L O O ~ ~ N n w ~ C r. w ~ T- ~ ~ A N~ O'er ~~ C0~ N~ (B~ N > O ~ d co~nto•3 n C "~ '~ Q C ~ ~ "- N i f6~ TOE N ~ G L G p N w f9 O to ~ f~ tq N ~ ~ O O ~ 4- O O ~ m n a~~°? ~~ ~ N'~ c N ~ N N C O X V fn C ~ C O j y o ~ ~ n c ~ ,.: 3 y co f~6 O N ~ G w ~nt-ooo°~ .~pUv U ~,U •> .~ ~ ~ ~ o o ~ ~ i.i ii.. ii n n rn ii -a m a +-' C O tV O _O g V Z ~ ~ ~i ~ o 0 0 N 7 N T t i O N r L '' ro ' N 0 0 Z 1 1 1 i~ 1 1 1 W U Z i Q R ~ E a m O ~ v 0 z 0 w a U `0 O W N ~ ~ «. .~ d ~ C •L ~ •y O _ =f ~ C '~ i C ~ y C =~ ~ ~ C _ c tp O C O -- ~ r ~ r T r ~~ r ~ L ~ ~ ~ O W n N LL ° W Q) ~ C y U C ~ ? C y V C _~ +[` C C rZ G ry C - •L ° O _ _ _ ~ _ V J v C.• V v _ J - .. N .~ d _ ~ Q ~ , _ Q ~ c ~ ~ r ~ . _! C~ 2 _ - c a - ~ n`. y `-' ~ ` - i d a ~ .a c ~ ~ ~ N u. T ^ ~ J y ai ~i ¢~ ~ ~ N LL O ? O , d' C ~ d ~ "' c C r O a 0 c ': ~ c Q. a - y w v T ti o g ~ co ~ - ~ ~ N a ~ .~.. d O C O~ ` Y w O O Q ~ O ~ (4 3 N f0 .O U _C ~+- _T (9 (9 = ~~ N~ U C ~ ~ C 'C o °7UC T aU cco~~ ~~~ v i acN~ _ ~~ _ , a ~`°~c~ >,~~~~°~ -moo .`~~~ °~~~~ ~~`°~.~ w ~L°. ~ m E cco ~ n~~ ~' ° .mac ~ ~ E ~ s~~ 3 a~ w o m U a> ~ y c a~ .. ~ °r o ~ a cn N aNi ~ ° N ~ ~ •n ~ ~ ~ ~ a~i o O C ~ >c "> ~ Wa ~ 3 L ~ Q) m ~ 3 c C O N (4 ~ m '~ w Q1 O O 'fl ~- N ~... O `' L-~ O Y ~ O V U~ ~ a i ~ ` O N C N C f9 f9 p to ` L Z ~ U ~ y U O ~•- U C O • U m ~ o~ c Qa~ocoa~ co ~> N C~ ~ t~m ~~c Ica c~ s co c ~UO N 3 •- s3~ N ° c m m L -o~' ~r . 3 ,~ ~ a m 3 0 0 .o ai m c ~ $ ~ ai 3 _m °~ a ° a> °~ m ' `-' $ ~ c_ 'a i ~ o a~ ~ a U a O ~ ~ ~ O 'C ° - co N • ~ c a~ f6 7 N O N o U ~ Q O Q L T Q Vl .L.. ~ > 7 d ~ a~ Q to ~ ~° U c h ~ ~ ~ a > '~ ~ co c ~ w : o E co w ~ '3 N m •~ o ~~ c o ca cN ~ >, ° . ol c :°ia 'a ° a 3 .~ ° c ° E N ~ ~ ~c ~~ a~ o Z a~ c a; ~N io ~ ~ ~ o :. ~ ~ rn.~ o ~ ~ ~ N o ° a a ~ ~ s ° ~ = c N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ O ~ ~ wcsj-aU ~~•°~.- ~ aE.E m ~ ~ N ~~-_- i -- °o~ a ~ E ° ~ ~Z C ri cO cD 1~ ~ +' C O Z O o 0 0 0 U ~ti Sri Sri ui Sri 0 0 0 N V N T ti N 0 0 0 Z Lei W U Z Q ~ ~ E a ~, ~ O U LL O Z O °1 a ~ U Q LL_ Q.' W N ~ ~ w .~ _d ~ c >, tq O c E c y ~ y c~ c`: ~ c ;C m o ~ c '_ - E ~ ~ ~ E ~ t - c _ r p G 4. ~ _. ,, ~ c _ _~ y a ~ ~ d -,. m d D D .~ D D Q' O w C r E i C U p7 • C E O O w .- ~ _ f O ~ O p~ < - E Q E C d C i• ~ W ~ , ~ ~ o ~ N O ._ N y .y . ~ `v p ~ d t 7 'C O ~. ~ ~ C c C c p O d d ~ a F y a ~ C ~ p w U ? a = ai ~ ~ ~ 10 '_ ~ co t cca c a> N a~ ~ ~.~~_ -o a~ ~ a~ ~ c~ c•~ N a~ N >. ~ a~ to v~ w ~~•~ co :? ~,~ c Q 'Nj~o ~Z o n ~ o•DCV~Z ~ o ZE moo ~a c ~ 3~ a ,~- ~ ca> a~ a ~(~L~ m E~ • ~ a -~ ~ c o g m X (~v, ~c ~ ~ a ~ .a~f° °' ~ a ~o ~' °~;°c~aaNi~ ~coi ~oa~6i ° a>c ~ `n ° ' n C ~: ~ f°iaa ic~o 3.~0•`-'~ °-~c co•°- c ~ ~v i~ im ~ ~= 3 ~ ow o> • TL ~ m~ >, Y ~ ~ o ~~ ~ co ~ •~r-° ~ oiu. ~ io_Q~ ~ avyi ~ c o c '" ~ o ~ ; To r ~' ~ 3 ti•c N . o 3 a c ai o ~ ai •~ca c o ~ > w ~' y c co co a.~? o ~~•c ~o cn m c o m~o - ~ 3 C0 0~ ~~ ~? Q~- ~ ocom o i i3 p U 3 0$ w U 3 . o c c ~ m~ W> _X o i w ~ o '- v w '~ > co a~ m ~~ 3 w - ~ ~ U c c . i o a C ~ c o ~~~ U m d s~ 3~ N a ~~ c a~ t C ' ~ ~ H ~~>~~ O C Q ~~ p O L N . C C tq ) . . C L _C f9 l! ~ ~ Q ~ a C~ O h L X~ f--• O C O^ ` 0 U~~ CO f6 ~ O C L • E m ' ~ ° ~ ~ m w 3 - c m ~~ .~ 3 y a~ c o -o ~~ cn ~ a~ c o o a o c a~ 0 0 ++ d f9 E E V a' o ~ C ~ C ~ U >` ~ U~ O C ' ~' ~ O :r C to L fn C L N L b c • ~ ~ ° v i o 0 a ~ ~ cn o ° a i a ~' E ~ co ~ ~ m a ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ c . ~ iv a~ 0 o o a .o cn a 5 a ~ 3 ~ w ~ :, a~ . m c ~ a~ o ms ~ n = ~ ~ a~ cc a> . ~ ~ a> ti ~ o a~ c c ~- o c a~ a~ ~ ca L o F- vU.=_ a~ o ~ o ~ E ~ ~ ~U ~ a~ cv o c c a~ av~U. p Z V O _O _O O ~ ~ ~ ~ o 0 0 N <1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 `1 1 1 i 1 1 1 ~ , O O Z , 1 1 L~ 1 1 L 1 1 II W U Z i Q ~ J 4. O d ~ U LL Z O ~ d U ~ LL _ Q' W ~ N ~ Y .~ d C ~ 'i ~ IA ~ c ~ ~ _ ~ C C a a° c t ~ '~ ~ ~ ao m ~ o w rn d ~ o C .i C ~ _ Q O •- y ~ Q C d O ~ c a ~ ~ v t9 ~ N i C ~ d .C O U ti ~ O O. O •" m a Q d o~ v _ (Q ~N.r ~ ~ ~_ ~ ~ C U N L 0 3 3 ~ C ~ t L ~ Q~ N V) O) L C N C cn U C~ L E C ~O O v- L O C o p C0 c_ o Zvi ~ 0 'O `~ o 3 ° z ~ ~ ~ °' c ~ ° o w c~ ~ ~ ~ ;v ~ O. O. C~ 0 ~ O C O ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ -O O O N C ca C U O )' ~ : ~ .~ N ~ ~ N E ~ U (~0 C L j v~ w C~ •~ f Q ~E ._ o acw~~ ~cooo ~ m E~ ~_ c,E m co 3 L ~o oL ocw ~ ~ 9 o m o ...~, a ~°•_° c ~ ~•N m o ` °c_'c ° a~i ~,a•3 ~•m•~~ ~•c ~ ~n..w E ° U ` ~ ca O (0 ~ C~ O U p > = 0 ~ ~ O C c 0 = c0 a ~ ~ 3 m ° ~ i .= y _ C G X p_ ' o ~ a E ~ o ` 3 f° ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ o >, c a • -o - ~ ' i c >' v o ' _ am m 3 ~ o .~ ~ m ~~~ ~~~a°~~ ~ ~° ' y a7~° a~ ~ c o a ° a~3 3 'c ~ 3 w ~ ~ ~ o '~ o ° ~ ~ ~ O C N L 3 7 ca o ~ '~ m 0 ~ N ~ j>~ C O~ ..' U>~ N . ~~> O N ~ 3~~= C •~ ,C V O~ C C9 a% ~ C U L .L-. N C O~ •p O` O L~ O N ` C c U O C d -~ E N O Q ~ ~ a~ 7 L O w .0 ~ d~ O .D '"' O U- •E •E a L cv ~ ~ co to •~ u ' N N ~+ N N w E •~ .. ~ . ° ~ C ~ C d O O ~ ~ Q E o + _ ° ~ . x ~ L N O O. to .C CO (0 O ~ ~ ~ to f9 ' m E E ° O_ fn C C C o> O .` c0 O > O O ~ 3~-aC~ o~ co.~ ~ ° 0 N ~- t n. ~ °~ ~ ~ E E a~n co.~ ~~ °' O a ~ 0 0 o N '~ .r ° X _ _ O U > > ~ W • • • • • • • ~ C C N N += C O ~ ~ ~ O Z ~ U ° C o ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 N 7 rJ 2 N O 0 _o Z W U Z L Q (Q J a m ~ O U LL Z O «' Q ~ U O W ~ H R w .~ _m ~ C ~ 'i ~, Vi ~ c ~ y ~ E ~ t O C a ~~ aG ` ~ o w ~ m '` o O H ` >"' - a ~ c V ~ C ~p ~ y 2 ~ ~ C ~ d .` O U o ao _ '~~a 0 ~ 0 u ~o ~ aim ~ o .~coo~ L O U a ~~ ~ O .. L o ~ a~ C O U ~ U (p N C ~' h C ~ ~ O ~ C ~ ~ fn .C N ~ C i+ ~ O ~ r ~ d O h O ~ ~ U m m o o m ~ L ~ ~ ~ vi ° a> ~ m c ~ a L ` (0 N L d N N C O ~ ~ ~ O . ~ a ~ ~~ ~ O m ~ ~ a~ ~ a ~ ,~ ~ U f9 L CO Hw~~nU3 'C rn w ~ 0 ~ U Z O, O O O rv 7 CN 1 1 N 0 1 ~ ' N O O Z 1 1 1 t 1 ~I 14.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES 1 1 A 1 t 1 u GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 14.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES A. 1 1 1 :7 INTRODUCTION In accordance with Section 15088, 15089 and 15132 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Bakersfield has prepared the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for General Plan AmendmendZone Change P99-0482. This Comments and Response section combined with the Draft EIR, which was circulated from April 5, 2000 to May 19, 2000, make up the Final EIR. Any additional City recommendations or requirements during the certification process will make up the final components of this EIR. The following is an excerpt from the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15132: "The Final EIR shall consist of: . (a) The Draft EIR or a version of the draft. (b) Comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR either verbatim or in summary. (c) A list of persons, organizations and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR. (d) The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process. (e) Any other information added by the Lead Agency." This Comments and Responses section includes all of the above required components and shall be attached to the revised Draft EIR to make up the Final EIR. Each comment letter is followed by the corresponding responses. A response is provided for each comment raising significant environmental issues, as received by the City during the Draft EIR review period. Added or modified text is shaded (example) while deleted text is striked out (fie). Comments and Responses JN 10-100278 14-1 May 24, 2000 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR B. LIST OF COMMENTS 1. Louise Parham, Southern California Gas Company 2. Colon Bywater, North Bakersfield Recreation and Park District 3. Roger McIntosh, McIntosh & Associates 4. Lorraine Unger, Sierra Club, Kern-Kaweah Chapter 5. Bakersfield Planning Commission Meeting, May 4, 2000 6. Jeff Sorensen, Department of Transportation 7. Craig Pope, County of Kern Roads Department 8. Stephen Hartsell, Kern County Superintendent of Schools 9. W.T. (Tom) Purves, Equilon Enterprises Comments and Responses JN 10-100278 14-2 May 24, 2000 APR-I3-OU 'I'HU 1 U ~ 42 CITY PLANN 1 NG h~AX NU, ~U5 32 (0646 t'. U~ ~, ' _ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~-.~~ ~~ ~'~ Governor's C)fFic~ of Planning and Research ~ ~, J - Stiatf~ Clearingl~otise ~~"""~°' Loretta L~~nch Gray Da.'is v,k~c7oa coy ~Rxc~R AC~NOVV~E:~GEMF.NT OF ~tECF.XkT DATE: April 11, 2000 ~~~ ~~~j r. T0: Martin Ortiz APR l 2000 ~~~ City of Bakersfield ~~~ ~ JF ts, ,-.+. s,sf iEL.t, 1715 Chester Ave. F'LARn~}N~.~ C~~::!'iir?~It/l,~I~~1 ;~ Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: GPA/,Z.C P99-0482 Progr~im Environmental Impact Report SCH#: 1999081078 ~• This is to acknowledge that the State Cae~aringfiouse liar received your~envirolurlental document ~; for state rcview. The review period assigned by the State Clearinghouse is: Review Start Uate: April 5, 2(+00 \~ Review End Uate: 1VIay 19, 2000 We have distributed your docuument to the following agencies and departments: - hwa Patrol Callfornla HIg y Caltrans, District 6 `~ Caltrans, Division of Aeronautics Department of Conservation Department of Fish arld Game, Region 4 ~' Departm~cttt of Housing and Co>«ununity Dcveloplnent Department of Parks and Recreation Department of Toxic Substances Control ~- Department of Water Resources Native American Heritage Conunissiola Oflice of Historic Preservation Public Utilities Corsunission Regional Water Quality Control Bd., Region 5 (l~resno) Resources Agency ~' The State Clearinghouse will provide a closing letter with any state agency comments to your r attelttion on the date following the close of the review period. Thank you for your participation in the State Clearinghouse review process. 1400 TENTH STR>rET P.O. BOX 3044 14-3 •AMENTO, CALIFOR.'~11A 95812-3044 9i6~g4i-0613 fAX gt6-321-3018 ~'a'a'.O!'R.CA.GOv~(;I,EARINGHUtIJC.HTMI The Gas Compan~• A ~'Sempra Energy company April 12, 2000 ~~ c~ I~ r ~:~ ~~~.-~-°~ ~-...; APR ~ ?.~00 CITY OF gglt~_~-i~F)Fi_G mG PLANNING bE!=..`. ~°ry„n, E. r~,T City of Bakersfield Development Services Department -Planning Division 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, California 93301 Subject: Draft EIR - GPA/ZC P99-0482 Southern California Gas Company 404 N. Tipton Street Visalia, CA 93292 COMMENT NO. 1 In response to your recent request for our review and comments, Southern California Gas Company has no objection to the subject project. Please note, however, this project appears to be within Southern California Gas Company service territory, not Pacific Gas & Electric's service area as stated on page 5.10-7. Thank you for the opportunity to respond. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at (559) 739-2316. Sincerely, ,: ~ ~ ~~~ Louise Parham Pipeline Planning Assistant \lp 14-4 1A GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Response to Comment No. 1 Louise Parham, Southern California Gas Company April 12, 2000 1A. Page 5.10-7, Paragraph 1, Line 1, of the Draft EIR has been revised to reflect that the subject site is within the Southern California Gas Company (SCG) service area. Comments and Responses )N 10-100278 14-5 May 24, 2000 ~~ ~(I~ Gnlaxl• .-lt•c~nr~c~, Bukc~rsJic~ld, C~rlrtiirniu )3~'(I~S' ((hl) 3)?-ZllUl~ COMMENT NO. 2 April 18, 2000 r, i'.'"i ('. ;v1drC GdUCiliCY, i'I~li iCi~.ldi 1'lai ~ilel• City of Bakersfield Development Services Department 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, California 93301 SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Impact Report, GPA./ZC P99-0482 Dear Mr. Gauthier: 77~e referenced project is within North Bakersfield Recreation and Park Disti•ict boundaries. We are working with Kyle Carter to locate a neighborhood park i~ a ZA portion of land that he currently owns. A site will provide park and recreation services for this area alld proposed Kyle Carter developments immediately to the west. Included in the program EIR are references to the need of a five-acre neighborhood park plus an additional five acres, Recreation 5.10-6 page 5.10-12, and aneight-acre 2g neighborhood park, Recreation 5.10-6a page 5.10-18. Is the need for five or eight acres? On page 5.10-12 the park development fee is said to be X670 per each new unit. Has a new fee been adopted? Based on recent construction cost, we certainly support the 2C increase. A park site will be needed somewhere east of Fruitvale Avenue south of Olive Drive to serve this proposed population. Sincerely, }~- ~ ~.; Colon G. Bywater Planning and Construction Director CGB:bc 14-6 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR r Response to Comment No. 2 Colon Bywater, North Bakersfield Recreation and Park District ' April 18, 2000 2A. This comment is noted and will be considered by the City of Bakersfield. 2B. Page 5.10-12, Paragraph 3 of the Draft EIR has been revised as follows: ' At build-out the ro osed ro'ect has the otential to increase the Cit 's existin p p p J p Y g population by approximately 2,036 persons. This projected population increasewould substantially increase the use of existing recreational facilities, as well as create a demand for additional park land. As noted above, the applicant would be required to either dedicate land, or pay in lieu fees pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code 15.80 which requires developers of new residential uses to provide 2.5 acres of land per 1,000 population. Based upon this criteria and an estimation of 2,036 ' new residents associated with a maximum 727dwe)ling units resultingfrom'the project (2.8 persons 'per dwelling unit as`-`- cited in Section 6.3 ` of this EIR), project implementation vvvettFe} may create a demand for approximately five acres of neighborhood park land. The project applicant would be required to provide the additional five acres to the City or pay an in lieu fees for park land acquisition and development. The applicant would also be required to pay a park development fee of ' $-69'$615 per each new single-family residential building permit. 2C. The park development fee referenced on page 5.10-12 of the Draft EIR has been ' revised to $615. L Comments and Responses JN 10-100278 14-7 May 24, 2000 MCINTOSH ~ Assoca~s May 1, 2000 City of Bakersfield Planning Commission _ _ 1501 Truxtun Avenue - _ ~ Bakersfield, California 93301 - RE: General Plan Amendment & Zone Change P99-0482 Kyle Carter North of the River Sanitation District EIR Adequacy Mc&A #87-132 Honorable Planning Commissioners: bb 1 •834.48 1 4 Fax bbl • 8 34.0972 2001 Wheelan Court Bakersfield, CA 93309 mmcengr@aol.com COMMENT NO. 3 This letter is being written to point out inconsistencies and inadequacies to the Draft Program. Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendment/Zone Change P99-0482. This letter is written on behalf of Olive-Landco Associates who have been involved in property ownership in the vicinity at the southeast corner of Olive Drive and Landco Drive since 1990. I have been involved in the property and land development in this same area since the early 1980's and am very familiar with the history, specifically as it applies to the alignment of Landco Drive. The purpose of this letter is to give you some additional background which appears to have been overlooked in the analysis of the Environmental Impacts for this application. In June of 1980, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Kern adopted the Landco Drive OP line known as proposed County Road Number 3199 (see Exhibit 1). This map shows Landco Drive between Rosedale Highway and Olive Drive to be 472.76 feet east of the intersection of Knudsen Drive at the alignment of the south' ound off- ramp at Freeway 99 and Olive Drive. OP lines were subsequently known as Specific Plan lines. A Specific Plan Line, in accordance with Kern County Zoning Ordinance Chapter 19.04.783 (see Exhibit 14-8 3~l ' 1 1 1 City of Bakersfield Planning Commission -. May 1, 2000 ~~ Page 2 " n rline 2), is defined as Specific Plan Line means the designated ce to of any road or highway as adopted by Resolution of the Board of ~; Supervisors from which the ultimate right-of-way is determined in accordance with the. Circulation Element of the General Plan". In 1990, the Circulation Element of the Metropolitan v Bakersfield 2010 General Plan was adopted and Landco Drive was shown as a collector on the Circulation Element Plan. The Circulation ' Element Map shown in the Draft Environmental Impact Report is difficult, at best, to read but upon closer review of subsequent documents it is apparent that Landco Drive does not align with Knudsen Drive as indicated in the application before you. On April 29, 1991 the Board of Supervisors amended the Circulation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan by Resolution 91-317 (see Exhibit 3) and approved conceptual ~: alignments for Mohawk StreetNictor Street, Olive Drive, Landco Drive, and Knudsen Drive. This was based on a request by North of, the River Sanitation District to revise certain Specific Plan alignments' ,~. in that area. You will notice on Exhibit B that Landco Drive was to remain in the already adopted Specific Plan alignment and that Knudsen was to sweep westerly into MohawkNictor south of Olive ~` Drive as shown on Exhibit B attached to the Resolution. As part of that Resolution by the Board of Supervisors, the Monitoring Program #1 (see Exhibit 4) for the adoption of the Specific Plan Lines specifically called out the requirement that ,,- ~, ~ "prior to submittal of any Precise Development Plans, Land Divisions or any other applications that would implement any portion of this project, the applicant ,~ shall amend the traffic study in accordance with the requirements of CalTrans and the Kern County Public Works Department. The amended traffic study shall ~_ require written approval of CalTrans and the Kern County Public Works Department. Additionally the applicant shall prepare a phasing program consisting of three phases and implements the requirements of approved traffic study. Said phasing program shall be ,~ approved by CalTrans, Kern County Public Works ' Department and the Kern County Depart of Planning and Development Services prior to the submittal of any "" 149 3A J Cit of Bakersfield Planning Commission Y May 1, 2000 Page 3 ~ • ' ._ .. f applications that would implement this protect. The Phasing Program shall include, but shall not be limited to, boundaries of development within each phase, a ,~ schedule or timing for construction of traffic related improvements and a discussion of proposed funding mechanisms to finance the improvements required by the approved traffic study. In lieu of a single traffic - study, separate traffic studies maybe prepared for each ~ of the three phases of development. Future occupancy . ` of structures or sites within each phase shall not be _ permitted until the required improvements have been com /eted and a roved. As art of Phase 1 the P PP P applicant shall establish a Transportation Management Association (TMA) or other transportation control measures to implement programs which reduce person trips for the project. The TMA shall develop a transportation management plan which shall be ,~. reviewed and approved by CalTrans and the Kern 3A County Public Works Department." `~ / I have spoken with the Kern County Public Works Department . and have been told that no such amended traffic study has been submitted to them. This amendment was not reflected on the ~ Circulation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General _ Plan. In the May 18"', 1999 annexation request and application for ;-; Zone Change by the North of the River Sanitation District (see Exhibit 5), there is no request to amend the Circulation Element of the ' General Plan to realign Landco to tie into Knudsen Drive. In fact, in one of the exhibit maps in the application labeled Lot Line ,~; Adjustment 3-93 (see Exhibit 6), prepared by Boyle Engineering Incorporated, which is the Sanitation District's Engineer, Landco Drive is clearly shown in the adopted Specific Plan Alignment and the ~ courses match exactly with the County's adopted OP alignment in _ 1980. This application was signed by Kyle Carter and Donald Glover, representative of the North of the River Sanitation District. That 0 ~; exhibit is not consistent with the Land Use Plan Concept Plan as prepared by Porter-Robertson in May of 1999. ~~~ ~• • 14-10 City of Bakersfield Planning Commission May 1, 2000 ~~ Page 4 _ .. In addition I have enclosed copies of the current Zoning Maps from both the County of Kern (see Exhibit 7) and the City of Bakersfield (see Exhibit 8). You will note that on both maps Landco Drive is shown in the Adopted Specific Plan Alignment and is even called out as an SP line on the County of Kerns' Zoning Map. It appears that both jurisdictions, at least until 1997, recognized the adopted alignment of Landco Drive. I am not aware of any ~, application that has realigned Landco Drive since 1997. If Landco is to be re-aligned then it should be addressed in the application and re- advertised and re-circulated with the correct changes. Because of this inconsistency the Draft Program EIR is inadequate for the following reasons: ~~ 1. Under the Executive Summary, Section 2.0 Project Summary, Section 2.1, this section talks about ~' amendment to the Circulation Element consisting of changes by deleting Mohawk Street as an arterial north of Hageman Road to Olive Drive, change Hageman Road from a collector to an arterial between Mohawk Street and Knudsen Drive/Landco Drive, along with t; modifying the alignment by swinging it to the north a few hundred feet, and to establish a collector segment - for Hageman Road between Knudsen Drive/Landco Drive to State Route 99/State Route 204, and to amend the zoning from M-1 etc. Nowhere in this Project Summary does it talk about an amendment to the Circulation Element to tie Landco Drive into Knudsen Drive, it only assumes that that is the alignment and ~ nowhere does it talk about amending the Specific Plan ~ ~ Alignment of Landco Drive as previously adopted and discussed hereinabove. I ~ ' . ected Traffic and Cumulative Traffic 2. Pa e 2-21 Pro S 1 Analysis Mitigation Measure 5.9-2a -The project shall participate through payment of fees in the phase construction of off-site roadway .improvements and: !~ traffic signals for the Year 2020 as follows: Landco Road has not been studied for adequate mitigation measures and needs to be addressed. ~` ~¢>> ~~ 3A Ci of Bakersfield Plannin Commission ty g May 1, 2000 -~ Page 5 3. Exhibit 3-3 -Land Use Planning -Landco Drive is not ~ correctly shown on the Land Use Plan. 4. Page 3-8 -Landco Drive tying into Knudsen is not " adequately addressed in the modification of its alignment. v 5. Page 4-3 -Cumulative Project List - In the summer of 1997, this firm processed and received approval of Vesting Tentative Parcel Map Number 10422. I have enclosed a copy of the Conditions of Approval (see Exhibit 9). This is a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map which .- does not show up on Table 4-1 as a Cumulative Project List. This is virtually across the street from this ,~ particular application. You will note in those ~' Conditions of Approval that because Landco Drive is a major highway alignment that has been adopted by a 3A Specific Plan, the developers were required to put in major improvements and dedicate 55' half-width of the Specific Plan Line of Landco Drive along the west map ,~ boundary. My clients were also restricted access to the property because of the frontage along the major .highway that had been adopted by the County of Kern. Exhibit 4-1 should also reflect this cumulative project. 6. Exhibit 5.6-1 does not reflect the correct ali nment of g Landco Drive. ~~ '~ 7. Page 5.7-17 under Land Use Element Goals/Policies ; -- Analysis shows that Land Use Policy #19 has not been met. That is to encourage separation of at least one-half ,~~ mile between new commercial designations. The designation shown iri the application at the northwest corner of Landco and Hageman is immediately across ~; the street from property owned by my clients. While ~ the property owned by my clients is heavy industrial, heavy industrial allows for commercial uses and is intended to be developed as Highway/Commercial in its nature. This could also be true of most of the ~, property zoned Heavy Industrial immediately south of that commercial corner now owned by Equilon. ~~. 14-12 _ ,~ City of Bakersfield Planning Commission May 1, 2000 Page. 6 8. Page 5.7-21 has no discussion about the alignment of Landco into Knudsen Drive. 9. Page 5.9-1 under Traffic and Circulation -Landco at Rosedale is studied however Landco at Olive is not. The traffic study does not address any traffic from the project to go onto Landco even though part of the project fronts on Landco Drive even if Landco were to tie into Knudsen. Logically it makes no sense to tie Landco Drive into Knudsen Drive when Landco Drive exists 470' to the east. The names and connections will not work from a planning sense nor from an addressing sense. In closing, the project is not consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and the Environmental Impact Report is subsequently inadequate. RAM:rjs H:Ut)sUandco.doc 3A 14-13 rn ~ z cn O -< ~ rv ~ r rn = m n ~ a D . rn ~ ~ r ~ ~° 0 z n D D ~ ~ ~ 70 p r D z ~ "T1 Z ~1 _ ~l c.. D ~ = O C Z ~ cn rn r fr1 C T D D ~ rn z m ~ o ~ ~ < z rn - o o c~ c c~ o o r o C ~ D ~ Z Z) ~ --1 4 v fd~ I,iv yivy ~. 'T^' ~~ iz~fi ~z`az`e T~ ~~o,~Q05'S~O.GY E 28 7 '~ ' `'~ 1 l8ir~o -tom ~.fz~!~O/.2 ~-G~{ 73 i ~~.~ Piz`. **, ~ i i ,~ i i ~ ~ ,~ i =~ 14-14 ZI~~ 22 ~Y6~°/D' ~ ~3-C-1 / awrDra [] }~ i r ~, ,~, -. ,~, I '~ II I I I ~~. - - ~a,.~~~ - - ~~ ~3 - ~- ~z ~~ to ~~/~s~~l 15 ~ ~ P~/~' T= /7,Z, a77' ~ CENTRAL ~-~~'// ~ I ~ SHOP ( ~I~ ~ SITE ~ iT~i-gyp 7~/~5~ /33 ~~ S~1rv~y ~ .~-/~~ 7= /7.2A77' II ~,~o~,~~~, I EE DETAIL "C" ~ I I I ~ I I Lo f /¢ ~ Lc f /5 ~L of /6 I i I ~ ~ - - -E~--- ~~ ,. ~~ ~~. ~ q\ ~• ~~~_~-~~ ~ ~~. J r -;~f~!6'~o'~'r /B3. S'_'.C~~2~~' lf'tlrY ,o ~// -- ~~ - ~: .. ~ `~ ~ ~ ~~ \~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~- ~ +'~ ~ - \ 1 ~~ fiir rs. 1`~i`~y T g g ,~1'ss,~ ~. ~~ ~ I T ~ ~ ~~~ ~ \ ~\ ~, ~ ~ ~~ ,. ~ ,a. ;~ ~~ V n' .~ '\ SEE ~ETAI L '~A" 1 /% F~~ ~, 3 ., R. 27 E . M. D. 8. a M. F ~ ~` ,2' ~ ~~ --- ~ J J ~~J !" `t ~;, o-,~"s_ R~~~ 1 ~~Is ~' p~1~ ~~~v ~~ ,PE~73/ /6 do. dG+~' /~'gf'Lii~ ~ .~~~~-.s~.l~.o ~9hf \ .~~~' ,~,~ ~i~~ Sri -9 __ i ~ 1415 ;I ~~l_ ~~~ ~'~~ SEE ATTACHED AflEA MAP '~ i MORRIS Q0. N OLIVE OQ ~ ' ~ ~ r ~ a~s ~~ ~~~~~ W 1 N ( O I ! ~ I _ , ' I I Y i i I ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ r~~~Yr~~ ' I I ~ I D 1 Q t I ~ 3 ' ~ ~J _i ~ I ~ _.._.. ~ -~ - - --.'1 I ----~ i ( ~ .~ I ~ 58 I ~~ \\ Y~Y Y ~ r---~= i ~ ~+ 1~- ~..Y ~ ~ r J I '. I li ~'~~ . ~ GPA #4, MAP 102-15 CIRCULATION AMENDMENT I\/.twAT / tit\LSSr AT ~~~~~~~~ AtT{\IAL / YAYO^ OIC IIwAT 1~ LAYYAI •\TL\IAL / YUOa IIIC Iiw AT Ivy LAYLfI COLitCTO\ / itC0Y 0A^L IIIGIIV+T _-_-_ ~~~~~~- iLLtR LOCAL fTLLLT a+luo+o 1_~ ,~ . CsAOi t[lA a+710Y / ,,,~~~LLL ~,~ ~ ~ IMTL \GIIAY:C / Q Q ~ 1 LOYTL 10[YTIIICATIO.T3 \TAt [~OY:C?+t[O iCL.•tIG YOYTti ~' COxYLaC1A1 Y+LAi00Vi wA3Tt fII1TTIYG aOYTu •••••••••••••••••••••••• GLOC tATI11C tLC10Y YOVYO+YT FILE 102-15 3 t d0 14-18 1 ~, 19.04.762 SIGN, WIND "Wind. -sign" means a sign or objects, sane or all of which is moved by wind as a method of attracting attention. 19.04.765 SIGN, WIrIDOW ~, °Windaw sign" means a sign that is applied or attached to the exterior or interior of a window ar located in such mariner within a building that it can ~1 be seen from the exterior of the structure through a window. r"' 19.04.768 SITE "Site" means any lot or parcel of land or combination of contiguous parcels of land. 19.04.771 SITE DEVEIAPI~r PLAN ~~ "Site development plan" means a plan graphically describing propose3 buildings, structures, and other required information submitted in conjunc- tion with an application for discretionary review and approval. 19.04.774 SILL FtJWL ~' ~~, cockatiel) . 19.04.777 SOFFIT i+ "Soffit" means the horizontal underside of an save. 19.04.780 SOLID FIASTE "Small fowl" means birds raised or gram for hobby purposes, show, or racing, normally no larger than a small chicken (e.g., pigeon, parrot, or ~; "Solid waste means all putrescible and nonputrescible solid, semisolid, and liquid wastes, including garbage, trash, refuse, paper, rubbish, ashes, industrial wastes, demolition and construction wastes, abandoned vehicles and parts thereof, discarded home and industrial appliances, manure,,, vegetable or animal solid and semisolid wastes, and other discarded solid. and semisolid wastes. 19.04.783 SPECIFIC PLAN LII~ "Specific plan line" means the designated centerline of any road or high~,ray as adopted by resolution of the Board of Supervisors from which the ultimate, right-of-way is determined in accordance with the Circulation Element of tt'~e General Plan. ~ FO~tN COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE - CHI 14-19 19.04 Page 4'1~ B E F O R E TH E B OA RD O F S U P E RV = S O R S ~- C OUNT Y O F K ERN ~ S TAT E O F C AL I F O RN 2 A In the matter of: Resolution No. 91-317 Reference No. 9111600 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE METROPOLITAN 9111482 ~, BAKERSFIELD 2010 GENERAL PLAN, AND THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE METROPOLITAN BAKERSFIELD 2010 GENERAL PLAN; APPROVE CONCEPTUAL ALIGNMENTS .FOR PORTIONS OF MOHAWK STREET/ VICTOR STREET, OLIVE DRIVE, LANDCO DRIVE, AND KNUDSEN DRIVE; FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION I, SUE LASITER, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Kern, Btate of Californla, do hereby certify that the tollowing resolution, on ' motion of 3upervieor Larwood , seconded by Supervisor ~~ Shell was duly passed and adopted by said Board of Supervieore,at J an official meeting hereof this 29th day of April , 1991, by the following vote, to witr AYES: Ashburn, Austin, Larwood , Hettinger, Shell NOES : None ABSENT: None SUE LASITER Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ~, County of Kern, State of California ~F, C ~'/,,ry/, Deputy Clerk ~ ~~° /S~J~ RE S OLUT = ON S~,_ _ R~ `~ Section 1. WHEREAS: (a) Pursuant to Government Code section 65358, four '~ times annually,. this Board considers proposed amendments to the i, County's General Plans; and (b) The following proposal was alphabetically designated on December 3, 1990, and parts of it were approved on February 11, 1991, with the remainder before this Board on March - 1H,~1991, and April 1, 1991, at which time it was continued to April 29, 1991: M. (1)(a) Amendment to the Metropolitan Bakersfield ~ ~ ~ 2010 General Plan from Map Code P (Public Facilities) to Map Code LR (Low Density Residential - Less Than or Equal to 7.26 Dwelling Units/Net Acre), LI (Light Industrial), SI (Service I # 91-317 ( i i ~. 14-20 trial and HI Heavy Industrial) or more Indus ), restrictive map code designations; and from Map Code HI (Heavy Industrial) to Map Code SI (Service ,~ Industrial) or a more restrictive map code designation; (1)(b) Amendment to the Circulation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan to reduce a portion of the Mohawk Street/Victor Street alignment from an arterial (Major Highway) to a collector (secondary highway) between Hageman Road and Olive Drive, and to relocate a portion of the existing Landco Drive alignment (collector); portion of the S/2 of Section 10, T29S, R27E, portion of the W/2 of Section 14, T29S, R27E, portion of Section 15, T29S, R27E, and portion of Section 22, T29S, R27E, MDB&M, County of Kern, State of California (a complete legal description is on file with the Kern County Department of Planning and Development Services); (c) The Department of Planning and Development Services has reviewed this matter and has prepared a report ~, containing a detailed description and analysis of the proposed amendment (a copy of the report is on file with the Clerk of this _ Board and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full); and ~ ~ (d) In its report to this Board, the Department has ' recommended that Proposal M be approved as requested, and the Department further recommended that the associated specific plan lines be adopted following a rescheduled hearing and more precise legal descriptions, following the recommended conceptual alignments; and (e) The Department of Planning and Development ~, \ Services has investigated these matters and prepared an amended Negative Declaration for Proposal M and a Mitigation Monitoring Program for Proposal M, after concluding this project (including the mitigation measures incorporated into the project) may not have a significant effect on the environment; and (f) The Department of Planning and Development .~ Services reports that the fee required by Fish and Game Code section 711.4 has been previously required for processing the said amended Negative Declaration for an earlier approval connected with this overall project; and (g) On this day, this Board held a duly noticed public hearing at which the proposed amendment to the Metropolitan 2 14-21 Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and the Circulation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan were considered by this Board and those persons desiring to be heard on said matter were heard and evidence in said matter received; Section 2. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Kern, State of California, as follows: 1. This Board finds the facts recited hereinabove are true, and this Board has jurisdiction to consider, approve, and adopt the subject of this Resolution. 2. This Board finds and determines that Proposal M is hereby approved as requested. 3. This Board finds and determines that redevelopment of the site is justified because any such development must be viewed as infill development. 4. This Board finds and determines that approval of the requested LR (Low Density Residential) designation is compatible with neighboring land uses in terms of_densities, lot sizes, and development. 5. This Board finds and determines that approval of the applicant's request for the LI (Light Industrial) and SI (Service Industrial) designations will act to buffer or perform a transition function from one level of use to another. Additional developmental control as afforded by the amended Negative Declaration and future precise development plan review, will ensure the compatibility of the industrial development and neighboring land uses. 6. This Board finds and determines that approval of the 2010 Circulation Plan Amendment from an arterial to a collector for the subject segment of Mohawk Street 3s warranted and will adequately serve the circulation needs of the project, as well as the needs of through-traffic. Furthermore, such an amendment is consistent with the conceptual alignment of Mohawk Street as a high capacity traffic carrier approved by this Board in 1984. 3 14-22 7. This Board finds and determines that approval of the conceptual ZO10 Circulation Plan changes for Mohawk ?~, Street/Victor Street, Olive Drive, and Knudsen Drive is warranted and will adequately serve the circulation needs of the project, as well as the needs of through-traffic. ~; 8. This Board finds and determines that the applicable provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, the State CEQA Guidelines and the Kern County Guidelines have been duly observed in conjunction with said hearing and the considerations of this project and all of the previous proceedings ~ related hereto. ~ 9. This Board approves and' further amends the proposed amended Negative Declaration prepared for the remaining unapproved portion of Proposal M to include a block wall along the _ west edge of the present Victor Street, and adopts a Mitigation ,, Monitoring Program for Proposal M as shown in Exhibit "A" attached hereto, and finds and determines on the basis of the initial study of the possible environmental effects of the requested project and the comments received regarding the proposed amended Negative Declaration and proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment provided the mitigation measures incorporated into the project (as more fully described in the amended Negative Declaration) and the Mitigation Monitoring Program are accomplished. 10. This Doard does hereby approve and adopt the I ~. _ hereinabove described General Plan Amendment for Proposal M as shown above, as requested, except that the Landco relocation ~ request has been withdrawn, and the Chairman of this Board and the Clerk of this Board are authorized and directed to certify the adoption of same. 11. The Director of Planning and Development Services shall cause appropriate notations to be entered in all documents and maps which embody the Kern County General Plan and the elements thereof in order to show such amendment. 4 14-23 this Board has dditi t th f i 12 ~ II on e orego ng, . In a o reviewed and hereby approves Staff's request for conceptual approval of the width and location for portions of Mohawk ~~ Street/Victor Street, Olive Drive, Landco Drive, and Knudsen Drive, as shown on the drawing attached hereto as Exhibit "B". 13. The fee required by Fish and Game Code section 711.4 has been previously required for the processing of the f amended Ne ative Declaration for an earlier a royal roceedin g PP P 9 connected with this project, and under section 711.4(g), we find 'I that the project is not tiered or phased, and separate environmental documents or review by the Department of Fish and Game is. not required, and further, based on the public interpretation of these statutes+.by the Department of Fish and Game staff, find this approval and related Notice of Determination ~r exempt from t)~e payment of the otherwise applicable fee. 14. The Clerk of this Board shall cause a Notice of _ Determination for Proposal M, prepared by County Counsel, to be filed with the County Clerk. Unless the project is declared exempt ~; herein and a Certificate of Fee Exemption executed by the Director of Planning and Development Services is on file, the foregoing project is not operative, vested or final until the filing fees required pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 711.4 are paid by the applicant to the County Clerk. 15. The Clerk of this Board shall transmit copies of this Resolution to the followin : g (a) Dir. Dept. of Planning & Development Services (b) Dir. Public Works (c) Surveyor (d) Road Commissioner (e) Fire Chief (f) Health Officer ~ ~ Kern Count Water A erc (9) Y 9 Y ` ~ (h) County Counsel ; (i) North of the River Sanit ry District j $ Simpson-VanCuren, Inc. ' BD:drb 2020 "K" Street j 4-29-91.gpa Bakersfield, CA 93301 ,~ 5 I 14-24 REVISED M~fI~RING PROGRAM q 1 F'OR '~ General Plan Amendment Case No. 3, Map No. 102-15 Zone Change Case No. 18, Map No, 102-15 Various Specific Plan Lines North of the River Sanitation District by Simpson-VanC~ren, Inc. ~, 1. MITIGATION MEASURE (from Negative Declaration): 1 1 t Prior to submittal of any precise development plans, land divisions, or any other applications that would implement any portion of this project,' the applicant shall amend the traffic study in accordance with the requirements of CalTrans and the Kern County Public works Department. The amended traffic study shall require written approval of CalTrans and the Kern County Public Works Department. Additionally, the applicant shall prepare a phasing program, consisting of three phases, that implements the requirements of the approved traffic study. Said phasing program shall be approved by CalTrans, the Kern County Public Works Department, and the Kern County Department of Planning and Development Services prior to the submittal of any applications that would implement this project. The phasing program shall include, but shall not be limited to, boundaries of development within each phase, a schedule or timing, for construction of traffic related improvements, and a discussion of the proposed funding mechanism(s) to finance the improvements required by the approved traffic study. In lieu of a single traffic study, separate traffic studies may be prepared for each of the three phases of development. Future occupancy of structures or sites within each phase shall not be permitted until the required improvements have been completed and approved. As part of Phase 1, the applicant shall establish a Transportation Management Association (TMA), or other transportation control measures, to implement programs which reduce "person trips" for. the project. Tl~e TMA shall develop a Transportation Management Plan which shall be reviewed and approved by CalTrans and the Kern County Public Works Department. 2. JUSTIFICATION (from Initial Study) Traffic studies prepared by the applicant's traffic engineer indicate that the project when built, along with other approved development in the area, will pose significant traffic circulation impacts. 3. TRUSTEE AGENCIES JURISDICTION YES NO State Department of Fish and Game X Stales Land Commission }C State Department of Parks and Recreation X University of California X O'IIiER PUDLIC AGENCIES CalTrans X Kern County Public works Department X 4. hKYJITORINC AGENCY/FIRM: Kern County Department of planning and Development Services 5. PROCEDURE - STEPS ~ OOh1PLIA.'(lCE (unique to each project) A. Prior to submittal of any development plan that would implement any part of the proposal, the applicant shall prepare an amended traffic analysis. In lieu of a single traffic analysis, the applicant may prepare separate studies for each of three phases of an overall develognent program. 14-25 D. Upon completion of said analysis, the applicant shall forward said report to CalTrans and the Public Works Department/Reads for review. Said report shall not be deemed acceptable until those agencies provide written verification of the adequacy of the report to. the Department of Planning and Development Services. C. Prior to submittal of any development plan that would implement any part of the proposal, the applicant shall prepare a phasing program that shall include, but shall not be limited to, the boundaries of development within each phase, a schedule for construction of traffic related improvements, and a discussion of the proposed funding mechanism(s) for financing the proposed traffic improvements. D. Prior to the Department of Planning and Development Services issuance of any permits for occupancy of structures or sites within each phase, the applicant shall provide evidence to Department of Planning and Development .Services that improvements for that phase have been completed and approved as determined by the Director of Planning and Development Services. ~. Prior to issuance of any permits for Phase 1, the applicant shall establish a Transportation Management Association (TTR+) to implement programs which reduce "person trips' for the project. ZT~e TT4+, shall develop a Transportation Management Plan which shall be reviewed and approved by CalTrans and the Kern County Public Works Departrnent/Reads. 6. COhiPLL41~E (each procedure step to be signed off and dated by monitor) A. D. . C . ~, D. E. 7 . C'Oh4~idI'S 8. Fees: Receipt q Date: Recd By: Pre pared Dy: Date: North of Cllr- ItivGi Sanil't+tion District ~~ by Simpc~>n-!';ud.uren, Inc. Page 2 Of 2 14-26 MQIITCRI2~ PROGRAM #2 FCtt ~ General Plan Amendment Case No. 3, Map No. 102-15 , Zone Change Case No. 18, Map No. 102-15 Various Specific Plan Lines North of the River Sanitation District by Simmpsan-VanCuren, Znc. 1. MITIGATION MF.A.SURE (from Negative Declaration): All residential subdivision shall be by final map subdivision. 2. JUS'I'IFICATZCN (fran Initial Study) To ensure that piecemeal development of the project does not take place, but is continued to be treated as a single project. 3. TRUST£E AGZZJCIFS JURISDICTICt9 YES ND State Department of Fish and Game X States Land Commission X State Department of Parks and Recreation X University of California X ~~ dlf~R PUSL.IC AGENCIES Kern County Department of Planning and Development Services X 4. MCNIZC~RING ~~Y/FIRM: Kern County Department of Planning and Development Services ~, 5. PRfJCFDURE - STEPS ~ CCf~LIANCE (unique to each project) A. At the time of review and processing of any land division for the residential portion of the project, the Departrnent of Planning and Development Services sill ensure that the land division is accomplished by means of a final map subdivision only. -~ B . 6. CCMPLIAN'~ (each procedure step to be signed off and dated by monitor) A. ~I B. 7 . OC1MMfNIS : 8. Fees: Receipt # Date: Recd By: Prepared By: Date: 14-2 7 MCtJiTC14tI1~ PROG1tAM N 3 FQR General Plan Amendment Case No. 3, Map No. 102-15 Zone Change Case No. 18, Map No. 102-35 Various Specific Plan Linea North of the River Sanitation District by Simpson-VanClaren, Inc. 1. MITIGATION tgA.SURE (from Negative Declaration): All industrial and commercial zoning shall include n PD (Precise Development Combining) District. 2. JUSTIFICATION (from Initial Study) Zb ensure that the project is developed in a comprehensive and integrated manner and to afford additional developmental control where necessary. 3. TRUSTEE AGENCIES JURISDICTICf1 YES iJO State Department of Fish and Game X States Land Commission }( State Department of Parks and Recreation X University of California X ~~ PUBL.IC AGENCIES Kern County Department of Planning and Development Services X 4. M'Dt~iITOF22t~ AGE1~Y/FIRM: Kern County Department of Planning and Development Services 5. PRO(~DURE - STEPS T'0 CCT~LIANCE (unique to each project) A. The applicant has requested that a PD District be applied to all the proposed industrial areas of the project. If future additional rezoning is requested by the applicant, the Departrnent of Planning and Development Services will ensure that the Board of Supervisors is aware of this requirement-prior to the Board rendering a decision. B. 6. CCt~LIANCE (each procedure step to be signed off and dated by monitor) A. B. 7. CL~R42TI5: 8. Fees: Receipt N Date: Recd By: Prepared BY: Date: 14-28 ~' hQdIZC~IIJG PROGRAM M4 FOR General Plan Amendment Case No. 3, Map No. 102-15 Zone Chan e Case N 18 g o. , Map No. 102-15 various Specific Plan Lines North of the River Sanitation District by Simpson-VanCuren Inc ~, , . 1. hffTIGATION MEASURE (from Negative Declaration); Prior to submittal of any future development project, detailed maps and plan addressing existing and future petroleum extraction activities on the site shall be developed. Said maps and plans shall be approved by the California Department of Conservation/Division of Oil a~ Gas. 2. JUST'IFICATICN (fran Initial Study) Zb preserve and rotect etr l p p o eum extraction activities pursuant to the regulations and policies of the California Department of Conservation/Division of Oil and Gas (DOG). 3. 4RUSZ£E AGENCIES J1JFtISDICTICtJ State Department of Fish and Game YES ~ X ~ States Land Commission X State Department of Parks and Recreation X University of California X O'I}~ft PUBLIC AGENCIES California Departrment of Conservation/ Division of Oil and Gas ~ X 4. MONITC~2ING AGENCY/FIRM: Kern County Department of Planning and Development Services 5. PROCED(JF2E - 5Z£PS Tt~ CCt~LIANCE (unique to each project) `" A. Prior to submittal of any future development project, the applicant shall prepare detailed maps and a plan addressing existing and future petroleum extraction activities on the site. B. Prior to suLmittal of any future development project to Planning and Development Services, the applicant shall submit said maps and petroleum extraction plan to the California DOG for approval. C. Upon California DOG approval of the petroleum extraction plan and maps, and prior to suiznittal of any future development plans for the site, the applicant shall reflect the California DOG approved plan in the development plan. D. At the time of submittal of any future development project to Planning and Development Services, the applicant shall submit a copy of said approved maps and petroleum extraction plan to the Department of Planning and Development Services. E. At the time of processing plans for future development of the project, the Departrnent of Planning and Development Services gill ensure that the development plan reflects said petroleum extraction plan and contains a design reflecting said plan and conditions of approval to accommodate said extraction. I r 14-29 6. GY,~LIAtJCE (each procedure step to be eignod off and dated by monitor) A. B. C. D. E. 7 . ~1I5 8. Fees: Receipt # Date: Prepared By: Date: North of the River Sanitation District by Simpson-VanCLren, Inc. 14-30 Recd By: Page 2 of 2 ~~ FLNITCIltiIJG P'AOGRAM ~ 5 FOR General Plan Amendment Case No. 3, Map No. 102-15 Zone Change Case No. 18, Map No. 102-15 Various Specific Plan Lines North of the River Sanitation District by Simpson-VanCLren, Inc. ,~' 1. MITIGATION MEASURE (from Negative Declaration); Prior to submittal of any development project, an acoustical analysis and mitigation for lot and construction design shall be sulmitted and approved. 2. JUSTIFICATION (from Initial Study) Zb ensure that noise levels to and frcm the project area meet the criteria of the Kern County Noise Element. 3. TRUSREE AGENCIES JURZSDICTICN State De YF5 ~ partment of Fish and Game X States Land Cortunission X State Departrent of Parks and Recreation ){ University of Califorru a X fJI}~:R PUBLIC AGENCIES Kern County Environmental Health Services Department X 4. M2~7IRCIRING AGENCY/FIRM: Kern County Depsz-tment of Planning and Development Services 5. PRDCF~URE - STEPS RO CCt~LI?+NCE (unique to each project) A. Prior to submittal of any development project, the applicant shall submit to Environmental Health Services Department an acoustical analysis and mitigation for lot and construction design. B. Upon Environmental Health Services Dep31-trnent approval of said acoustical analysis and mitigation, the applicant shall reflect said mitigation in the design of the project. C. At the time of submittal of any future development project to Planning and Development Services, the applicant shall su2:mit Written evidence from Environmental Health Services Department indicating approval of the acoustical analysis and proposed mitigation. D. At the time of processing plans for future development of the project, the Departrnent of Planning and Development Services Will ensure that the development plan reflects said mitigation as approved by Environmental Health Services Department and appropriate co~itions of approval. 6. CCt~LIANCE (each procedure step to be signed off and dpted by monitor) A. B. • C. D. ~" 14-31 ~ . ar~a~,n's e. Fees: Receipt $ Date: Recd By: Prepared BY: Date: North of the River Sanitation District by Simpson-VanCliren, Inc. Page 2 of 2 14-.5 G r ~J M1JIT~fLTNG PROGRAM ~6 FCR General Plan Amendment Case No. 3, Kap No. 102-15 Zone Change Case No. 16, Map No. 102-15 Various Specific Plan Lines North of the River Sanitation District by Simpson-Van~l:ren Inc. ! 1. MITIGATZCN MEASURE (from Negative Declaration): Prior to submittal of any development project, applicant shall have prepared an approved geological report. 2. JUSTIFICJ~TION (from Initial Study) Tb ensure project is built and designed in a manner which protects the public from geological hazards. 3. TRUSTEE AGENCIES JUtLISDICTICN 1'F5 ~ State De partment of Fish and Game R ' States Land Commission X State Department of Parks and Recreation X University of California X OI7~R PUBLIC AGENCIES Kern County Department of ~, Planning and Development Services g 4. MONITOFtTNG AGENCY/FIRM: Kern County Department of Planning and Development Services 5. PROCEDURE -STEPS TO CCt~LIANC:E (unique to each project) A. Prior to submittal of any future development project, the applicant shall prepare a geologic report. B. Prior to sulznittal of any future development project, the applicant shall reflect in the design of the project any mitigation noted in the geologic report. C. At the time of processing plans for future development of the project, ~ ~ the DeparCnest of Planning and Development Services will ensure that the developnent plan reflects any mitigation contained in the geologic report and contains appropriate conditions of approval. 6. CC~LIANCE (each procedure step to be signed off and dated by monitor) A . B. C. 7 . . CU4~'2d1`S : 8 F . ees: Receipt N Date: Recd By: Prepared BY~ Date: 1 I~ 14-33 M21IT~ING PROGRAM ~t7 FOR General Plan Amendment Case No. 3, Map No. 102-15 Zone Change Case No. 18, Map No. 102-15 Various Specific Plan Lines North of the River Sanitation District by Simpson-VanCuren, Znc. 1. MITIGJ~TICN MEASURE (from Negative Declaration): Prior to submittal of any development project, applicant shall furnish a soils test for hazardous materials acceptable to the Kern County Environmental Health Services Department. 2. JUSTIFICATION (from Initial Study) To ensure that the public health and safety is protected from chemical contamination of soils and water supply. 3. TRUSTEE AGENCIES JURISDICTION 4 5 6 YF5 1JC) State Depar~nent of Fieh and Game X States Land Commission X State Departrnent of Parks and Recreation X University of California X C+I}OrR PUBLZC AGElJCZES Kern County Environmental Health Services Department X MONITORING AGENCY/FIRM: Kern County Department of Planning, and Development Services PROCEDCTRE - STEPS Ta COMPLIANCE (unique to each project) A. Prior to submittal of any development project to Planning and Development Services, the applicant shall furnish to Environmental Health Services Department a soils test concerning hazardous materials. B. At the time of submittal of any future development project to Planning and Development Services, the applicant shall submit written evidence from Environmental Health Services Department ind.icatinq approval of the soils test and giving clearance to develop. Alternatively, Environmental Health Services Department may reccmnend mitigation concerning hazardous materials. C. At the time of processing plans for future development of the project, the Departrnent of Planning aril Development Services will ensure that the development plan reflects any mitigation determined by Environmental Health Services Department to be necessary aryl contains appropriate conditions of approval. CCt~LIANCE (each procedure step to be signed off and dated by monitor) A. B. C. 14-34 7. ~7I5: . 8. Fees: Receipt p Date: Recd By: Prepared By: ~~: North of the River Sanitation District Dy Simpson-VanCllren, Snc. Page 2 of 2 14-35 MOPTITOAING PROGRAM M 8 FOR General Plan Amendment Case No. 3, Map No. 102-15 Zone Change Case No. 1B, Map No. 102-15 Various Specific Plan Lines North of the River Sanitation District by Simpson-VanCliren, Inc. 1. MITIGATION MEASURE (from Negative Declaration): Prior to submittal of any development project, applicant shall submit an archaeological field survey acceptable to the California Archaeological Inventory. 2. JUSTIFICATION (from Initial Study) 4b ensure that significant cultural resources are not destroyed during the development process. 3. TRUSTEE AGENCIES JURISDICTION ' YFS NO State Department of Fish and Game X States Land Commission X State Department of Parks and Recreation X University of California X DI}Orft PUBLZC AGEt~IES Kern County Department of Planning aryl Development Services X 4. MONITORING AGF3JC'Y/FIRM: Kern County Department of Planning and Development Services 5. PROCIDURE -STEPS TO CCh~LIANC,~ (unique to each project) A. Prior to submittal of any development project to Planning and Development Services, the applicant shall prepare an archaeological field survey acceptable to the California Archaeological Inventory (CAI) and shall submit to Planning and Development Services. written evidence from CAI indicating the acceptability of the survey. B. At the time of processing plans for future development of the project, the Department of Planning and Development Services will ensure that the development plan reflects any recotnmenciations contained in the approved archaeological survey and contains appropriate conditions of approval. 6. CX~LIAIJCE (each procedure step to be signed off and dated by monitor) A. B. 7. CCh4~M5: 8. Fees: Receipt 11 Date: Recd Hy: Prepared By: Date: 14-36 MCNITCY4tI1JC PROGRAM ~ 9 FCR General Plan Amerdrnent Case No. 3, Map No. 102-15 Zone Change Case No. 18, Map No. 102-15 Various Specific Plan Lines North of the River Sanitation District by Simpson-VanCluen, Inc. 1. MITIGATION MEASURE (from Negative Declaration): ZT~e residential area of the project will be limited to a tninimtmi lot size of 10,000 square feet (net). 2. JUSTIFICATION (from Initial Study) Residential lots of 10,000 square feet could yield lot sizes and density that would be more compatible with neighboring residential uses than would the proposed 6,000-square-foot lots. 3. TRUSZ£E AGENCIES JURISDICTION Y£5 NO State Department of Fish and Game R States Lard Commission g State Department of Pazks and Recreation g California State University, Bakersfield R CR4~R PUBLIC AGENCIES Kern County Department of Planning and Development Services X 4. MCNIZORING AGENCY/FIRM: ~. Kern County Department of Planning and Development Services 5. PROCEDURE - STEPS ~ CGlPI.IAIJCE (unique to each project) A. At the time of review and processing of any land division for the residential portion of the project, the Department of Planning and Development Services will ensure that the lard division includes parcels containing a minimum of 10,000 square feet (net). 6. CCt~L.IANCE (each procedure step to be signed off and dated by monitor) A. 7 . C17~4~.'NI'S : 8. Fees: Receipt M Date: Reed By: Prepared By: Date: 14-3 7 M~IITOFLINC PFDG'RAM N 10 Ft1R General Plan Amendment Case No. 3, Map No. I02-15 Zone Change Case No. 18, Map No. 102-15 Various Specific Plan Linea North of the River Sanitation District by Simpson-VanCuren, Inc. 1. MITIGATZON MEASURE (from Negative Declaration): An additional 10-foot-wide landscaped buffer strip shall be installed and maintained beyond the right-of-way for Mohawk Street by the applicant, ar by an entity to be formed, acceptable to the County. 2. JUSTIFICATICf1 (from Initial Study) Additional buffering is necessary to provide aesthetic appeal to the roadway as well as to provide additional separation between residential and industrial uses. 3. TRUST£E AGENCIES JURISDICTICt1 YFS NO State Department of Fish and Game X States Iand Crnarussion X State Department of Parks and Recreation X California State University, Bakersfield X OIf~R PUBLIC AGFTJCIES Kern County Public Works Department X Kern County Department of !. Planning and Development Services X 4. MONITQRING AGENCY/FIRM: Kern County Department of Planning and Development Services 5. PROCEDURE -STEPS TO CU~LIAIJCE (unique to each project) A. Prior to submitting any land division or precise development plan involving that portion of the project site located betzaeen Hageman Road and the northerly project bou~ary, the applicant shall incorporate into the project design an additional 10-foot-wide landscaped strip on the east and/or west side of Mohawk Street beyond the 90-foot right-of- way, adjacent to the proposed land division or precise development plan. B. At the time of review and processing of any land division or precise development plan for the project, the Department of Planning and Development Services will ensure that the project design incorporates the additional landscaped strip ns noted above. C. At the time of approval of any lrind division or precise development plan for the project, the Department of Planning and Development Services shall ensure that the conditio~ls of approval for said land division or precise development plan include, in a fozm that is acceptable to the County, provisions for the continuing maintenance of the landscaped stripe. 6. OOMPLIAI~E (each procedure step to be signed off and dated by monitor) A. B. C. 1438 1 i I 1 1 1 ~~~ f ~ . ar~,rrs B. Fees: Receipt p Date: Recd By: Prepared By: Date: North of the River Sanitation District by Simpson-VanCuren, Inc. 14_39 Page 2 of 2 M~1IRt~ING PROGRAM #11 FOR General Plan Amendment Case No. 3, Map No. 102-15 Zone Change Case No. 18, Map No. 102-15 Various Specific Plan Lines Nozth of the River Sanitation District by Simpson-VanCuren, Inc. 1. MITIGATICLJ MEASURE (from Negative Declaration)i In conjunction with-the construction of Mohawk Street, asix-foot-high solid block wall of concrete or masonry shall be installed along the west side of Mohawk Street from Olive Drive to the southeast corner of Tract 3579. Parcels whose primary access to a garage or off-street parking is taken from Victor Street shall be permitted a gated opening in the wall. 2. JUSTIFICATIDrI (from Initial Study) Testimony taken at the public hearing for this project indicates that traffic noise arising from the future development of Mohawk Street may reach unpleasant levels unless mitigated. 3. TRUSTEE AGEtJCIES JURISDICTION ~ YES AXE State Department of Fish and Game X States Land Commission % State Department of Parks and Recreation R California State University, Bakersfield X OTE~R PUBLIC AGENCIES Rern County Public Works Department/R.oads R Rern County Department of planning and Development Services % 4. MONZR'ORING AGEIJC'Y/FIRM: Rern County Department of Planning and Development Services 5 pRfJCEDURE -STEPS Tp COMPLIANCE (unique to each project) A. At the time that the applicant's traffic consultant prepares an amended traffic study, said study shall specify which phase of project development requires the construction of Mohawk Street. The study shall miake provision for financing and construction of a block wall along the west side of Mohawk Street. B. During the development phase specified in the amended traffic study, the developer of Mohawk Street shall construct the solid masonry wall along Mohawk Street from Olive Drive to the southeast corner of Tract 3579. 6. CCMPLIANGE (each procedure step to be signed off and dated by monitor) A. B. 7. CIC79~1I5: 8. Fees: Prepared By Receipt # Date: _ Recd By: Date North of the River Sanitation District by Simpson-VanGliren, Inc. 14-40 ~~ oads to be Affected ~~ i i ~'=.i_ll ... __...~~ _~~ 0 Vii ~i? Z~j ~~I ~, ~...,~ --. _ i/ ' - is ~' i~ ~ ,~ 'I ' ,~ ~~ • _I ~ ~ i I ~ ~I I ~I ~~ ~ ~/ } ~; ~ ,.ii ~, ~ , !i;~' ~...... i~ 14-41 \\ ~~9\~ O F J p. O ~` o •~ ,'- -o ' B E F O RE TH E B OA RD O F S U P E RV = S O R S COUNTY O F K ERN ~ S TAT E O F C AL I F O RN = A In the matter of: Resolution No. 91-317 Reference No. 9111600 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE METROPOLITAN 9111482 BAKERSFiELD 2010 GENERAL PLAN, AND THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE METROPOLITAN BAKERSFIELD 2010 GENERAL PLAN; APPROVE CONCEPTUAL ALIGNMENTS FOR PORTIONS OF MOHAWK STREET/ VICTOR STREET, OLIVE DRIVE, LANDCO DRIVE, AND KNUDSEN DRIVE; FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION I, SUE LASITER, Clerk of the Board of supervisors of the County of Kern, state of California, do hereby certify that the following resolution, on motion of Supervisor Larwood seconded by Supervisor Shell was duly passed and adopted by said Board of Supervisors at nn official meeting hereof this 29th`day of April 1991, by the following vote, to wits AYES: Ashburn, Austin, Larwood, Hettinger, Shell NOES : None ABSENT: None SUE LASITER Clerk of the Board of Supervisors County of Kern, State of California Deputy Cler R E S OLUT I ON .. ' ~CNC'.//'1l~yG ~~ Section 1. WHEREAS: (a) Pursuant to Government Code section 65358, four times annually, this Board considers proposed amendments to the County's General Plans; and (b) The following proposal was alphabetically designated on December 3, 1990, and parts of it were approved on February 11, 1991, with the remainder before this Board on March 18, 1991, and April 1, 1991, at which time it was continued to April 29, 1991: M. (1)(a) Amendment to the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan from Map Code P (Public Facilities) to Map Code LR (Low Density Residential - Less Than or Equal to 7.26 Dwelling Units/Net Acre), LI (Light Industrial), SI (Service # 91-317 14-42 1 ~i 1 B E F O R E T H E B OA RD O F S LTP E RV = S O R S C OLJ NTY O F K ERN ~ S TAT E O F CAL = F O RN = A ' In the matter ofs Resolution No. 91-317 Reference No. 9111600 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE METROPOLITAN 9111482 BAKERSFIELD 2010 GENERAL PLAN, AND THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE METROPOLITAN BAKERSFIELD 2010 GENERAL PLAN; APPROVE CONCEPTUAL ALIGNMENTS FOR PORTIONS OF MOHAWK STREET/ VICTOR STREET, OLIVE DRIVE, LANDCO DRIVE, AND KNUDSEN DRIVE; FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION I, SUE LASITER, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Kern, State of Celifornla, do hereby certify that the following resolution, on motion of Supervisor Larwood seconded by supervisor Shell was duly passed and adopted by said Boazd of Supervisors at an official meeting hereof this 29th day of April , 1991, by the following vote, to wits Shell er Hettin rwood L A ti A hb g , , n, a us urn, s AYES: NOES : None ABSENT: None SUE LASITER Clerk of the Board of Supervisors County of Kern, State of California . ~ Deputy Clerk ' ~ / c -~ N N" ~ t~/ f ~ v RE S OLLJT = ON 6~~`4~ L~ UuN,~ Section 1. WHEREAS: (a) Pursuant to Government Code section 65358, four times annually, this Board considers proposed amendments to the County's General Plans; and (b) The following proposal was alphabetically designated on December 3, 1990, and parts of it were approved on February 11, 1991, with the remainder before this Board on Mazch 18, 1991, and April 1, 1991, at which time it was continued to April 29, 1991: M. (1)(a) Amendment to the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan from Map Code P (Public Facilities) to Map Code LR (Low Density Residential - - Less Than or Equal to 7.26 Dwelling Units/Net ~ Acre), LI (Light Industrial), SI (Service ~ 91-317 14-43 NORTH OF RIVER SANITARY DISTRICT NO . 1 5001 Olive Drive Oildala California 93308 DIRECTORS SECRETARY•MA.VAGER ' D(`VALD J SILVn;S, PRESIDENT R :ARD L. KYKER VICE PRESIDENT DONALD O. GLOVER STANLEY MOE 5001 OLIVE DRIVE SAMUEL SCOLES PHONE (661) 399kt1 t FAX (661) 399-2856 GARY MCKIBBQJ E-mail: norsdfalli¢hbpeed.net May 18, 1999 ' Mr. Stanley Grady Planning Director . City of Bakersfield 1501 Truxtun Avenue , Bakersfield, California 93301 RE: ANNEXATION REQUEST Dear Mr. Grady; The North of River Sanitary will commence operation of our new treatment plant located west of Bakersfield next month. Our existing facilities located south of Olive Drive is scheduled for abandonment and we are currently negotiating the sale of our property for future development. The developer wishes to annex the property to the City of Bakersfield. We therefore request that you initiate annexation proceedings as soon as possible. We are also enclosing the following items for your review and processing. Application for general plan amendment. Application for zone change. Geologic Report , Archaeological report and California Archaeological Inventory Review. It is our understand that you will be obtaining Request For Proposals (RFP) for an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for this project. When obtaining the RFP's please have the consultants include all reports, in addition to those listed above necessary to complete the EIR Since the property ~s within the boundaries of North of River Sanitary District, this annexation , request is with the understanding that the property will remain within those boundaries and sewer service will be provided by North of River Sanitary District. , If you need any further information please direct communication to Mr. Harold Robertson, Porter-Robertson Engineering & Surveying. Inc., 1200-21 st Street, Bakersfield, California, 93301. Sincerely, j ~~~~~ \ ' Donald O. Glover Manager 14-44 - ,. 1 E3 .~ f~ E. FZ 5 F f E L U ~ • 1 .aPPLIC.~NT / O~i'NER INFORMATION COti'CL12REti~ APPLICATION ' GE~~RAL PLAN A_~"IE~~~IEr"T & ZONE CHANGE Cit_v of Bakersfield • Development Sen•rces • Planning Divisionh 1 171 S Chester Avenue Bakersfield C9 93301 /tS61) 326-3733 • F.-L~' 1661) 327-0646 Jack Hardisrv, Development Servlees Director applicant Name: _ Contact NamC: applicant Address: Kyle Carter 3851 Fruitvale Avenue, Suite B Phony Number: Phone Number: File No.: Date Received: Fee Collected: Receipt Number: Received Bv: Hearins Date: Stanley Gradv, Planning Director (661) 399-0239 Bakersfield, California 93308 North Of River Owner Namz: Sanitation District No. 1 Owner Address: 5001 Olive Drive ~' Oildale, CA 93308 Projf:ct ~Site~ Address: Description oT proposal: PROJECT INFORtiIATION South of Olive Drive and East of Fruitvale Avenue To increase the residential area, include cortQnercial sites and reduce industrial area. Assessor's Parcel Number: 116-08 Existing Zoning: A ~ A-1 (R-1 in suspense) M-1,M-2,M-3 PD Acreage: 532.61 Proposed Zoning: R-1, R-2, C-2, M-1, M-2 Acreage: 532.61 General Plan Designation: ~ ~ L1, S1,H1 Aeraage: 532.61 ' Proposrd Gf:nzral Plan Designation: LR,LiVLTZ, GC,L1,S1, MUC Acrease: L':ve cerrifv that the information contained in this application packet is correct to the best of rmvour knowled¢e. /:":ve agree to comply with all cin~ ' ordinances and state laws relating to the development requested in this application. Si~ature of Applicant or Agent LC~C~CIL Date: S~~'' ~-~, Siffiature of Prooem Owner ~ D ~ Dare: S' r ~-9~f - ~ 14-45 Phone Number: (661) 399-6411 i CITY OF B.4KERSFIELD Office Use Only: ~_ PL.4_~tiL`G DEP.4RT`fENT File No. COI~'CLRRENT ~PPLICaTION SLPPLE`fE~IT:>,L QL'ESTIO~I~I:~IRE ' These suoplemen[al questions must he answered and included as pan of the application for a Concurrent Zone Change and , General Plan Amendment. Please complete as thoroughly as possible, read the advisory infotmation- sign and date this form and submit tt with the other checklist items on the Inscnution Sheet. If necessary, you may attach additional sheets. I. Present use of subject property (describe structures and improvements on site): The NORSD treatment plant ' is located on the i~te, there are numerous wells and tanks scattered around the S~ G site, the remainder of the site is used for farming. '. Description of proposed use and/or zoning: Single family and multi-family residential with a ' school and park, two commercial sites and industrial (light and service). =. explain the nerd for the amendment. How a the amendment lustihrd.' ~Pleasr submit any substanuattng rvtdzncel: The NORSD treatment plant will soon be abandoned, the majority of the wells are inactive or abandoned and the proposed amendment is a natural expansion of existing development to the north and west. ~. Describe and explain any deed restrictions or easements attached to the property [hat tray affect the proposed use: ~. None ~-DVISORY tiOTICE: Review of the Concurrent application could result in the requirement of the applicant to submit additional information, including but not limited to, foctued, specialized or specific studies or preparation of an EIR, which could extend the processing time. ' General Plan Amendmetu and Zone Change applications are subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality .4ct cCEQA). It is recommended you consult with the Planning Department prior to submitting a Concurrent application. For additional information or to file this application. contact the City of Bakersfield Planning Department, 1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, C.4 93301. Telephone: (6611 336-373;. ~-~ , ~: . pplicant and/or Propem Owner Signature Date 14-46 •: ersion: 03; 99 Final Filing Date: Hearing Date: APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE As Provided By Section 17.64 V of the ~~lunicipal Code of the City of Bakersfield Date: TO THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION City Planning Department 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield. CA 93301 (661) 3?6-3733 1 I North of River Sanitation District . am applying for a Change of Zone classification of propem~ located at (address or Qeneral area): y South of Olive Drive and east of Fruitvale Avenue. 2. I am: (check one) X the owner _ the owner's agent other 3. This property is zoned: A ~ A-i (R-1 in suspense), M-l,M-2,M-3 PD ~. And. I am requesting that it be changed to R-i, R-2, c-2, M-i, M-2 within the boundaries of the following exact legal description: 5 See attached A map or plot plan of this property is hereto attached and made a pan of this petition. (It is desirable to attach photographs of property involved.) VOTE: State law requires that zoai.ng and the City's General Plan be consistent. 14-47 -1- 1 6. This proposed Zone Change is required by public necessity because: ' It is an infill area ready for development. 7. The property involved in this request is more suitable for the purposes permitted in the , proposed zone than for the purposes permitted in the present zone because: There is existing residential development to the north and west and a large industrial area to the south that justifies the proposed reduction in industrial zones. 8. The uses permitted in the proposed zone will not be materially detrimental to the public , welfare or to the surrounding property because: It is expansion of existing developments. , 9. This proposed zone change is necessary rot the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial ' propem right because: It will allow the property owners to meet the demands of the current development which indicates more residential and less industrial is needed. --- 10. The date this property was acquired by the present owner is: 1 1. .any deed restrictions which affect the use of this property are as follows: ' None i 12. (I am) (we are) the owner(s) of the property, or authorized agent for who is~th' a owner, requesting the above described Zone Change. Signature ~ / ~ ~.~.-- Print ~~+ G ~ ~ U. ~ ° ~+~ Date ~ ~ ~- 9 g Signature Prin Date C ~ 14-48 ' -2- 13. OPTIONAL: You are NOT required to have neighbors sign this application, but if you wish to do so, the following space is provided. The undersigned owners or property in the vicinity of the property described in this application for Zone Change certify that they do not object to the granting of this Zone Change. SIGNATURE (Print or type name under signature) ADDRESS (Print or type) P:`.applica[~.Zc-munic.app.wpd 14-49 - 3 - jRev. 8/98) i I PROJECT LOCATIONI o ' 1A1.E s ~ NORR1 I DECATUR I 0 ', a , 34TH ELD r . 2 I t _~_ ~ t MILES u~"r~ 14-50 n W a. O 1 t t [] '~ V ~ n ~ Of ' •f ' d O N ~ ~ O ~ O tD . t0 M ~ 1~ ~ ~ n ~ M ~ ~ ~ f\ M ~ y N ~ ^ N ~ 2 17 f~ Qf N 17 p m m N M p tp m O N f~ N ~ M ^ Q1 Cf O- pi ~ ~ S IA 1n p1 ~ .r ~ •~- y r (D 17 ~ GO 01 ~ 17 N N $ n N tD a0 'd ItJ ~ n M ~O O v M ~ ~ O1 ~ to .• 17 10 1ff 17 17 17 17 •? N y Cf M ' Z LJi J 3 a 3 t W 3 a W a 3 a 3 ~ 3 • 3 t W a 3 W ~ W W a W a W W W W W W W W W W W W 3 W m < O Z N d d ;- N 17 ~ N ~ ~pp `~t p g ~ O O O d a O N d r') ~ '? ~ y M 1'1 O ~ ~ ~ a t0 ~ ~ O ~ a ~O lr~ ~ N u~ ~ y 0 a 10 17 t N ~ a N o a C1 f7 a ~ o e tp - a Of 1 a N a N '- ~ W in P d f~ iA P CD S~ O r i7 P i0 P 00 P ~ t~ P i~ M a r Co r to 17 oo o0 :* ~ r to d ~ ~ .- '' ~ 1A N ~ N `~ cD - iA Qf . lA 7 ify 17 lV 0 t0 W Z ~ m a°' o° a°fo °o a°'o o° ~ a~o o° a°'o °o ao n v r ~ l~ ~ a~o ~ ~ a~o ar`o l oNO f g r g a i r o° p o~ d - °' $ Z y V1 V1 y y Z Z y y y Z Z Z Z Z 2 V1 y Z y Z Z Z Z o to Z a o Z Z ' Z J J N M J d J N J tD J h J aD J O1 J O J r' J N J 17 J ~ J to J t0 J f~ J cD J Of J O N (ryr- NN 1(7~ Nd J I(n'y tND 1(~'~ W J ONs O J J J J J ..J J J 14-51 cri O Z N J LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT "A" PARCELS 1 THROUGH 10 OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT No. 3-93 AS PER CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE RECORDED FEBRUARY 8, 1995 AS DOCUMENT No. 0195015706 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, BEING A PARCEL OF LAND LYING WITHIN SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 29 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, M.D.M., IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA, COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. 14-52 g ~ 8 b! H '.. d ¢M R \~ H \1 ti •~ O n S N I a° L'S z °~ z s z c a ^' ~ ~' _ ~ i~ ~, ~ 1 1 The objective of the proposed amendment to the Kern County General Plan is to significantly reduce the acreage of industrially designated property and , create a planned residential community with a school and park site, a commercial area and light and service industrial to act as a buffer to the heavy industrial that is located to the south and east. , The proposed project will be served by the North of the River Sanitation District for sanitary sewer and the California Water Service Company for domestic water and fire protection. 1 1 1 e n 1 14-54 s Concurrent Application lnsrructions pane ~ FEE Concurrent applications are charged as follows: • Land Use Map and Zoning Map changes only - 54.060 • Text (2010 document or Zoning Ordinance) and map changes - 54.567 If an EIR is required, a qualified consultant will be hired based upon a competitive request for proposals process. The applicant will be charged the cost of EIR (consultant tee, administrative cosu, etc.). These costs, are charged directly to a trust account containing the applicant's deposits. The initial deposit for an EIR is 52.537 plus the estimated cost to prepare the EIR. Additional deposits may be required as actual cosu are monitored and projected. CONCURRENT APPLICATION CHECKLIST: Please submit the following completed items with your application. ~_ 1. Permit Application Form. ~ 2. Concurrent Application Supplemental Questionnaire. ~_ 3. Application Fee. 4. Environmental information form including a letter from the water company stating they will serve the project area. 5. Signed Hazardous Waste Site Verification Statement. 6. One map describing the location of the project with dimensions. (A legible Assessor Parcel Map is acceptable. For multiple changes in designations. every change must be shown by size, shape and location of map. ) 7. Photos of the existing condition of the project site showing structures, vegetation, topography, river or canal. historical, cultural or scenic aspects of the project site. 8. Photos of the surrounding vicinity showing the conditions of existing land users) including streeu, structures, topography, historical or scenic aspects. 9. Other (Traffic, Noise, Air Quality, Biological, if needed). 10. Legal description of site: For multiple zone changes, each zone district must have a metes and bounds description of the acreage. Also, attach an 8 1/2" x I1" map showing the size, shape and location of the entire site affected. 11. Signed Indemnification Agreement. 12. Letter from Archaeological Information Center at California State University Bakersfield at 9001 Stockdale Hwy., Phone H661/6642289; FAX 661/6642415. r ~ For more information, please contact: City of Bakerstield Planning Department 1715 Chester Avenue Bakerstield, CA 93301 661) 326-3733 14-55 ~rrsim:.io:.l !.:999 INDE`L'~TFI aTION a REE~iENT In consideration of the City of Bakersfield's approval of my re uested (check one q ) ^ Conditional Use Permit O Parcel Map Waiver ^ Comprehensive Sign Plan ^ Site Plan Review ^ Extension of Time ^ Tentative ParceUTract Map ® General Plan Amendment ^ Wall and Landscape Review ~ ^ Lot Line Adjustment ~l ' Zone Change ^ Modification ^ Other ~ 116-08-44; 332-011-34 ~ 35 ~ on Assessor Parcel Number 332-012-20; 365-011-10,11,12,18 ~ 24 ,generally located d ~ South of Olive Drive and east of Fruitvale Avenue ,and of the related environmental doc uments (hereafter, the 'Project"), Kyle ~~~ (hereafter, the "Property Owner") agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Bakersfield, its agents. officers and employees from anv claim, action or proceeding against the City of Bakersfield or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul the Project, the CEQA approval. or any subsequent related development approvals or condition imposed on the Project by the Cirv of Bakersfield or anv of its agencies, depamnents, commissions, agents, officers or employees. or to impose personal liability against such agents. ~, officeTS or employees resulting from their involvement in the Project, which claim, action or proceeding is brought within the time period provided by law, including any claim for private attorney general fees claimed by or awarded to any party from the City of Bakersfield. This agreement does not prevent Property Owner from challenging any decision by Ciry of Bakersfield related to the Project. ' The Property Owner's obligation under this Aereement shall apply regardless of whether any other permits or entitlements are issued. The City of Bakersfield shall promptly notify the Property Owner of any such claim, action or proceeding, and shall cooperate in the defense. The City of Bakersfield may, within its unlimited discretion, participate in the defense of any such claim, action or proceeding if it bears its own attorney's f and costs, and defends the claim, action or proceeding in good faith. ~~ 5~1~~~ig ~. ~~~~ Date KYLE CARTER, Propem Owner. (If property owner is not an individual: Corporation name goes above, authorized representative roes below.) By: 14-56 June ?:. 1998 t 1 HAZ~~RDOUS `VASTE VERIFICATION STATEMENT Dear Applicant for Development Project: The California Legislature has passed a law that requires persons applying for development projects to review a listing of all hazardous waste sites. You must indicate whether or not your project site is included on the list of hazardous waste sites. Please review the list of hazardous waste sites and sign the Verification Statement below: A copy of the list and law requiring this verification is available at the Planning Department VERIFICATION STATEI~~1T ~~ r 1 (Review list related to hazardous waste sites) I, ~~liQ1~1 Lt/. J~f7°l?~~I , as applicant for a development project locaud at Gzt~r o~~~? ~'', ~E~!/~ 4~~/~i~Lb.~°have reviewed the (most current) hazardous wastes and substances site list pursuant to Section 65962 of the California Government Code. The proposed site ~ (is notl included on the list Source (circle one): DHS DHS2 DHS3 DHSS WRCB CWMB Vone Signature: Date: ¢- 20 - ~ 14-5 7 FILE NO: ~otJSce use only/ AGREE~IE~'T TO MITIGATION MEASliRES Applicants with projects requiring mitigation measures (as typically identified in a traffic study, biological report or EIR) to reduce potential impacts to a level less than significant must sign this form and submit it prior to project consideration, in order for the Cirv to process the environmental document for the project. I, Kyle Carter .representing North of River Sanitation District (print name of applicant! (print name of owner/ am applying to the City of Bakersfield for Annexation, General Plan Amendment and Zone Change lidenafv project/ at Northwest Bakersfield genera! location/ Check one of the following and complete, if applicable: ~Iv application materials include the identification of impacts and mitigation for (tra(jic, biological resources, other, specify) ® The Environmental Impact Report prepared for the above project identified mitigation measures for several impacts. t 1 1 1 I hereby agree to incorporate all the mitigation measures referenced in said materials into the project as approved ,~ by the City of Bakersileld and as crated in the environmental document. (~ (,(~, APPLI T'S SIG ATURE 5~ /~~ ~~ DATE NOTE: In order for your project to be advertised and set for hearing with an environmental document, this properly executed form must be submitted prior to consideration of the project by the Ciry. References;Section 21080m Public Resources Code and CEQA Guidelines 1~070(b). t`.amm ~-tl991 Cin• of Bakersfield Planning Department 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield. CA 93301 Phone: X661) 326-3733 Faz: 16611 .327-0646 14-58 1 J 1 1 1 t. S„I-ft~ .,, ;., f~, ~ ~~I~~ ------ -- _-=--- . _-. -- -Nd~d 1d~ON00 _ o „ ~ z . nro-~ / is ~nfs •u.a - oa[i ----- -- ----- V \ 'fit. '-JMA311~1:16 9 CA:f.f ar TJN3' ~~':: ~ 3~b s~~~n,~~ l -ON •a~S~~l'O'N co/ah an ,rres ne _ - a3inoa .~ o3ae _ ; ..; ~ ~'i r.. 0 } J O O II ~' L . `i - ~~ ~ . // / V Iq - `~j '- - !: ~; - -. ~- 1 / / ~ ~~~ %~^/ / / / ~ ~, /.' /~~ ale '' ~~- • '~ : , / / / -.--- J ~,f~ ~~ ~ / - i '\/ / / /~ - ~ /% ~ / . ,; C~ ~~. j p °°f G - ~3 3 W ~ ~\ f.~ ~ v ~ Y •i ¢\ ~ r ~ ~ R u / 1 V ~ ',~~~ ] o m ¢ ' ~ .1 , l _l _-_: - -_ _ ~ ~ -- ~ . I . - --- - ~ ~(r.an~~w- - %f it a br s 4 ~~ 4 J l - i :rr~i5 iY)i ~v - ( j• III! I'I,I I I I i I/ ~ r.l ~~~~' i ~~~ 'i; ~ I I li .I ICI I I I I I , .jl I' I III I >l I 'f ^~ YI I .I l i',~ ili ~ i I~'' Iljl I I i I I II III I lil.,, I IiI I I .; .h l i ~ i i III ,. '`~~ ~ I I ~~~ ~~~ ;:I 1. ~ ~- : -=~ ~ ~ - ~ I r~~r1.- i i 1~ ri~~tP~,.. ~r I -r i~il I-ail`. ;I - i. ,, , i II I i _ :_. L:. .__- . _-__: ..__- ~' ~: 4' Q U 3 U w ~ s - O t ~ ~. ~ qi ~ Q X ~ Vl m G {p M m ~ Q ~ N N m Q O ~ W ~W pr m m m Q Q Q W O O ~ N ~ ~N m Q O .",. m ;, Q O ,p r m U Q N n ~ m a _ m N ~ J Q LL ~ 6 ~ ZZ o Q ~ ~ y 7 O ~ O Q Q Q d ~ ~ ° ~ g Q •.' / - --I I I I ~I?~ ~ I ! I I _I I_. _ __. Jt_. _.-._ - -. __ _- . -._--- - - ----r ...._ - -- -- - 3~„~.-3,.~fm~, __- 1459 • -- ~ ~' ' ? Q w U N° _ ~ ~ O ~ y~ - W f ~ Z Z Z ova ~ < $ mf ~ W~ U ~ W _ _ _ J~~ G O O C 2 ~ V V O Q ~ ~ ¢ ... F- D ~ ¢ ~ a i7 ~ r j w O W j =' < Q W S Z In ~ W C Z N ~ ~ j ~ 5 Q G m~ 2 O V J~~ .~ V N y W N) a Y G = O ~ V Q Q Z` V V Q N N~ ~ W N U O N Q~ N ? Z Z Q Q 2 0 N Q_ Q a O F Z W W 0> J W Z W I O~ W Q-~_ N N~ N N O ~ S U U Q a~ 0 U Z ~ a s ~ O ~^•J > 1 1 I l l z ~ V ~~ Z ~ J W H F !W- ti W r W O O D _W S¢; N~ J W N Z°~~ e~ Q ~ O x~ N N N Vf N N N O W O~ W W V 2 W m W 4 J W J W W W W W W W J~~~ 2 V S Q¢~¢ O W `. _ a~ U N Q .. _ .. ..... ..... ... .... _ .~ .~ ... ... O 0 Z W ~ N ~ ~ ~ Q N O O C) W ~ V Q Q W W W W W W W C C~~ U U U O. 2 f¢ O V N~N" ~ ~ N O ~ d ifi `„i 1 0 =1 u`dc s ~ ~, U ,„ 0 0 U Ali a I W i i c~ - i°~ ;~ o ~ + W < ° a° i °- i i ~~~ae. ~ ;i5~; ~aa-~ aoa=.e~ Z Y o e a _ Z ~~-_-.. 3 s b ~~' ' o WW ">~ ~ ° o ' ~ ° o ~ ti ~ Z~ ~ b ~ s'- ~ ~ .~. ` m W =h~ Z F 7 ~{~ 1 Q w J .. R F J Q J V ~ J~ O< Y~~ c O ~, o ~ 4 ~ j~ ~ ~- N ~- O G W j O O Q ~ Y a y y 'Illy _ i W u ot°Y' s °a 2'~ r >>W x ° ~ i- c~ W O ~ W a : O 3 Z J W W O O i~ z a z o Wr 3 f J < Z q: a ~ ., ; : a a ` ~ 3 6 u ra g ` / W N M O a - a~ f f v i~ w o~ 4 z _ _ _ 1 >i • Z01 avw 335 i --'~ _-_ ~ 0-- ~-~'r- -r-T~ _ i Q ~ ~ \ y ~ ` ~ a\ ~' a ~ \ N i ~ I ~ \ o\ \ ~ \ \ • ` f ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ , , \ \ ~ ~o ` _ i y ~ I I. ~ 1 `- w '. ~~a X1 ~ ~ ~ o \ ~ * i . ~,~ \ 0 \ ~ b -- , \ \ \_~ (b/113 \ ~ i \~_ \ rCtl ~ a~ax~1S----L ~ Stl (Z/i)3 N N a c ~ W W W °i I W I I W I I W I i 1 ;~ I -~- -~ T- ' . - N ~ ~, W ~ ~ W ~ ~ 1Oti ~\ \~ \ \ I N 1 VA \\\ ~ \ \ i I I _ N. Cam-: ->-~ \~ ~ ~ ~ a li O I ~; _ 1 ~ ~ ~ I QI= e J+ I I N a' I z i _ V. ~ N Y ~ 6 ~ I W on J m I Q~1 SI I i I -T 3n~ - - --~ 3 ~vP • ei-ZCi drw 335 14-60 +. v w n --^ W ---- W ~ I N W N W o_ W I N 'N W - _ s 1O O • iN Vd - ~« ~ it i k 2 -- ~ ~P~a a ~ii7 2z+'i' °_w aaaa raaaa'o~ _-~~r i '-'°~iN'^eun' n ^GO ^ ~+~e ~' • ^ vs V V JJJO•nN'~a ~ ioovo ooo°¢¢°=~¢°O~v of goo ooo~oo~o o°~ov ZONE MAP 102-15 A r 1 1 ~ ~ _ ~n W V1 ~' a O M - O i ~ ~'~+ / N N vl 7 = p ~ = 7 ~ 2 O J H 1 i 4 1 „O, _ . O I O ~ 1 1 2 u Z 1 U 2 ry p 2 2 a: f ~ J ~ O J 1 1 p . ~ f ; 0 o z 2 3 v w u i e~- Z i 3 0 0 Z i S Oti i i ~ O ~» w Q Q1 W 'r m m m M Q m 2 ~= f a m j 2¢ f Z~ 2 7 2 z V O¢ O O ~ e H ¢ O ] S d' ! ~ ~ m ~ 2 y~ i ~ O 3 V] O ^' n. O 7 O= f 1 M ,~ `O ^ ~ j ~~ s_ O ~ w ~ i n a s ' z ~ p a<i~i~r00 JO`07iiui"ujfV2QaiZ'O`~~s z ¢1 Y Q p 'a'^ 2 - _ J 1 0 1 N W+ - W z 1 0~~-~ . j .. o ~YOf N.. ° J Y ~ ~' _ W i=1i z4 ,^„ °ia 1 O m J V W W , „ f auj Z~rn¢pa JW ~ no_~'N ~ ~ p~2 u J ; Z n~ N 0 ¢ C¢ 0 0 = f~ 2 s V O Z V N 2 1~ 1 ~ O~ J ~ 0 1 V ^' p u V 0 - - ~ ¢ O a¢¢ 1 a Q O J-. ~. 1.. s¢ u J u v J v O a f f u z f a r I. O n 1 O~ Z ~ ~ . Z ( YOU ~ ~ ~~ r ~ ,.,t a a a a s-¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ p¢ V v U V p 1 1 O Q f f p V Z O<. ~ I. 3 n 1 9~-70/ Oeti w>' ~ _ '~ . ~ .. -- ~= 0 ~~ ]° ~O~a .C ~a~. - ° ~~~ a ).:o M=' 111 • _~ :ifo 1pS= 7~~C iO~A ZOZ ' i- <'a: g-' i S) ~.i~w _000 l - wti cI~ ~'' '~: 'os~'s r ~:` a' 3l0 ~;.~~ e ja' i '_°Z+ 3 •o~:. s f r t. Vb ,f;4 )8v) )r ip ~ 6 ~, 3 d~I ~#J} :~ iiii' t' t.. '~ R"Jt '<<~V~~' ~ii~l~ 4' ~•` \\ O~CN7~ ~ __ ' _ 133aiS _ - _ - - _y*yHOn h O p 2 N x ~ o s II R O C a Rg 3- a aW a~ ~z '~'I8 el 2 r inn ~O~ al3 Q7 Q7 ryy V'• C d L' L PLANNING DEPARTMENT TED JAMES, AICP, Director 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 100 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2323 Phone: (805)862-8800 FAX: (805) 862-8601 m R.lay taooa~s•2925 E-Mall: planninp~kamcounty.com December ] 8, 1997 Olive Landco Associates by Martin-McIntosh 2001 Wheelan Court Bakersfield, CA 93309 Olive Landco Associates P. O. Box 524 Bakersfield, CA 93302 Re: Notice of Approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 10422 Ladies and Gentlemen: RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY ~_ DAVID PR1CE Ill, RMA DIRECTOR ' Community Development Program Department Engineering b Survey Services Department Environmental Health Services Department Planning Department Roads Department DEC i " ~ ~i FILE: TPM # 10422 ~~ ~S ~ n ,~ ~-~/ V - ~/J Enclosed for your information is a copy of Notice of Decision(s) adopted by the Hearing Officer of the Kern County Planning Department, approving the referenced Tentative Parcel Map. Also enclosed are the Conditions of Approval and the Legislative Findings for Parcel Map 10422. The map was approved by the Advisory Agency on December 11, 1997. The Conditions of Approval must be complied with prior to recordation of the final parcel map. Should you have any questions, please contact Lorelei H. Oviatt, Senior Planner ((805) 862-8866) of this Department. Very truly yours, TED JAMES, AICP, Director anning Departure i y James E. Ellis, AICP Y Planning Operations Division Chief jc Enclosure 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14-62 NOTICE OF DETERNIINATION TO: County Clerk (3) FROM: Kem County Planning Department County of Kern 2700 "M" Street, Suite 100 Bakersfield, CA 93301 j SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in Compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code Applicant or Sponsoring Agency or Department: Olive Landco Associates by Martin-McIntosh 1 1 1 Project Title: Tentative Parcel Map No. 10422 State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted to State Clearinghouse): P799035145 Contact Person: Lorelei H. Oviatt, Senior Planner ((805) 862-8866) Telephone: (805) 862-8600 Project Location: Southeast corner of Olive Drive and Landco Drive at Highway 99 southbound on ramp, northwest Bakersfield Project Description: A Vesting Tentative Parcel Map, a merger and resubdivison; proposing to divide an 8.63-acre site into six parcels and a designated remainder containing from 1.00 net acre to 1.20 net acres for future industrial uses and to vacate and relocate County Road 2471; variances to the Kem County Land Division Ordinance and Subdivision Standards to allow a distance of 590 feet between a secondary and local street on a major highway, where the requirement is 660 feet; to allow deferral of street improvements, including street signs, until development occurs; to allow the deletion of the requirement for an alley; and to allow deferral of the removal of obstructions in road right-a-way until construction of street improvements This is to advise that the KERN COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT, Lead Agency/Responsible Agency, has approved the above-described project and has made the following determinations regarding the above-described project: 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of the State CEQA Guidelines. The Negative Declaration and record of project approval may be examined at the Kern County Planning Department, 2700 "M" Street, Suite 100, Bakersfield, CA 93301. 3. Mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A Statement of Overriding Considerations ; as not adopted for this project. 5. Findings were made pursuant to the provis ns of CEQA. Date Received for Filing: December 18, 1997 Janes E. Ellis, AICP Panning Operations Division Chief jc Date of Hearing: December 11, 1997 cc: Environmental Status Board Applicant 14-63 CERTIFICATE OF FEE EXEMPTION De Minimis Impact Finding Applicant: Olive Landco Associates by Martin-McIntosh P. O. Box 524 Bakersfield, CA 93302 Project Title/Location (include County): Tentative Parcel Ma No. 10422 P Southeast comer of Olive Drive and Landco Drive at Highway 99 southbound on ramp, northwest Bakersfield; County of Kern Project Description: A Vesting Tentative Parcel Map, a merger and resubdivison; proposing to divide an 8.63-acre site into six parcels and a designated remainder containing from 1.00 net acre to 1.20 net acres for future industrial uses and to vacate and relocate County Road 2471; variances to the Kern County Land Division Ordinance and Subdivision Standards to allow a distance of 590 feet bettiveen a secondary and local street on a major highway, where the requirement is 660 feet; to allow deferral of street improvements, including street signs, until development occurs; to allow the deletion of the requirement for an alley; and to allow deferral of the removal of obstructions in road right-a- way until construction of street improvements Findings of Exemption (attach as necessary): Based on the absence of evidence in the record as required by Section 21082.2 of the State of California Public Resources Code (CEQA) for the purpose of documenting significant effects, it is the conclusion of the Lead Agency that this project will result in impacts that fall below the threshold of significance with regard to wildlife resources and, therefore, must be granted a "de minimis" exemption in accordance with Section 711 of the State of California Fish and Game Code. Additionally, the assumption of adverse effect is rebutted by the above-referenced absence of evidence in the record and the Lead Agency's decision to prepare a Negative Declaration for this project. Certification: I hereby certify that the County of Kern has made the above finding(s) and that the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the California Department of Fish and Game Code,~_ ` '~ ~-E~~ (C1~efPlanning Official) ' Title: Director of the Planning Department Lead Agency: Planning Department Date: r~P,.P.~,tiPr 11, 1997 14-64 jc , BEFORE THE HEARING OFFICER COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ._ FILE: TPM # 10422 Notice of Decision LvQ~I~~ Q~ pE_~I~~QL~ In accordance with the provisions of Section 19.102.100 of the Ordinance Code of Kern County, a public I hearing was held in the office of the Kern County Planning Department on December 11, 1997, to consider a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map submitted by: Olive Landco Associates by Martin-McIntosh Southeast comer of Olive Drive and Landco Drive at Highway 99 southbound on ramp, northwest Bakersfield APN: 116-010-31 and 365-020-19 At the conclusion of the hearing, during which all persons wishing to be heard were heard and further consideration given to all written evidence, the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map was CONDITIONALLY APPROVED, as set forth on the attachment. FOR PARCEL MA~/PA_R .i, MAP WA_TVFR/LOT LINE ADJU TMENT• The applicant, or any other interested party, may appeal the action of the Planning Director to the Board of Supervisors. Such appeal shall be in writing on such fonns as the Board of Supervisors may, from time to time, approve and shall be filed with the Advisory Agency, accompanied by a fee of Four Hundred Twenty Dollars ($420). Anyone may file such an appeal within ten (10) days from and including the date of mailing of the Notice of Decision of the map/lot line adjustment. For further information, please contact the Planning Operations Section of the Kern County Planning Department, 2700 "M" Street, Suite 100, Bakersfield, CA 93301. Telephone: (805) 862-8600. i~ ~ .,,~ JAMES E. ELLIS, AICP, Hearing Officer Jc Attachment 1465 I 1 Parcel Map #10422 Project Location: Southeast comer of Olive Drive and Landco Drive at Highway 99, southbound on ramp Bakersfield Area, S.D. #3 , CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Conditions which must be complied with prior to recordation ofthe parcel map: (1) In accordance with Section 66465 ofthe Subdivision Map Act, a title guarantee dated within 30 days of recordation ofthe parcel map shall be submitted to the Advisory Agency. (2) In accordance with Sections 66464, 66492, and 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, a Tax Collectors Certificate, Assessors Tax Estimate, and security (if necessary) shall be submitted to ' the Kern County Engineering and Survey Services Department prior to recordation ofthe final _ map. (3) The parcel map must contain an owners' statement, signed and acknowledged by all persons having any right, title, or interest in and to the property being divided. A request for the waiver ofthe signatures of parties owning rights-of--way, easements, or interests which cannot ripen into fee must also accompany the final map in accordance with Section 66445(fj of the Subdivision Map Act. Owner's statement may be recorded on a separate document rather than appear on the map, provided the recording information appears on the map. (4) In accordance with Section 66436(A)(i) ofthe Subdivision Map Act, any public entity or public utility owning rights-ofway, easements, or other interests which cannot ripen into fee must be advised by certified mail ofthe division ofthe property. The Advisory Agency will require a letter from these parties stating that the development will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise ofthe right-of--way or easement within the boundaries of this development. (5) In accordance with Section 18.45.060 of the Kern County Land Division Ordinance, show all, existing easements of record on the map. (6) All parcels shall contain no less than the minimum area required by the adopted site zoning and shall comply with lot size and density requirements ofthe Kern County General Plan. Existing zoning is M-2 PD. (7) In accordance with Section 66434.2 of the Subdivision Map Act, information required by the conditions of approval shall be in the form of an additional map sheet. (8) In accordance with Chapters 18.50 and 18.55 of the Kern County Land Division Ordinance, dedicate an irrevocable offer to the County of Kern in the following locations: (a) 55-foot half-width ofthe Specific Plan Line of Landco Drive along the west map boun- dary. (b) 60-foot full-width local east-west street alignment as shown on the tentative map. (c) Standard 20-foot by 20-foot comer cutoff at the intersection of all easements. ~- 14-66 1 lot until such improvements are installed in accordance with requirements of the Kern County Fire Department, at the time of development. ' (17) A variance to Section 18.55.050 of the Land Division Ordinance has been approved to eliminate the requirement for an alley on the basis that: (a) Special circumstances exist applicable to the subject property, with respect to size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, such that a strict application of the requirements of this title deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity, as evidenced by the shape of the project site. The odd shape of this site, resulting the freeway, the canal, and the curve of the Landco Drive Specific Plan Line limits the street and lot design. Requirements for an alley would be difficult to implement and further limit the buildable area . (b) The granting of the variance does not constitute a grant of special privilege, inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity, as evidenced by similar requests to eliminate the alley requirement have been granted on industrial projects in the area. (c) .The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or to property or residents in the vicinity, based on evidence that alleys that are inappropriately maintained and lighted actually contribute to crime and vandalism. (d) Any improvements re uested to be deleted or modified are not reasonabl rel q y ated to the impacts created by the approval of the parcel map, as evidenced by the fact that development of the site requires implementation of the precise development plan. Recordation of the parcel map will result in no impacts that could be alleviated by requiring an alley. ' (I 8) A variance to Section 18.55.030.6 of the Land Division Ordinance has been a roved to defer the PP removal of obstructions on the basis that: (a) Special circumstances exist applicable to the subject roe ,with res ect to size sha e, P P rty P ~ P topography, location, or surroundings, such that a strict application of the requirements of this title deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity, as evidenced by the undeveloped nature of the surrounding area and incompletion of Landco Drive to the south. Removal of obstructions needs to occur when improvements occur. (b) ,The granting of the variance does not constitute a grant of special privilege, inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity, as evidenced by the fact that obstructions occur in established, unimproved tights-of way. (c) The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or to property or residents in the vicinity, because no new streets will be graded or constructed until the obstructions are removed ' Parcel Map #10422 Bakersfield Area, S.D. #3 14-67 Page 3 (b) The granting of the variance does not constitute a grant of special privilege, inconsistent , with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity, as evidenced by the use of the precise development district in all areas of the County to defer improvements until development commences. , (c) The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or to property or residents in the vicinity, because the improvements being deferred are not needed until development occurs to create an impact. All dedications will be made, and the improvements to Type A standards will be completed on County Road 2471 so that there will be no detriment to the property to the east. t (d) Any improvements requested to be deleted or modified are not reasonably related to the impacts created by the approval of the parcel map as evidenced by the fact that , development of the site requires implementation of the precise development plan. Recordation of the parcel map will result in no impacts that would need to be alleviated by full improvements. ' (e) Improvements have been deferred on the basis that: y (i) The property to be subdivided has no established use as verified by the precise ~ development zoning which requires processing and approval of a plan before development occurs. No current precise development plan for development exits. A site visit also confirmed there is no use on the property. (ii) 'Ilse zoning district M-2 PD (Medium Industrial -Precise Development Combin- ing), which is applicable to the property, requires improvements of a higher standard at such time that a use is established as verified by Section 19.38 of the Zoning Ordinance. , (iii) The following note shall appear on the final map: NOTICE: A variance has been granted to defer certain improvements until such time as the property is developed. The following requirements shall be satisfied prior to approval of occupancy of this site: 1. Under street improvement plans approved by Kem County Engineering and Survey Services Department and Kern County Roads Department, construct the east-west local street between Landco Drive and the east parcel map boundary to Type A Subdivision Standards, local commercial street,, in accordance with the Kern County Land Division Ordinance, ' Appendix B, phased development. The developer will be required to construct some off-site street improvements along the local street alignment between the east parcel map boundary and Beardsley No. 1 Ditch to provide adequate access to the property east of the ditch. Parcel Map #10422 Bakersfield Area, S.D. #3 14-68 Page S I~ -located within the road right-of--way shall be permitted only upon approval by the Director of the Kern County Roads Department. Compliance with this requirement may result in the need to create public utility easements outside of the right-of--way. (24) The a licant's en ineer shall rovide a le al descri tion of the desi ated remainder and the PP g P g P !'n applicable processing fee, to enable the Advisory Agency to prepare a Conditional Certificate of ' Compliance. ' (25) The following note shall be recorded with the map: Prior to issuance of an develo ment ermit includin din the a licant will be Y P P ( g ~ g), PP required to construct on-site sumps or other alternative facilities for the disposal of drainage water generated by the parcels, including adjacent road right-of--way. If drainage sumps are required, the sump shall be located no closer than 100 feet from any existing or proposed water well. If the proposed drainage facilities are intended or required to be i ' publicly maintained, an entity with taxing powers, subject to approval by the Director of Kern County Engineering and Survey Services Department, shall be formed prior to issuance of the development permit. 1 (26) All development shall comply with the adopted Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan, including any mitigation assessment fees. (27) The following note shall appear on the final map: Access across Landco Drive will be restricted except at the local street opening and a maximum 41-foot-wide opening serving Parcel 6 when the raised median is constructed as a requirement when Parcel 6 is developed. (28) Dedicate vehicular access rights to the County on the east side of Landco Drive except at the local street opening and a maximum 41-foot-wide opening serving Parcel 6. *(29) Prior to the recordation of any land division map or approval of anX,.precise development plan, the property owner shall record an avigation easement over the site in accordance with an approved Kern County format. *(30) All precise development plans for this site shall restrict the height of buildings to four stories. *(31) All precise development Ip ans for this site shall show the location of any abandoned oil wells. ' *(32) Prior to issuance of building or grading_permits, the applicant shall comply with the requirements of the State Department of Conservation/Division of Oil and Gas regarding the abandoned wells on site. (33) Prior to recordation, Precise Development Plan 17, Map 102-14 and Precise Development Plan 14, Map 102-15 shall be modified to reflect street a;~d lot layout on this approved tentative map. Parcel Map #10422 Bakersfield Area, S.D. #3 ~ 4.69 Page 7 ~J I FINDINGS: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 10422 (Sections 65567, 66473.5, & 66474, Government Code) , (Section 18.25.060, Kern County Land Division Ordinance) (Section 710, et seq., Fish and Game Code) (Section 21000 et seq., Public Resources Code) , a. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Open Space and Conservation Elements of the General Plan. , b. The proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. c. The design or improvements of the proposed subdivision aze consistent with applicable general and specific plans. d. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. e. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. ' f. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial , environmental damage or substantial and avoidable injury to fish or wildlife or their habitat. g. The design of the proposed subdivision or the type of proposed improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems. ' h. The design of the proposed subdivision or the type of proposed improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. i. In accordance with Section 18.55.020, the construction of on-site and/or off-site improvements is a I necessary prerequisite to the orderly development of the surrounding area. I j. Based on the absence of evidence in the record as required by Section 21082 2 of the State of . Califomia Public Resources Code (CEQA) for the purpose of documenting significant effects, it is the conclusion of the Lead Agency that this project will result in impacts that fall below the threshold of ~ -- significance with regard to wildlife resources and, therefore, must be granted a "de minimis" , exemption in accordance with Section 711 of the State of California Fish and Game Code. Additionally, the assumption ofadverse effect is rebutted by the above-referenced absence of evidence in the record and the Lead Agency's decision to prepare a Negative Declaration for this project. k. The requirement for road improvements is necessary for the protection of the public safety and welfare and is in compliance with Section 65909 of the California Government Code, inasmuch as the 'I proposed development will generate more traffic in the immediate vicinity. ~ 'i t. The Hearing Officer, having received and read the Negative Declaration applicable to this case, hereby finds that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment and that an Environmental Impact Report is not required and hereby adopts said Negative Declaration. The above findings are made and adopted this 11th day of December 997. The tentative map is approved. O~ ADVISORY AGENCY TED JAMES, AICP, Director Planning Department LHO:jc 14-70 t MONITORING PROGRAM #2 FOR Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 10422 Olive-Landco Associates by Martin-McIntosh 1. MITIGATTON MEASURE (from Negative Declaration): All precise development Blanc for this site shall restrict the height of buildings to four stories. 2. JUSTIFICATION (from Initial Study) The project site could potentially place large numbers of people along with industrial chemicals in the flight path of aircraft accidents. 3. TRUSTEE A .N . .S JURISDICTION YES NO State Department of Fish and Game X State Land Commission X State Department of Parks and Recreation }~ California State University, Bakersfield X OTHER P 1Ri.iC' A N 4 Kem County Planning Department ){ Kem County Airports Department }~ 4. MONITORING AGENCY/FIItM: Kern County Planning Department 5. PROCEDURE -STEPS TO COMPLIANCE (unique to each project) A. Planning Staff shall include this measure as a condition of approval of this and future precise development plans. B. 6. COMPLIANCE (each procedure step to be signed off and dated by monitor) A. B. T. COMMENTS: 8. Fees: Prepared By: Receipt aY Date: Recd By: Date: 14-71 MONTTORIlVG PROGRAM #4 FOR Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 10422 Olive-Landco Associates by Martin-McIntosh 1. MITIGATION MEASURE (from Negative Declaration): Prior to issuance of building or dine rrni c, the applicant shall comply with the requirements of the State Department of Conservatiort/Division of Oil and Gas regazding the abandoned wells on site. 2. JUSTIFICATION (from Initial Study) Abandoned oil wells could expose people to risk of accidental explosions, release of hazardous substances, and potential health hazards. 3. TR C A N S .TiTRISDICTION YES NO State Department ofFish and Gamc }~ State Land Commission ){ State Department of Parks and Rccreation }{ California State University, Bakersfield ){ OTHER P 1R1,Tf A N S Kern County Planning Department }{ State Department of Conservation/Division of Oil and Gas X 4. MONITORING AGENCY/FTRM: Kem County Planning Department 5. PROCEDURE -STEPS TO COMPLIANCE (unique to each project) A. Planning Staffshall include this measure as a condition of approval of this and future precise development plans or Land Division action. B. 6. COMPLIANCE (each procedure stcp to be signed off and dated by monitor) A. B. 7. COMMENTS: 8. Fees: Receipt t! Date: Rcc'd By: Prepared By: Date: 14-72 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Response to Comment No. 3' Roger McIntosh, McIntosh & Associates ' May 1, 2000 ' 3A. At the May 1, 2000 Commission meeting, a question was raised regarding the current alignment of Landco Drive as it is shown in the Kyle Carter Homes, Inc. Draft EIR for Proposed G PA/ZC P99-0482 (the "Proposed Project"). Specifically, there is a question ' of whether the applicant has attempted to change the alignment of Landco Drive without processing a circulation element amendment to the 2010 General Plan. j Landco Drive is properly shown for all environmental and planning records which have been processed for the Proposed Project; therefore,, no further environmental ' review and no circulation element amendment to the 2010 Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan are necessary pertaining to the Landco Drive alignment. The location of Landco Drive as shown in the Proposed Project's Draft EIR complies with the 2010 ' General Plan Circulation Element Map. The assumption that the 1980 Kern County Official Plan Line sets the current location ' of Landco Drive for the Proposed Project is incorrect. The County of Kern established the Landco Official Plan Line in 1980. In March, 1990 both the County of Kern and the City of Bakersfield adopted the 2010 Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan. At that time, the Circulation Element Map of the 2010 General Plan set a new location for the alignment of Landco Drive -one different than that shown for the 1980 Landco Official Plan Line. It is the City s position that the adoption of the 2010 General Plan in 1990 set the legal ' and official alignment of Landco Drive from that time forward, and supercedes any previously adopted plan line. ' .There has been no official action taken by the County of Kern or the City of Bakersfield to change the alignment of Landco Drive since the adoption of the 2010 General Plan. A proposed alignment change was sought in 1991, but was withdrawn from ' consideration by the project proponent. The Proposed Project shows the Landco Drive alignment as it is designated in the 2010 1 General Plan. Therefore, there is no need for a circulation element amendment to the 2010 General Plan for the Proposed Project. ~i J Comments and Responses )N 10-100278 14-73 May 24, 2000 SIE~-RA CLU 2815 La Cresta Drive Bakersfield, CA 93305 May 4, 2000 GG\~RRA C(\ f J~ ,;; . rrea''T';s r,. --- - -. '~ ~wE`~ H -KAWEAH CHAPTER COMMENT NO. 4 1 t City of Bakersfield Development Services Department Planning Division Mr. Martin Ortiz, Associate Planner 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Re: Program EIR for General Plan Amendment and Zone Change P99-0482 Dear Mr. Ortiz: We wish to support the "No Project" Alternative outlined on Page 2-30 of the document, which would result in no environmental impacts associated with construction of the project. This would allow the area to be developed to the maximum density allowable under the existing use designation. After reviewing all the impacts from this project and the potential mitigations, the logical conclusion is to not change the zoning or amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The proposed residential construction will be built in the midst of two refineries, three chemical storage facilities, rail lines carrying tank cars holding hazardous chemicals, and be in the direct flight line for Meadows Field. Incompatible uses of land adjacent to each other, is not what we think as responsible urban planning. This project is simply unsuitable for its proposed location. 4A , Pages 5.7-10 and -11 Land Use Compatibility speaks about Aesthetics, Noise, Traffic and Circulation and Human Health/Risk of Upset. This section addresses housing adjacent to heavy industrial and cites the project as being incompatible in the 4B Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan. Surely you can amend the General Plan, but that does not make the project more desirable? Page 5.10-9 Fire Protection The Kem County Fire Department has raised concerns about proposed development being located immediately adjacent to a heavy industrial 4C area. The document assumes this can be mitigated by siting the Carter development 330' from a h~e~ardous area. This might protect a residence from most hazards, but not from the airborne pollutants that would occur with an accidental explosion. Page 5.10-2 Services and Utilities Local elementary and intermediate schools are (4D presently over capacity. Development of single family homes will bring in more children 14-74 1 with a need for addition schools. The proposed school in the Initial Study has been omitted from this proposal. The comments on the Initial Study include a letter dated. Sept 29, 1999 from the California Department of Transportation. This letter says "that the northern half of the project site appears to be within the Meadows Field Airport 4D ' Safety Zone C ... schools are prohibited in Zone C". With more residents and more children wouldn't adequate mitigation be to build a school? If the area is too dangerous to build a school, why would anyone want to buy a home there? ' Pages 6-4 and 6-5 Project Impacts speak to the jobs lost from potential industrial build- out as 6390. Commercial facilities from this project would generate 351 new jobs. No reference is made to jobs created by this project, but we know that construction jobs are 4E temporary in nature. Somewhere in the vicinity of 6000 jobs will be lost in the long run. Is this not a significant economic impact? Page 5.2-17 Consistency with Air Quality Attainment Plan The Level of Significance after Mitigation. The Reactive Organic Compounds (ROG) and Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) 4F emissions from the project would only add to poor air quality. We are in a severe "non- attainment" area for air quality. We fail to see how this project would qualify for a consideration that there is a social ' need for it, nor would it bring economic advantages to Bakersfield. The best mitigation would be to not do the project. Thank you, ,, ~ n , ~ ~(' Lorraine Unger U 1 v~~. 14-75 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Response to Comment No. 4 , Lorraine Unger, Sierra Club, Kern Kaweah Chapter May 4, 2000 , 4A. Comment is noted and will be considered by the City of Bakersfield. The commentor refers to land use compatibility concerns with adjacent uses. Compatibility impacts were evaluated in Section 5.6, Human Health and Safety and Section 5.7, Land Use Compatibility.. Both sections concluded no significant impacts are anticipated and , mitigation for setbacks from industrial uses is included in Section 5.6. 4B. Comment is noted and will be considered by the City of Bakersfield. ' 4C. The Draft and Final EIR identify criteria which establishes an appropriate safety buffer between the heavy industrial uses and proposed residential zones. The method used to determine the recommended setback distance takes into consideration the worst credible case release scenario for each of the high risk storage containers present. This includes the explosion possibility resulting from a release of flammable gases or ' vapors. The buffer considers airborne emissions resulting from- potential explosions. The data, calculations and conclusions have been verified by the Bakersfield City Fire Department Office of Environmental Services. The EIR concludes that by applying the required buffer zone mitigation that potential impacts are reduced to less than significant levels. , 4D. Page 5.10-10 of the Draft EIR concludes that school impacts are less than significant, based upon correspondence with the affected School Districts. , 4E. Section 6.3 of the Draft and Final EIR evaluates growth inducing impacts resulting from the proposed project. Although the evaluation does not consider short-term ' construction-related employment, it is acknowledged that with any form of construction (under the existing and proposed land use designations) short-term employment would occur. Section 6.3 concludes that under buildout conditions, the ' project area would generate 351 new jobs or increase the employment in the area by 0.4 percent. , 4F. Comment is noted and will be considered by the City of Bakersfield. Comments and Responses , )N 10-100278 14-76 May 24, 2000 1 COMMENT NO. 5 VERBATIM OF MAY 4, 2000 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING RECEiVE~ RE: AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11 MAY ~ ~ 2000 ' ~ Agenda Item No. 11 RGBER7 REIN, INM FRO5T ' MD: Next we will go on to Agenda Item Number 11. And, um, fortunately for Commissioner Boyle, I will need to declare a conflict of interest on this item as a couple of months ago I accepted a commission to do a PD Plan and office improvement on Seven Seas Court. ' The property borders the subject property that is going to be heard, or considered, under this draft environmental impact report. So, for that reason I will declare a conflict of interest and turn the chair to Commissioner Boyle who will handle that. ' SB: Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Brady. .J ii MB: Thank you Mr. Vice-Chairman. Um, I've been advised that a present client of my firm had made comments, and will continue to make comments and has input on this particular project. And for that reason I'll need to declare a conflict of interest and recuse myself. SB: Thank you Mr. Brady. Any other conflicts? Then we'll go ahead with the matter. Agenda Item 11 is a public hearing for the Draft Environmental Impact Report. It will be focused on the objectivity and the adequacy of a Draft EIR in discussing potential impacts upon the environment; ways in which the adverse effects may----might be mitigated with the intent of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Do we have any additional Staff report at this time? SG: Mr. Chairman, we ----- I would just like to add that tonight's meeting is a public hearing to receive comments on the Draft. Those comments will be responded to in writing as part of the preparation of the final EIR which will come in front of you when you'll have a more detailed presentation of the findings and the mitigation that is presented in the Environmental Impact Report. We have tonight a (unintelligible) LaJoy who will present to you an overview of the project description and the environmental impacts that were identified and studies as part of this development proposal. With that, I'll turn it over to Mr. LaJoy. LaJoy: First, I'll briefly describe the project description that was evaluated in the Environmental Impact Report. The project is a concurrent application for an amendment to the land use element and circulation element of the 2010 General Plan, and a zone change to allow residential and commercial uses on 170.9 acres. The amendment to the land use designations consist of changes from light industrial, service industrial and heavy industrial to low density residential, low-medium residential, and general commercial. The graphic to my right depicts the location of the project areas for ------ which include approximately 65 acres for low density residential, possible 92 acres for low-medium density residential and approximately 15 acres for general commercial. The amendments 14-77 L to the circulation element consists of changes which include Mohawk Street as an arteriole north of Hageman Road to Olive Drive, and changing Hageman Road from a collector to an arteriole between Mohawk and Knudsen Drive/Lanco Drive, along with modifying the alignment by swinging Hageman to the north by a few hundred feet to establish it as a collector segment from Hageman Road ---- for Hageman Road between Knudsen Drive I believe to State Route 99. The proposed amendments to the zoning include changes from the existing light manufacturing, general manufacturing and heavy industrial to single family residential, limited- multi family dwelling residential and general commercial. That briefly describes the project description. Uh, returning back to the CEQA compliance processing, just to back track a bit. The Notice of Preparation was distributed on August 16`h and there was a public scoping session here before the Planning Commission on November 4`h. What I'm briefly going to describe for you is -and summarize is the contents of the Draft EIR with regard to the issue areas. Beginning with aesthetics and that is in section 5.0 of the document. With regard to aesthetics the Impact Analysis included short term construction impacts, as well as long term conditions with development of the property. Also included is the change in light and glare on the property. Mitigation is proposed with regard to short term construction impacts. With regard to air quality, we looked at short term construction as long as well as long term emissions with regard to build out of the property. The conclusions include significant impacts with regard to construction activities as well as significant impacts with regard to long term emissions. There is also the identified inconsistency with the San Joaquin Valley Unified Area Quality Attainment Plan, as well as significant impacts with regard to cumulative conditions. The subject area of biological resources included a comprehensive sight survey, evaluation of potential impact of sensitive species, and a mitigation included mitigation for the San Joaquin kit fox and burrowing owl. For cultural resources, the analysis was based on a technical study provided by the applicant, and included ----- the conclusions included the identification of two recorded cultural sites and mitigation is provided. Subject area of geology and soils was based on a technical evaluation provided by the project applicant. The potential impact had been fully mitigated and evaluation included geotechnical, seismicity concerns as well as soils. Subject area of human health and risk of upset included -the comprehensive evaluation of safety concerns which included a Phase I and Phase II environmental hazards assessment, as well as a hazard's analysis by insight environmental consultants. The 2 ~ ¢~s t ~'~1 1 ' section evaluated historic use of the property which included agricultural operations, oil production and sanitation district operations as well. A key evaluation point in this section was the safety concerns with regard to nearby industrial use operations. ' Other areas of evaluation included electric and ma netic fields, air traffic, rail hazards g ' and Valley Fever. With regard to mitigation, mitigation includes soil testing for pesticide use, proper containment of existing and abandoned wells, clean up of tanks and storage drums on site, asbestos testing, and with regard to the safety consideration, the evaluation concluded the appropriate set backs that would be required from the industrial uses ' located to the east and southeast of the project. Land use analysis, next subject area, evaluated the agricultural land conversion due to the agricultural operations on site, the effects on the mineral resources on site, land use compatibility, compatibility with all the surrounding uses, and a comprehensive general plan consistency review which is included in the chapter. The conclusion based on the analysis was no significant impacts, and identified compliance with all the appropriate municipal code requirements. The subject area of noise included short term construction impacts, as well as long teen noise impacts with regard to local roadway traffic. Mitigation included noise attainment ' for long term noise conditions. 1 1 1 The subject area of traffic included comprehensive technical evaluation by AKJK Consultants. The evaluation identified existing traffic levels and conditions evaluated the opening year conditions, and generation, and evaluated the horizon year traffic conditions, which was the 2010 conditions. This includes the traffic load capacities, and the overall street system. A complete listing of mitigation is provided for both the opening year and the 2020 conditions on and off site. The final chapter in Section 5.0 is the service and utility section which included a comprehensive evaluation of fire, police and school services, libraries, roadway maintenance, recreation, water, waste water, solid waste, electricity, gas and telephone system. The conclusion notes no significant impacts. Mitigation is also provided in that section. Finally a couple other sections that are included in the EIR is the growth inducement evaluation in the alternative section, section 7.0, which evaluates four separate alternatives and further the required no project alternative pursuant to the CEQA guidelines. Again, we're here to accept public testimony on the merits of the Draft EIR. Thank you very much. 3 14-79 1 SB: Does that complete the Staff presentation? SG: Yes Mr. Chairman. SB: At this time we would like to have public comment on the Draft EIR since these are just comments neither------ we wont do it by those in favor, or those opposed, but you can just give your comments whenever you're ready. We would ask that before beginning your comments that you state your name for the record. Thank you. TF: Chairman Boyle, and members of the Commission, my name is Tom Fallgatter, and I'm representing Equilon this evening. We feel the EIR was done in compliance with requirements. We have only one issue, or item we wanted to bring up . We do not understand the EIR to have actually dealt with the specific issue of the alignment - of the ultimate alignment of Landco as it goes southerly from the project, and nor do we think it needed to. The reason why I'm.brining this up is we - we would like to participate later when the actual final alignment for Landco where Knudsen on your drawing that's ------- this is Knudsen where my finger is it comes straight down that turns into Landco----- it's proposed. And, we have some concern about the southerly alignment of that. We have a tank farm down there with a lot of chemicals in it. I don't believe the EIR intended to address that issue, I don't think it did, and we just want to be sure that's correct, and indicate that we'd like to be involved when that ultimately is decided. So I see Staff is shaking their head that's correct; the EIR did not address that issue. Okay. Otherwise we think this is a good project. As the commission is probably aware, Equilon has purchased a large portion of what was originally intended to be in the project. The portion of Landco that I'm referring to, at least the northerly part of the south portion is now in property owned by Equilon. That's the reason, or the basis for our request to participate later. Thank you very much. SB: Thank you very much Mr. Fallgatter. Any other comments? BA: Good evening Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, I'm Lorraine Unger. I'm here tonight representing the Kern Kaweah Chapter of the Sierra Club. The local chapter of the Sierra Club. Um, I've read the EIR and some of my comments that I've ------ I `ve written a letter to Mr. Ortiz with the Planning Division. Some of my comments are more to the General Plan Amendment. We basically, and the Sierra Club would support a no project alternative, uh, which would of course result in no environmental impacts, right? It would allow the area to be developed to the maximum density allowed under the existing use. And, we object to the change and use. The proposed residential construction would be built in the midst of two refineries, three chemical storage facilities, rail lines carrying hazardous chemicals and a direct line to Meadows Field. These things are all critical. We know you can mitigate. There are plenty of mitigations listed in the document. One of the things the document talks about is land use compatibility. The use of residential there is not compatible with the heavy industrial Fuse. This is something we have been trying tc 1 1 5A 1 0 u 5B u 4 14-80 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 WB ' SB: 1 1 v`~ork on in east Bakersfield in the Old Town Kern redevelopment area, incapatible uses there. It's not heavy industrial. But, when you have people living right next to areas where there are chemicals and there's also superfund site in east Bakersfield. We feel this is very much --- very dangerous and that it cannot be adequately mitigated. There was reference -there was a letter from the Kern County Fire Department asking for a mitigation ---- and agreement was made of a mitigation of putting the residences at least 330 feet from the heavy industrial uses. This is acceptable, except what about emergency accidental explosions? There's talk about services and utilities. A school was originally put in this plan. There were comments in the initial study from the Department of Transportation of the State of California ---- and I'll quote from that. The letter says that the northern half of the project site appears to be within the Meadow Fields Airport Safety Zone C. Schools are prohibited in Zone C. Well now I understand there is no more school involved in the project, but there will be more residences. That's what the document tells you. There will be people there. People generate children, so you're going to have to mitigate for the students. The schools are already overcrowded. This is also listed in the document. If the area's too dangerous to build a school, why would anyone want to live there? But I feel that that portion cannot be mitigated unless we have a school and the school is impossible. Or, maybe not totally impossible, but more studies need to be done. Uh, consistency with air quality. We all know we're not in attainment. We're in a heavy ------ a severe non-attainment area. The level of ROGs (reactive organic compounds) will be increased, the nitrogen -the oxides of nitrogen and these cannot be mitigated. We don't know what's going to happen in 2005. If we don't meet the air quality regulations. we might have problems with our roads, and what I think this project is a lot about roads. Uh, there's also in the document information about jobs. Potential jobs that would be lost as a result of building the residential and commercial projection. They use the figure 6,390 potential jobs that would be lost if the area had been left in heavy industrial use. Commercial facilities are quoted as bringing in 351 jobs. That sort of tells me that in the long run we're going to lose 6,000 potential jobs in that area. Why? Why do we have to go ahead with this project? That is an economic impact. The end result is your council wants to go ahead with this; would be an economic and social override. That is significant if you're going to lose that many jobs.. You can mitigate away a lot of the environmental impacts that the document shows us, but I still think we have a poorly sided development. Thank you. Thank you Ms. Unger. Any other comments? My name is Wally Blodgett. I work for Roadway Express. We are east -just across the street from the proposed change. Mr. Blodgett, could you spell your nary}=~? 5 14-81 56 1 WB: Yes. It's B-L-O-D-G-E-T-T. We operate legally within our zoning classification. We are ' a transportation company. We run 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Um, we close down Saturday morning, and open back up again Sunday afternoon. We have found , residential zoning tends to be noncompatible with industrial zoning. Contrast in uses, low quiet activity versus high activity. Truck traffic, noise, lighting, etc. We have found over 5C the years that although we are good neighbors, after a time residential use looks at our hours of operation, noise levels, traffic levels and lighting levels is not compatible to their needs. VVe are a civic minded company. We support United Way, local charities and other community involvement. We like to see industrial growth. It promotes jobs, ' industrial tax base, but we just feel the industrial use of this land is noncompatible. SB: Thank you Mr. Blodgett. Any other comments? RM: My name is Roger McIntosh with McIntosh & Associates. I'm here to address the adequacy of the Environmental Impact Report. Uh, in order to do that I need to point out ' «-hat appears to be a discrepancy between the alignment of Landco Drive as the County recognizes it, and as I am told the City recognizes it. I've been involved in this area and in projects in this area since the mid 80's, and have -and am very familiar with some of ' the history on Landco Drive. What I've given you there is a list of exhibits, and along with a letter. and I wanted to walk you through the chronology of - of how Landco got to where - where I believe and my assoc---- or my - my clients believe that it should be. , By the way, I am representing all of Landco Associates.- Uh, in 1980 the County of Kern adopted the official plan alignment of Landco Drive, and I've shown that -included that as Exhibit l . You'll see on that exhibit that Landco Drive sweeps over to the east as it , comes up from the south, and it ties in at the - at Olive Drive, about opposite of the off- 5D ramp -southbound off-ramp to 99. You'll see there on that exhibit that it is suppose to ' be 472.76 feet east of the centerline intersection of Knudsen Drive. And, uh, I want to point out that this exhibit shows Landco Drive tying into Knudsen at this location here. Landco as it exists today is about 472 feet to the east. , In l 990; the 2010 Metropolitan General Plan was approved and that apparently has with it a circulation element that was adopted that is very difficult to read; it almost looks like ' Landco is suppose to tie in to Knudsen. However, in 1991 there was an application that was processed by the North River Sanitation District for a much larger area then what you see here. It actually encumbered all of the area owned by the District at that time, which ' vti~as kind of outlined in this location here. And the District requested changes to the specific plan alignments to Mohawk, which tied into Victor, Knudsen and also to Landco. And, I've shown the Resolution approved by the Board of Supervisors in 1991 as Exhibit ' 3 there. That's Resolution Number 91-317. And, of particular note at the time the District was requesting certain changes to all of these alignments, but if you look on page four of that Resolution, Item Number 10, "does hereby approve and adopt the herein , above described,General Plan Amendment for Proposal M as shown above as requested except that the Landco relocation request has been withdrawn. So in 1991, the County 6 14-82 recognized Landco Drive as being in the location as identified in that exh -that conceptual which is -which is this. This conceptual plan was the Landco alignment and that was the alignment that the County recognized as being the true alignment. 1 1 e 1 ~~ ri r I1 0 I also wanted to briefly go over Exhibit 2. I couldn't find anything that talks about the specific plan lines, but Exhibit 2 is a copy out of the Kern County Zoning Ordinance - I'm sorry I couldn't find anything in the City Ordinance, but the Kern County Zoning Ordinance states that the specific plan line means the designated center line of any road or highway as adopted by resolution of the Board of Supervisors from which the ultimate right-of--way is determined in accordance with the circulation element of the General Plan. So in 1991, the Board of Supervisors elected not to change the alignment of Landco Drive and they even adopted a Monetary Mitigation Monitoring Program Number One, which is shown there as Exhibit 4. And, I'm told in consultation with the County Public Works Department that the District was required to come back to the County and explain to them through a traffic study - a revised traffic study----- how the North of the River Sanitation District was proposing to take care of the intersections along Olive Drive. And that specifically is Victor Street. Knudsen Drive and Landco. Because of the problems that are created up there because of the traffic flow, the District opted not to do that. They did not follow through with this Monitoring Program, and about that time, 1992, the real estate market started going sidew-ays and I'm told that their buyer. or optioner, elected not to pursue the project. So now we fast fon~-ard to 1999, and Mr. Carter comes along and the District on behalf of Kyle Carter submits and Application For General Plan Amendment Application For Zone Change, you've got that as Exhibit Number 5. Geological Report, Archeologic Report, etc. There's a copy of that Application there. I've included in. Nowhere in there does it discuss or describe any amendment to any specific plan alignments to Landco, nor any circulation element change of Landco Drive. In fact, in that same application, you'll see about, oh about five or six pages back, you'll see this map. This is a map that was produced by the District's engineer, Boyle Engineering Corporation. And it is a copy of the property that the District owns, and it's shown as lot line adjustment number 3-93. If you look at the lot line adjustment exhibit map, the District acknowledged and even shows center line of Landco being in the same exact location as the adopted specific plan alignment that was adopted by the County in 1980. That appears to be in conflict with the exhibit map shown here as part of the application. Actually this was part of the application. And to further confuse the issue, um, I've included a copy of the County's zoning map Exhibit Number 7. You'll see that Landco Drive is shown as the specific plan line. It does tie into the Landco that exists at Olive, and I've also included a copy of the City's Zoning map which again shows Landco Drive and the City recog~:izes that Landco is 1 14-83 5D n ~~ suppose to be tied into Olive at the - at the existing location of Landco. Uh, in 1997, I processed on behalf of my clients a vesting tentative parcel map number 10422. And, I've included a copy of the conditions of approval that the County placed on ----- on the developers. And you'll see that on - on some of the conditions there they again reiterate - if you look at the conditions of approval ---- condition number eight, "in accordance with Chapters 18.50 and 18.55 of the Kern County Land Division Ordinance dedicated an irrevocable offer to the County of Kern in the following locations: A) 55 feet half width of the specific plan line of Landco Drive along the west map boundary." The parcel map, by the way, that I processed was for property at this location here. It was a 20 acre parcel right here. So if the developer of that 20 acre parcel is required to dedicate a 55 foot right-of--way on Landco Drive in accordance with that specific plan alignment. Also the developer was restricted from accessing Landco Drive because it is known as a major highway to the County. We could not get access to any of the parcels that fronted on Landco Drive, and actually had to bring in a local street to make that connection and get access to the different parcels. Uh, I've gone over this situation with Cit}' staff and with the County Staff. I was told by the County Staff that they are going to respond to the Environmental Impact Report and, um, and as of a week ago they concurred with my analysis and my position that Landco is suppose to be about 472 feet to the east of where it is shown. Uh, a couple of just logical thoughts come to mind. Why ~~-ould you tie Landco Drive into Knudsen Drive if Landco ahead}~ exists some 470 feet to the east. That just doesn't make any sense. The addressing will be off. You'll have a Landco North, a Landco South. Um, do you change the name to Knudsen? Does it then change the name of Knudsen or Landco at Olive and continue Knudsen on to the north? Uh, that just doesn't make any sense. Uh, you heard earlier that I think Mr. LaJoy mentioned that the overall street system has been studied. Um, some of my other comments in the letter point out that the traffic study did not study the impact of the project on Landco Drive. In fact, it didn't even recognize that Landco existed. That is -that is north of Hageman Road.. I'm not here to hold up the process, but I'm here to suggest that there's been an error or discrepancy between City and County jurisdiction. And, a simply solution would be to move, or leave Landco where it is, go back and study the impacts of Landco on the intersections and on the street segment from Hagemen north to Olive Drive and come back with some mitigation measures. I met with Public Works Staff yesterday and I thought that Public Works Department was possibly going to look at how Hageman would tie into that Landco specific plan alignment and, uh, possibly make that work. As far as being a - you may hear tonight that it is a local street. Landco is not recognized as a collector or an arteriole and therefore it does not have to be studied. I would remind you that in the - the not so grand Canal project Colony .Street was also a local street, and we had to study the impacts on Colony and come up with mitigation measures at opening day and also in the year 2020. So my request tonight -oh I also had discussions last week and also this f 1 t~ ~; 5D - 1 t 14-84 1 week with Mr. Carter. He indicated to me that he did not have a problem with Landco ` Drive in either location, and I think for the purpose of moving the project forward it would be easier to go back and study the impacts on Landco. Leave Landco where it is ~~ suppose to be where the County recognizes it and where my clients are required to build it as a major highway and I don't think that would slow the process dovti~n at all. So thank ,~ you. SB: Thank you Mr. McIntosh. Are there any other comments? Seeing no other comments, do we -this is not apublic - is it a public hearing that I close? Alright. I will go ahead and close the public hearing, and ask for Commissioner comments. Mr. Sprague. RS: Thank you co-chair Mr. Boyle. I had some questions, um, that I spoke of on the Monday pre-meet regarding this project, and I have made two trips to the location and traversed it in all directions. I've looked at the EIR - or actually read the EIR and went over intently, um, because of the zoning and because of the request for a General Plan Amendment and zone change to R1 versus the industrial. I also made requests for - or from Staff for an area photograph, and for the letters from the school districts that were effected in this area, which were omitted from the Draft EIR that we were submitted - or ~ that was submitted to us. And, um, 1 want to thank Mr. Grady for delivering those to me. They ~~-ere very helpful in ascertaining where items were located on the property. ~~ Um. I conducted a surve of the school districts ands oke with Steve Hartsell of the y p school districts regarding the needs for the schools in the area and discovered that the project is not totally in the Beardsley School District, but the lower portion on the Draft EIR is actually in Fruitvale School District, of which they did not delineate in the EIR. So, he informed me that he would inform Staff and other people about that boundary line, and where it existed. He also talked to me about the need for additional school facilities and that the recommendation of the applicant and of Beardsley was for short term fix of putting in temporary classrooms, but that evidently would not resolve the issue of schools in the area. Um, and there's quite a bit of concern on his part regarding the needs for the impact on those two school districts and the highschool district. Uh, we also had a discussion on school fees, conversion from SP50 and 2926 regarding the $1.93 limit and ~~ the possibility of increasing those fees for Rl, uh, with a needs analysis to be performed by the Districts. At this point in time, as you will recall in the EIR, they couldn't calculate what it was, and it would take time to calculate those fees for abuilder/developer to ~~ budget with. Um, and I have concern about that. ;~. Um, my major concern in this is health, safety and welfare, of not only the school issue but the residences. If we change the zone from an industrial M2 and M3 to Rl, in the central portion of this industrial area, it's like mixing cattle and sheep in the pasture. It just doesn't mix. And, uh, you've got total surrounding by M2, M3 with the exception of the residential building that Mr. Carter is doing in the northwest section at the moment _ just west of Victor Street. Um, that does not seem to be effected too much by the 9 14-85 5D 5E industrial and commercial that exist to the south, and probably wont be as we get down the road. But if we change the zones and General Plan Amendment from industrial to residential I feel that do~~-n the road, and it's still subject to discussion here by the commissioners and hearings as we go along, that we're going to be forcing the industrial land owners different than the applicant to conform to Rl standards in City Ordinances and zones which I don't think they really wanted to deal with in coming into the project, so I think those are significant items that other property owners will have to deal with in an industrial area. I researched mineral right holders in the area, and their surface rights. Um, there's no surface right waivers existing. They probably would have to convert to drill islands or be forced to dill islands to drill their vested interest rights in the area if we went to R1. Um, the propane tanks located to the east, which is a major storage facilit}~, to me, is ---- even though they're located a fair distance away from the Rl, could be a very potential problem, and with the additives to make tl~e propane, that smell is much more intense and travels much further than standard natural gas smells. So I think that would possibly be a problem in the residential area too. Based on that, I just wanted to make those comments and input and when they study this Draft EIR for more public input as we go along, I would like to have those items considered, um, when this is analyzed. And with that I'll turn it over ---- turn it back over to Co-Chair Boyle and let other Commissioners make comments. Thank you. SB: Seems to be pregnant pause in terms of our comments here for a moment. During this pause, I could like to go ahead -and make a couple of comments. I am concerned about the intersections at Olive Drive with using the Landco alignment that has been brought up now by Mr. McIntosh, as well as the Knudsen alignment. Uh, I happen to drive---- even though this is not my area of town, I happen to drive there several times a week, because both - my church is located in this area, and my in-laws live over in the northwest. And it seems that this -the intersections there are already fairly well impacted at the key commuter times, and I am concerned by the amount of additional traffic, because I assume a large portion of this traffic is going to travel north in order to get quick access to the freeway to go to other locations. So, I was concerned about that. I'm not sure that the Draft EIR addressed all of my concerns regarding the amount of traffic that is generated at those intersections Also to follow up on the comment by Mr. Sprague on the propane tanks, and Idon't - I may have misinformation, but I remember a number of years ago at a public hearing in a different city being -hearing testimony to the fact that if there's an explosion on propane tanks that the tank parts will travel up to a mile in distance. And, in fact, they even talked about how the tanks are welded so the explosion will occur in a certain direction to try and shield it away from other buildings, etc. If that information is true, IO 5E 5F 14-86 then it raises the question about these propane tanks as to how they were manufactured and which way that explosion would occur. And I have no idea whether that information is correct and whether or not it applies to these propane tanks. But, I would think that that also should be addressed if we have residential in that neighborhood. Those were my comments. Are there any additional comments. If there are no other comments, I think we need then a Resolution, although I don't see on in the Staff Report, but we're suppose to take a vote. SG: No. SB: No? SG: No. Commissioner Boyle, there isn't a vote. You just -you close the public hearing. You've taken public comments. you've made your comments. You would now just move on to the next agenda items. We would receive those comments and respond to them in the final EIR. SB: Alright then. The portion of the Agenda that says roll call, vote is in error? SG: Yes. SB: That will be fine. Then we'll move on to Agenda Item l3. SG: Uh, can I add one little piece of information? SB: Yes. SG: As you move on. We will still be accepting written comments up through May 19`h, and the hearing date for the Draft EIR is set for June 15`h SB: Thank you Mr. Grady. Mr. Chairman I'll turn it back over to you. 5F 148 7 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR !, Response to Comment No. 5 ~; Bakersfield Planning Commission Meeting May 4, 2000 ;~ 5A. Refer to Response 3A. Also, it is noted that Section 5.9 of the Draft and Final EIR did address Landco Road, south of the project area, at Rosedale Highway (see page 5.9-1). 5B. A No Project Alternative has been evaluated in Section 7.1 of the Draft and Final EIR. ~ Hazards with regard to surrounding uses has been addressed in Section 5.6. Of . - the amount of current rail activity in the project area is limited. The additional note - , proximity of the site to Meadows Field has also been addressed in Section 5.6. :~- Compatibility has been addressed in Sections 5.6 and 5.7 and the analysis has - concluded less than significant, with mitigation. The commentor also references emergency services (see Section 5.10), Air Quality (see Section 5.2) and schools (see Section 5.10), all of which have been evaluated in the Draft and Final EIR with regard to comments on jobs, refer to Response to Comment 4E. ~_ 5C. The commentor cites concerns for compatibility of residential uses with industrial uses. The Draft and Final EIR include a comprehensive evaluation of land use, health, safety, noise, aesthetic and traffic impacts, which consider the proposed use and the ~~ surrounding land use conditions. The analysis does not conclude significant adverse impacts and mitigation is provided. 5D. Refer to Response to Comment No. 3A. 5E. The boundary line for the Fruitvale School District has been clarified in Response to Comment No. 8. School fees and mitigation is also addressed in Response to Comment No. 8. The commentor cites concerns for compatibility and safety considerations of proposed residential uses adjacent to existing industrial operations. The setback distance ~' identified in Section 5.6 is established through a scientific basis in accordance with accepted risk management practices. Impacts are reduced by establishing appropriate separation distances pursuant to criteria set forth by the City of Bakersfield and County of Kern Fire Departments. With regard to mineral rights, oil production is addressed in Section 5.6 and references Chapter 15.66 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code which sets forth the guidelines and standards for well site development, permits and encroachment of development in petroleum areas. ~~ Comments and Responses JN 10-100278 14-88 May 24, 2000 ,~, GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 1 5F 1 1 1 1 Propane is a liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) which is separated from other gas streams. Additives are not used to make propane. Additives are used to impart an odor to the liquid so that it is detectable when it vaporizes during a release. The additive used to odorize natural gas and propane are very similar in chemical make up. Both gases use thiol (mercaptan) as odorizers and although natural gas and propane odors are different, the smell intensity and distance it can be detected is very similar. Therefore, other than being a potential nuisance problem, impacts are considered to be less than significant. With regard to the Landco Road alignment, refer to Response to Comment No. 3A. Traffic consideration, north of the subject site, and in the vicinity of Olive Drive, have been evaluated in Section 5.9 of the Draft and Final EIR. This includes existing conditions and with project buildout. The analysis also addressed conditions at Olive Drive and SR-99. With regard to propane tanks, refer to Response to Comment No. 5E. Comments and Responses JN 10-100278 14-89 May 24, 2000 1 S1ATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS. TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY GRAY DAVIS. Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1352 West Olive Avenue Post Office Box 12616 Fresno, California 93778 (559)444-2583 TDD: (559) 488-4066 FAX: (559) 488-4088 May 9, 2000 COMMENT NO. 6 2132-IGR/CEQA 6-KER-99-27.891 DRAFT EIIt, GPA/ZC P99-0482 State Clearing House 1400 Tenth St., Room 121 Sacramento. CA 95814 Attn: Scott Morgan: SCH# 1999081078 Thank you for the opportunity to review the Draft EIR for GPA/ZC P99-0482 (SCH# 1999081078). Caltrans has the following comments: The construction of this development is to be done~in phases, however, detail of the phasing was not included in the Traffic Impact Study. RKJK & Associates recommend monitoring requirements for each development phase to ensure roadway improvements throughout the study area. These monitoring requirements are to be enforced by the City of Bakersfield and would necessitate the following: 1. A traffic impact study will be required for each new phase of development to monitor actual traffic conditions (Determine Levels of Service) and to address the impacts of land uses. 2. The required format and scope for each traffic study should be determined by the City of Bakersfield and Caltrans. 3. The improvements needed at locations significantly and directly impacted by the project will be required to be in place prior to occupancy of the relevant development. The specific improvements should be covered in the traffic impact studies for each phase. State Route 99, through the City of Bakersfield, will reach its capacity in the near future. Modifications to State Route 99 will be necessary to ease congestion along this route during peak hours. The implementation of ramp metering is an anticipated modification to reduce congestion. The interchanges at Olive Drive and Buck Owens Boulevard are candidates for the ramp-metering program. Subsequent Traffic Impact Studies should consider the congestion of State Route 99 and potential ramp improvements. • ~ Traffic Impact Studies should be performed for the ensuing developments as directed by RKJK and Associates. It is additionally recommended that Caltrans rep°iew the Traffic Impact Studies to determine if mitigation will be required. The Traffic Impact Studies should follow Caltrans "A Guide for Traffic Impact Studies" and should address improvements and/or pro-rata share contributions toward State highway facilities. 14-90 REC~lVEG ~aY ~ ~ ~ooo ~OBERr HE!N. AVM ~FiU4 i 1 1 1 6A 1 1 6B 1 1 6C, 1 Mr. Scott Morgan May 9, 2000 Page 2 Please call me if you have any questions in regard to this matter. Sincerely, G~~ Jeff Sorensen Office of Transportation Planning cc: Martin Ortiz 14-91 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Response to Comment No. 6 Jeff Sorensen, Department of Transportation May 9, 2000 6A. The City of Bakersfield will require supplemental traffic analysis for each new phase of project development. The analysis shall be in accordance with City of Bakersfield requirements. The analysis will include additional analysis formajorintersectionssuch as Hageman Road at Mohawk Street, Hageman Road at Landco Drive and Mohawk Street at Krebs Road. Future study wi I I assess needs for various road i mprovements and will reassess phasing and timing of various mitigation improvements. In addition, the City of Bakersfield shall require the following additional mitigation measures which are to be included in the Final EIR: 5.9-1 d C}peningdaymitigation=measures in sections 5.9-1 a through 5.9-1 c hall k~e required to be implemented with the first phase of development. 5.9-2e The developer shall be required to pay his proportionate share of all the year 2020 mitigation .measures as specified in sections 5.9-2a through 5.9 2c of the DEIR. A fee schedule shall be prepared,by the'developer with a requirement for 'approval ,prior to recordation of a subdivision rnap or final occupancy ofany-commercial development with fees being paid at time'of building permit on a per unit basis; 5.9-2f The traffic impact fee schedule shall also include..computation of fees for those facilities o'n. the Phase'2' RT1F list which are not included in the improvements specifically listed for Year 2020. These additional facilities shall include all facilities on the`RTIF list within the influence area of the project which is generally the area bounded: by Coffee Road; Norris Road, Roberts Lane, Freeway 99 and Rosedale Highway. The additional facilities include, but are not limited to, the following;; •' Olive Drive from Knudsen Drive to Coffee Road • Mohawk Street from California Avenue to Rosedale .:Highway '~ Mohawk Street Bridge over the Kern River • Various othersigrals, bridges, culverts and improvements within the study area which are on the RTIF list:. 6B. Comment is noted and will be considered by the City of Bakersfield. It should also be noted that the City would normally cooperate with the State in ramp metering as needed. Incorporation of this in the subsequent Traffic Impact Studies in reasonable. 6C. Comment is noted and will be considered by the City of Bakersfield. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I Comments and Responses JN 1 0-1 002 78 14-92 May 24, 2000 ' ,~, ROADS DEPARTMENT CRAIG M. POPE, P.E., Director 2700'M" STREET, SUITE 400 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2370 ,^ Phone:661-862-8850 FAX: 661-862-8851 Toll Free: 800-552-5376 Option 5 TTY Relay: 800-735-2929 ,E-Mail: roads@co.kern.ca.us RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY DAVID PRICE III, RMA DIRECTOR Community Development Program Department Engineering & Survey Services Department Environmental Health Services Department Planning Department Roads Department COMMENT NO. 7 May 15, 2000 Mr. Martin Ortiz, Associate Planner City of Bakersfield 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Ref: 7-8.1 Program EIR for GPA/ZC P99-0482, North of the River Sanitation District Property south of Olive Drive ` Dear Mr. Ortiz: '~' Thank you for the opportunity to review the draft EIR for the above mentioned project. This Department has particular interest in the Traffic Impact Study (Section 15.8) and has the following comments which have bearing on the Traffic and Circulation section of the report (Section 5.9): ~~ 1. The original General Plan Amendment that covered this area while it vas in the County ~, required additional Traffic Impact Studies that identified reasonable mitigation for the General Plan Amendment. This was never done. It would seem that this still needs to be done. Basing this Traffic Impact Study only on the part of the project that is now being amended makes the assumption that the remainder of the project can be mitigated. That is not a certainty. 2. If it is determined that only the proposed General Plan Amendment must be addressed by this study, the remainder of the project should be addressed as other development. In the study, other development is shown as only a 133 unit residential subdivision. Other development should include as a minimum the remainder of the residential property being developed by the applicant to the west of TAZ 2 (120 lots) if not the industrial property adjacent to it that was part of the original General Plan Amendment done by the North of the River Sanitation District through the County. 3. Am and PM peak hour intersection traffic volumes were counted recently by Department staff at the intersections of Olive Drive and Victor Street and Olive Drive and Knudsen Drive. These counts were substantially highei than the counts indicated in the study for existing conditions. A comparison of these counts are detailed on the attached Exhibit A. Appendix B was not included in the copy of the report given to this Department. So it is unknown when the counts in the report were taken. 14-93 Printed ~ _ _, _.,,J Paper 7A 7B 7C 1 City of Bakersfield May 15, 2000 -- Page 2 ~ The counts realized by this Department are closer to the 10% of the daily count that is generally expected in the peak hour. The Level of Service calculated with HCS 2.4 using these counts is shown below: ~. Olive Drive @ Victor Street AM -LOS D PM - LOS C ~C Olive Drive @ Knudsen Drive AM -LOS D PM -LOS D ~. While fluctuations in counts do occur, there is concern about the amount of difference in the counts. Using the counts in the study as the basis for the future may inaccurately portray future Levels of Service. 4. The year 2020 Project Trip Distribution for TAZ's 2 & 3 (Exhibits 4-E & 4-F) shows that ~' a high percentage of traffic would travel southerly to get to the east and State Route 99 after Landco Drive is completed to Rosedale Highway. This reduces the amount of project traffic 7D on Olive Drive. However, existing counts on Hageman Road at Fruitvale Avenue indicate _ that the majority of motorists go north to Olive Drive to travel easterly rather than travel southerly to Rosedale Highway. ,~ 5. Appendix C was not included in the report submitted to this Department. Level of Service (7E calculations could not be reviewed. 6: The opening year for the study is 2002. It is doubtful that this project can be completely that 17F quickly. 7. The future intersection controls are not depicted on Exhibit 6-A at the intersections of Krebs Road @ Mohawk Street, Hageman Road @ Mohawk Street, and Hageman Road @Landco 7G Drive. Will the applicant pay 100% for future control devices at these intersections or a pro rata share? 8. Although the predicted volumes came from the KernCOG model, the Year 2020 volume on Hageman Road between Landco Drive and SR 99 shown on Exhibits 4-U & 4-W appear low ]H when compared to the volumes west of Landco Drive. a 14-94 1 City of Bakersfield a May 15, 2000 Page 3 9. Segments of Mohawk Street, Landco Drive, and Olive Drive have Volume to Capacity ratios greater than 0.80 in Exhibit 4-X. However, no additional lanes are depicted as being ]~ - necessary in Exhibit 6-A. 10. County and City staff have discussed joint cooperation in a study into necessary improvement of the Olive Drive/ State Route 99 interchange. In conjunction with this study, a determination can be made into whether it is more beneficial to connect Landco Drive to 7) Landco Drive or Knudsen Drive at Olive Drive. Therefore, it would be preferable to wait for this study before revising the 2010 Circulation Element to reflect the alignments shown ~ in the traffic study. 11. On pages 1-7 and 1-8 of the traffic study, several development monitoring requirements are outlined to insure that no development can occur that will adversely impact the Level of Service on area roadways. In light of comments 1, 2, & 3 above, it is suggested that these 7K development monitoring requirements also pertain to further development of the residential area west of TAZ 2 and to the Industrial areas that were part of the original North of the River Sanitation District General Plan Amendment. ~~ If you have any questions, please contact Barry Nienke of this office. Very truly yours, Craig .Pope I~ Director CMP:BN:ab I:\ann\L2019 ~l 1 14-95 Exhibit ,A. Comparison of Study Counts and recent Kern County Roads Department Counts ~~ SR Count(3/20J2000) Stu y Count KCR Courrt(4/4/2000) Left 42 95 73 85 Through 1369 1599 910 1012 Right 13 22 10 6 Westbound Y,e$ 64 i34 14 30 Through 604 667 1333 1407 Right 40 48 82 78 Northbound LeR 9 10 14 30 Through 12 7 i2 6 Right 57 b2 67 67 Southbotmd Left 86 129 107 87 Through I2 20 18 16 Right 38 23 74 79 Page 1 of 2 14-96 Exhibit A Comparison of Study Counts and recent Kern County R Departixient Counts ~~ ~ Kt:R Count(3/23/2000) Stud~ount KCR Count( F~stbound Left 65 22 59 65 Through 1396 1613 983 1214 R.igltt 44 48 44 31 Westbound Left 34 33 56 Through 607 641 1388 Right 146 145 467 TjQrrhbOUIId Left ~ 30 14 42 Through 2 11 16 Right 23 27 26 l~outhbotind Leff 452 582 312 Through 17 11 21 Right 44 i9 53 Page 2 of 2 14-97 45 1513 496 57 20 6 443 5- 37 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Response to Comment No. 7 Craig Pope, County of Kern Roads Department May 15, 2000 ~ 7A. The traffic impact study report for GPA/ZC P99-0482, North of the River Sanitation ,~ District Property, does not make the assumption that remainder properties surrounding the project can be mitigated without subsequent analysis of development proposals on those properties. Extensive development monitoring requirements are recommended for the entire study area on pages 1-7 to 1-9 of the traffic impact study report. 7B. Kern Council of Governments traffic stimulation model data was utilized for the assessment of the Year 2020 cumulative conditions in the traffic impact study report for GPA/ZC P99-0482. The Kern COG traffic model data incorporates growth projections for properties surrounding the project. The 133 unit residential sub- division mentioned in this comment is a near-term project which was added to the ambient growth forecasts for the analysis of Opening Year (2002) conditions. r ffi im act anal sis for GPA/ZC P99-0482 was initiated durin mid 1999. The 7C. Theta c p y g traffic counts for existing conditions are based upon data collected during August 1999. Traffic projections for future conditions (Year 2020) are based upon Kern COG traffic model data. ,~ 7D. None of the project traffic volumes estimated to travel through the Fruitvale ,~ Avenue/Hageman Road intersection are projected to go south to Rosedale Highway. 7E. Comment is noted and will be considered by the City of Bakersfield. 7F. Comment is noted and will be considered by the City of Bakersfield. 7G. Site plans which display local project streets and driveways were not available for the level of analysis incorporated into the traffic impact study report for GPA/ZC P99-0482. These site specific design features will impact the determination of intersection controls in the immediate vicinity of the project development areas. As noted on page 1-8 of the traffic impact study report, the development monitoring features recommended for r the study area include the requirement that "improvements needed at locations significantly and directly impacted by the project to maintain the City service level standards shall be required to be in place prior to occupancy of the relevant development phase." 7H. The relatively low traffic volume on Hageman Road east of Landco Road is related to ' the lack of direct ramp connections to the SR-99 Freeway. Comments and Responses JN 10-100278 14-98 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR 71. The review of peak hour intersection lane requirements support the link circulation recommendations on Exhibit 6-A. It should also be noted that the additional lanes are included in the Regional Impact Fee program. 7J. Comment is noted and will be considered by the City of Bakersfield. 7K. Comment is noted and will be considered by the City of Bakersfield. Comments and Responses )N 10-100278 14-99 May 24, 2000 1 KERN COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS LARRY E. REIDER, Superintendent COMMENT NO. 8 Marc Gauthier, Principal Planner Development Services Department City of Bakersfield 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 1 1 RE: GPA/Zone Change P99-0482 North of River Sanitary District Site Environmental Impact Report Dear Mr. Gauthier: May 17, 2000 Our File: M99-0001 This office represents the Beardsley, Fruitvale, and Kern High School Districts. As stated in correspondence to Ms. Kathy Dumble dated June 7; 1999, the districts have been advised that Government Code Sections 65995, 65996, and 65997 now prohibit the City of Bakersfield from denying or refusing to approve a project such as this on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities. For this reason, the districts do not expect the City to impose any conditions related to the financing of public school facilities at this time. This letter is intended to update and correct information previously provided by this office regarding this project and to suggest and request modification of the Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") accordingly. In our earlier correspondence, we failed to note that a significant portion of the project, that lying south of Krebs Road, is within the boundaries of the Fruitvale School District instead of the Beardsley School District. We regret and apologize for having failed to note this fact earlier and trust that the information in this letter is sufficient to correct the DEIR. In addition, subsequent to that correspondence, this office received a report prepared by David Taussig 8~ Associates, Inc. ("DTA") regarding student generation rates for districts within the City of Bakersfield. A copy of that report was previously sent to the city but an additional copy is enclosed for your convenience. That report calculated the rates using the methodology required for the School Facilities Needs Analysis which districts must prepare if they wish to adopt the higher fees authorized by Government Code Sections 65995.5 and 65995.7. Although the rates identified in exhibits G & H of the DTA report will be used to assess the impact of this project on the three school districts in this letter, it should be emphasized that this methodology significantly unders~:ates the actual impacts of projects such as this one. 8A ...advocates for children 1300 17th Street -CITY CENTRE, Bakersfield, CA 93301-4533 1661) 636-4000 ^ FAX (661) 63G-4130 ^ TDD 1661) 636-4800 ^ http://www.kern.org 14-100 Partner -Kern County Network for Children 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ',1 Marc Gauthier, Principal Planner GPA Zone Change P99-0482 Page 2 May 17, 2000 Beardsley School District M99-0001 According to this recent Draft EIR, the number of dwelling units proposed for the Beardsley School District is 218. The DTA report indicates that within the Beardsley School District, the student generation rate per household for Kindergarten through 8t" grade is .5972 students per household. This would mean 130 new students for the Beardsley School District. The District has been, and continues to be, overcrowded especially in grades K-6, as evidenced by resolutions adopted by its Governing Board levying fees under Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Section 65995. (These resolutions are incorporated by reference.) Current overcrowding is exacerbated by other development taking place in the District. The 130 additonal students from this project cannot be accommodated merely by adding relocatable classrooms to existing sites. For example, North Beardsley School already has seven relocatables on site and another two will be added this summer. More classrooms at this site can only be seen as a temporary measure until a new elementary school is constructed. (Even if adding more relocatables at that school were considered to be an appropriate long-term solution to the additional overcrowding which will result from this project, the categorical exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") provided by Section 15314 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations would not apply.) The District and this project's proponent have been in serious discussions regarding the District's acquisition of a school site in the project area. The district hopes that discussions will prove fruitful. If they are, there will be two positive effects. First, land dedicated to the school site will be unavailable for residential development and thereby lessen the impact of this project on the district. Second, the school site will make it possible for the district to construct the new school necessary to accommodate the remaining students who will come from this project. Fruitvale School District The proposed development within the Fruitvale School District is estimated at 509 dwelling units. The DTA report concluded that within the Fruitvale School District, the student generation rate per household is .5865. This would mean 298 new students for the Fruitvale School District. Discovery School is located approximately .75 miles from the proposed project, while Fruitvale Junior High School is approximately 2.25 miles away. Discovery School has a capacity of 660 students and a current enrollment of 651. Of the 509 new students there would be 236, K-6 students who would create severe overcrowding of Discovery School. Fruitvale Junior High School, with seven relocatables already on site, has a capacity of 756 and a current enrollment of 631. In isolation, there would appear to be capacity to accommodate the remaining 62 new junior high students, however, when combined with other development in the District, the cumulative effects would be significant at the junior high level as well. The overcrowded status of the District's facilities has been recognized by the State Allocation Board which has determined that the District is eligible for new construction funding at all grade levels. This determination is confirmed by resolutions adopted by its Governing Board levying fees under Education Code Section 17620 and- Government Code Section 65995. (These resolutions are incorporated by reference.) Depending on when these 298 students arrive, it is possible that at least some of them can be accommodated by adding relocatables at existing schools. However, based on current enrollment projections, the district 14101 8A Marc Gauthier, Principal Planner GPA Zone Change P99-0482 Page 3 May 17, 2000 M99-0001 will have to construct at least one new elementary school to accommodate students from this project and other students expected to enter district schools in the future. Kern High School District The total number of residences proposed in this project is 727. The DTA report indicates that within the Kern High School District, the student generation rate per household for grade 9 through 12 is .1825. This would mean 133 new students for the Kern High School District. The District has been and continues to be overcrowded as evidenced by resolutions adopted by its Governing Board levying fees under Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Section 65995. (These resolutions are incorporated by reference.) While the district's high schools have been permitted to go over their capacity in the short-term by using relocatable classrooms, the overcrowding of specialized classrooms, rest rooms, cafeteria, and athletic facilities means that this can only be seen as an interim measure until a new high school is built to accommodate students from this project and other students expected to enter district schools in the future. Suggested/Requested Modification of the DEIR We suggest that the DEIR should be modified to reflect the fact that a significant portion of the projected residential development will occur in the Fruitvale School District. The district's most serious concern with the DEIR is that it incorrectly characterizes the project's environmental impacts in the area of public schools and suggests that these impacts can be adequately mitigated by adding portable classrooms to existing school sites. As shown above, portable classrooms will not adequately address the additional overcrowding of schools that will be caused by the project. Furthermore, evidence previously provided to the City by this office demonstrates that this project's environmental impact will definitely be significant. In responding to similar projects in the past, this office has provided substantial evidence to the City that projects of this type will have a significant environmental effect on public school facilities. That evidence is hereby incorporated by reference into this letter. In resolutions adopted in 1998, each of the districts determined that the full mitigation of impacts created by projects such as this one would require payment of $11,235 per residence. Pursuant to Government Code Sections 65995, 65996, and 65997, mitigation of this projects' impacts on public school facilities will be limited to the collection of statutory fees authorized under Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Sections 65995.5, 65995.6, and 65995.7 at the time that building permits are issued. Although, as noted above, the districts do not expect the City to impose any condition related to the financing of public school facilities at this time, we do request that the DEIR be modified to reflect the facts summarized above and suggest the following specific language replace that currently found on page 2-25 for EIR section 5.10-3: 14-102 8A 1 i 1 i~ 1 J Marc Gauthier, Principal Planner GPA Zone Change P99-0482 Page 4 ~ May 17, 2000 M99-0001 IMPACTS: "Project Implementation will create the need for additional public school facilities. Significance: Significant Impact, however, pursuant to Government Code Section 65996 the provisions of Chapter 4.9 of Title 7 of the Government Code (commencing with section 65995) are currently deemed to provide full and complete school facilities mitigation and the Cify cannot deny or refuse to approve the project on the basis that school facilities are inadequate." MITIGATION MEASURES: "The developer shall pay fees levied in accordance with Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Sections 65995, 65995.5, and 65995.7." This language and the additional and corrected information provided in this letter should also be incorporated into the other portions of the DEIR related to schools (e.g., at pages 5.10-2 through 3 and 5.10-9 through 11). We would be happy to assist the City in this task. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this project. If you have any questions, or if we can be of any further assistance in this matter, please feel free to contact me at (661) 636- . 4599, or through a-mail at sthartsell@kern.org. Sincerely, 1 SLH:mIw cc: Beardsley School District Fruitvale School District Kern High School District Kyle Carter, Kyle Carter Homes, Inc. Enc. G:\DIVADMI NISDFS\CORRES1M99-0001.SanitDist.wpd Larry E. Rei r County Sup i tend~nt of Schools Ste~e~~C~r~s$t1, Director School District Facility Services 14-103 8A 1 CALCULATION OF STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR THE KERN COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION r Prepared For KERN COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION 1300 17`~ Street Bakersfield, California 93301 Prepared BY DAVID TAUSSIG & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1301 Dove Street Newport Beach, California 92660 (949)955-1500 '~. January 3, 2000 14104 1 1 1 t On November 4, 1998, following the approval of Proposition lA by the voters of the State of California ("State") in the general election on November 3, 1998, Senate Bill ("SB") 50 was fully implemented. One (1) of the three (3) provisions included in SB 50 was the reformation of the statutory school fee/mitigation payment collection procedure. In lieu of the powers granted by the Mira-Hart-Murrieta court decisions, SB 50 provides school districts with a reformed statutory school fee collection procedure that, subject to certain conditions, authorizes school districts to collect alternative school fees ("Alternative Fees") on residential developments. However, in order to levy Alternative Fees, a school district must first approve a School Facilities Needs Analysis ("Analysis"). One (1) of the key components in an Analysis is the calculation of student generation rates ("SGRs"). SB 50 set forth a specific methodology for calculating SGRs for the purpose of projecting student enrollment for levying Alternative Fees. Section 65995.6(a) of the Government Code requires a school district to project the total number of students to be generated from residential development anticipated to occur in the school district over the next five (5) years. This projection is to be based on SGRs for residential development over the previous five (5) years of a type similar to that of the residential development anticipated to occur in the school district over the next five (5) years. An excerpt from SB 50 describing this requirement is provided below. The school facilities needs analysis required by paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 65995.5 shall be conducted by the governing board of a school district to determine the need for new school facilities for unhoused pupils that are attributable to projected enrollment growth from the development of new residential units over the next five years. The school facilities needs analysis shall project the number of unhoused elementary, middle, and high school pupils generated by new residential units, in each category of pupils enrolled in the district. This projection of unhoused pupils shall be based on the historical student generation rates of new residential units constructed during the previous five years that are of a similar type of unit to those anticipated to be constructed either in the school district or the city or county in which the school district is located, and relevant planning agency information, such as multiphased development projects, that may modify the historical figures. Because of the widely varying demographics within the County of Kern ("County"), the Kern County Office of Education ("KCOE") retained David Taussig & Associates, Inc. ("DTA ") to calculate SGRs for jurisdictions in the County. Specifically, DTA calculated SGRs for the Cities of Arvin, Delano, Shaffer, Wasco, and Bakersfield, as well as the unincorporated portion of the County. Additionally, the Ciry of Bakersfield and the unincorporated County were divided into West and East Regions. This report will provide (i) an explanation of the general methodology used in calculating the SGRs and (ii) discussions of individual SGRs calculated for each of the regions mentioned above. Kern County Ojfice ojEducation 14-105 Page 1 Calculation o(Student Generation Rates - SB SO January 3 2000 GENERAL METHODOLOGY To comply with Section 65995.6(a) of the Government Code, the calculation of SGRs must incorporate residential development data, building permit data, and student enrollment data. DTA obtained residential development data from the fiscal year 1998- 99 assessment roll, as prepared by the County Assessor's Office ("County Residential Data"). Because of its role in issuing certificates of compliance for school districts in the County, the KCOE was able to provide building permit data to DTA for the period from January 1, 1994 through December 31, 1998 ("County Building Permit Data"). Finally, twenty (20) elementary school districts, three (3) high school districts, and one (1) unified school district("Participating School Districts") (see Exhibit A for a list of the school districts) provided student enrollment data to DTA via the KCOE. Upon receipt of the data listed above, DTA extracted from the County Residential Data and the County Building Permit Data the sets of records related to the areas served by the Participating School Districts ("Project Residential Data" and "Project Building _ Permit Data," respectively). Thereafter, the Project Residential Data was compared to the Project Building Permit Data to identify the residential units constructed during the previous five (5) years. Finally, once identified, these residential units were compared to the student enrollment data to calculate SGRs by unit type (i.e., single family detached, single family attached,- and multifamily)' and school level (i.e., elementary school, middle or junior high school, and high school). CITY OF ARVIN The City of Arvin is served by Arvin Union School District (grades kindergarten through 8) and Kern Union High School District (grades 9 through 12). Based on data contained in the Project Building Permit Data, 181 single family detached, zero (0) single family attached, and twenty (20) multifamily units were constructed within the City of Arvin during the previous five (5) years. Upon comparison of the Project Residential Data to the student enrollment data of Arvin Union School District and Kern Union High School District, a total of 189 elementary school students, 68 middle school students, and 82 high school students were identified as being generated from the residential units constructed during the previous five (5) years. Table 1 lists the SGRs by unit type and , school level in the City of Arvin while Exhibit B contains specific numbers and counts used in calculating the SGRs. ' Parcels containing units which have no common walls were assigned to the single family detached ("SFD") category. Parcels containing a single unit with common walls were assigned to the single family attached ("SFA") category. Parcels containing multiple units with common walls were assigned to the multifamily ("MF") category. Kern County Ojfzce ojEducation Pa el Calculation o~Student Generation Rates - SB SO 14-106 8 January 3 2000 , i 1 1 r C1' 1 TABLE 1 STUDENT GENERATION RATES r~~x THI CITY O F ARVIN SGRs for SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School Grades K - 5 0.989 .0.000 0.500 Middle School (Grades 6 - 8) 0.370 0.000 0.500 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.448 0.000 0.050 Total 1.807 0.000 1.050 CITY OF DELANO The City of Delano is served by Delano Union School District (grades kindergarten through 8) and Delano Joint Union High School District (grades 9 through 12). Based on data contained in the Project Building Permit Data, 1,032 single family detached, zero (0) single family attached, and 56 multifamily units were constructed within the City of Delano during the previous five (5) years. Upon comparison of the Project Residential Data to the student enrollment data of Delano Union School District and Delano Joint Union High School District, a total of 847 elementary school students, 332 middle school students, and 438 high school students were identified as being generated from the residential units stated above. Table 2 lists the SGRs by unit type and school level in the City of Delano while Exhibit C contains specific numbers and counts used in calculating the SGRs. TABLE 2 STUDENT GENERATION RATES FnR 'i'AF'. C'TTY nF 11FT . e Nn SGRs for SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School (Grades K - 5) 0.792 0.000 0.536 Middle School (Grades 6 - 8) 0.311 0.000 0.196 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.413 0.000 0.214 Total 1.516 0.000 0.946 Kern County Oj~ce of Education Pa e 3 Calculation olStudent Generation Rates - SB S`14-107 January 3 ~ ~' CITY OF SHAFTER The City of Shafter is served by Richland-Lerdo Union School District (grades kindergarten through 8) and Kern Union High School District (grades 9 through 12). Based on data contained in the Project Building Permit Data, 287 single family detached, zero (0) single family attached, and 21 multifamily units were constructed within the City of Shafter during the previous five (5) yeazs. Upon comparison of the Project Residential Data to the student enrollment data of Richland-Lerdo Union School District and Kern Union High School District, a total of 266 elementary school students, 61 junior high school students, and 69 high school students were identified as being generated from the residential units constructed during the previous five (5) yeazs in the City of Shafter. Table 3 lists the SGRs by unit type and school level in the City of Shafter while Exhibit D contains specific numbers and counts used in calculating the SGRs. TABLE 3 STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR THE CITY OF SHAFT'ER SGRs for SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School (Grades K - 6) 0.889 0.000 0.524 Junior High School ._ (Grades 7 & 8) 0.209 0.000 0.048 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.233 0.000 0.095 Total 1.331 -0.000 0.667 CITY OF WASCO The City of Wasco is served by Wasco Union School District (grades kindergarten through 8) and Wasco Union High School District (grades 9 through 12). Based on data contained in the Project Building Permit Data, 227 single family detached, eight (8) single family attached, and eight (8) multifamily units were constructed within the City of Wasco during the previous five (5) yeazs. Upon comparison of the Project Residential Data to the student enrollment data of Wasco Union School District and Wasco Union High School District, a total of 261 elementary school students, 63 junior high school students, and 109 high school students were identified as being generated from the residential units stated above. Table 4 lists the SGRs by unit type and school level in the City of Wasco while Exhibit E contains specific numbers and counts used in calculating the SGRs. Kern County Ojfuc ojEducation 14-108 Page 4 Calculation of Student Generation Rates - SB SO January 3 2000 t 1 1 f i 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE 4 STUDENT GENERATION RATES FnR THF, riTY nF wa can SGRs for SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School (Grades K - 6) 1.071 1.750 0.500 Junior High School (Grades 7 & 8) 0.256 0.625 0.000 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.436 1.000 0.250 Total 1.763. 3.375 0.750 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD The City of Bakersfield is served by the following kindergarten through 8`~ grade school districts: Bakersfield City School District, Beardsley School District, Fairfax Elementary School District, Fruitvale School District, Greenfield Union School District, Lakeside Union School District, Lamont School District, Norris School District, Panama-Buena Vista Union School District, Rio-Bravo Greeley Union School District, Rosedale Union School District, and Standard School District. In addition, students in 9`h`through 12`~ grade in the City of Bakersfield are served by Kern Union High School District. Based on data contained in the Project Building Permit Data, 6,901 single family detached, zero (0) single family attached, and 1,048 multifamily units were constructed within the City of Bakersfield during the previous five (5) years. Due to the fact that some of the school districts that serve kindergarten through 8`~ grade in the City of Bakersfield have an elementary school and a middle school configuration while other school districts have an elementary and a junior high school configuration, DTA has calculated a set of SGRs for each scenario. Upon comparison of the Project Residential Data to the student enrollment data of those school districts listed above, a total of 4,605 students in kindergarten through 8`" grade and 1,450 students in 9`~ through 12`~ grade were identified as being generated from the residential units constructed in the City of Bakersfield during the previous five (5) years. Table S lists the SGRs by unit type and school level in the City of Bakersfield for school districts with an elementary school and a middle school configuration and Table 6 lists the SGRs by unit type and school level for school districts with an elementary school and a junior high school configuration. Exhibit F contains specific numbers and counts used in calculating the SGRs for the City of Bakersf eld. Kern County Office of Education 14-109 Page S Calculation oiStudent Generation Rates - SB 54 January 3 2000 1 TABLE 5 STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR THE CITY OF BAKERSFiFi.n SGRs for SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School Grades K - 5) 0.413 0.000 0.327 . Middle School (Grades 6 - 8) 0.185 0.000 0.135 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.188 0.000 0.146 Total 0.785 0.000 0.608 TABLE 6 STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR TtI~ CITY OF BAK ERSFIELD SGRs for SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF U 'ts Elementary. School (Grades K - 6) 0.474 0.000 0.368 Junior High School (Grades 7 & 8) 0.123 .0.000 0.094 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.188 0.000 0.146 Total 0.785 0.000 0.608 1 1 In the course of calculating SGRs for the City of Bakersfield, DTA discovered variances in the type of residential units that were constructed over the past five (5) years. Government Code Section 65995.6 specifies that, for purposes of a school facilities needs analysis, ~ "the projection of unhoused pupils shall be based on the historical student generation rates of new residential units constructed during the previous five years that , are of a similar type of unit anticipated to be constructed either in the school district or the city or county in which the school district is located." Therefore DTA has calculated SGRs for the East Region and the West Region of the City of Bakersfield. , Kcrn County Officc of Education Pa e 6 Calculation oiStudent Generation Rates - SB SG 14-110 January 3 2000 1 1 1 1 ~~ West Region of Bakersfield Students in kindergarten through 8`" grade in the West Region of the City of Bakersfield are served by Fruitvale School District, Lakeside Union School District, Norris School District, Panama-Buena Vista Union School District, Rio- Bravo Greele~ Union School District, Rosedale Union School District. While students in 9 through 12`~ grade in the West Region of the City of Bakersfield are served by Kern Union High School District. Based on data contained in the Project Building Permit Data, 6,082 single family detached, zero-(0) single family attached, and 591 multifamily units were constructed within the West Region of the City of Bakersfield during the previous five (5) years. Due to the fact that some of the school districts that serve kindergarten through 8`~ grade in the West Region of the City of Bakersfield have an elementary school and a middle school configuration while other school districts have an elementary and a junior high school configuration, DTA has calculated a set of SGRs for each scenario. Upon comparison of the Froject Residential Data to the student enrollment data of those school districts listed above, a total of 3,778 students in kindergarten through 8~' grade and 1,166 students in 9`~ through 12~' grade were identified as being generated from the residential units constructed in the West Region of the City of Bakersfield during the previous five (5) years. Table 7 lists the SGRs by unit type and school level in the West Region of the City of Bakersfield for school districts with an elementary school and a middle school configuration and Table 8 lists the SGRs by unit type and school level for school districts with an elementary school and a junior high school configuration. Exhibit G contains specific numbers and counts used in calculating the SGRs for the West Region of~-the City of Bakersfield. TABLE 7 STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR WEST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD SGRs for SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units 11g' Units Elementary School (Grades K - 5) 0.404 0.000 0.244 Middle School (Grades 6 - 8) 0.183 0.000 0.113 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.183 0.000 0.095 Total 0.770 0.000 0.452 Kern County Office of Education 14-111 Page ~ Catcutation oiStudent Generation Rates - SB Sl January 3, 2000 TABLE 8 STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR WEST RF(~inN nF TNF. !`T'ry n>~ R e uFn cwt n SGRs for SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School (Grades K - 6) 0.464 0.000 0.276 Junior High School (Grades 7 & 8) 0.123 0.000 0.081 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.183 0.000 0.095 Total 0.770 0.000 0.452 East Region of Bakersfield Students in kindergarten through 8`~ grade in the East Region of the Ciry of Bakersfield are served by Bakersfield Ciry School District, Beardsley School District, Fairfax Union School District, Greenfield Union School District, Lamont School District, and Standard School District. While students in 9`~ through 12`~ grade in the East Region of the City of Bakersfield ire served by Kern Union High School District. Based on data contained in the Project Building Permit Data, 819 single family detached, zero (0) single family attached, and 457 multifamily units were constructed within the East Region of the Ciry of Bakersfield during the previous five (5) years. Due to the fact that some of the school districts that serve kindergarten through 8`~ grade in the East Region of. the City of Bakersfield have an elementary school and a middle school co~guration while other school districts have an elementary school and a junior high school configuration, DTA has calculated a set of SGRs for each scenario. Upon comparison of the Project Residential Data to the student enrollment data of those school districts listed above, a total of 908 students in kindergarten through 8`" grade and 284 students in 9`~ through 12`" grade were identified as being generated from the residential units constructed in the East Region of the City of Bakersfield during the previous five (5) years. Table 9 lists the SGRs by unit type and school level for school districts in the East Region of the City of Bakersfield for with an elementary school and a middle school configuration and Table 10 lists the SGRs by unit type and school level for school districts with an elementary school and a junior high school configuration. Exhibit H contains specific numbers and counts used in calculating the SGRs for the East Region of the City of Bakersfield. Kern County Ofjce ojEducation 14-112 Pagt 8 _Calculation o/'Studenl Generation Rates - SB SO January 3 2000 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE 9 STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR EAST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD SGRs for ~ SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School (Grades K - 5) 0.551 0.000 0.440 Middle School (Grades 6 - 8) 0.221 0.000 0.164 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.228 0.000 0.212 Total ~ 1.000 0.000 0.816 TABLE 10 STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR EAST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAxFRS~t.n SGRs for SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF U>aits Elementary School (Grades K - 6) 0.629 0.000 0.492 Junior High School (Grades 7 & 8) 0.143 0.000 0.112 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.228 0.000 0.212 Total 1.000 0.000 0.816 THE UNINCORPORATED PORTION OF THE COUNTY OF KERN The unincorporated County is served by the following kindergarten through 8`~ grade school districts: Arvin Union School District, Bakersfield City School District, Beazdsley School District, Blake School District, Buttonwillow School District, Caliente Union School District, Delano Union School District, Di Giorgio School District, Edison School District, Fairfax Union School District, Fruitvale School District, General Shafter School District, Greenfield Union School District, Kernville Union School District, Lakeside Union School District, Lamont School District, Linns Valley-Poso Flat School District, Lost Hills Union School District, Maple School District, Norris School District, Panama- Buena Vista Union School District, Pond Union School District, Richland-Lerdo School District, Rio-Bravo Greeley Union School District, Rosedale Union School District Semitropic School District, South Fork Union School District, Southern Kern Unified Ktrn County Ojfice ojEducation pa e y Calculation olStudent Generation Rates - SB Sl 14-113 January 3 2000 i School District, Standard School District, Vineland School District, and Wasco Union School District (DTA did not receive student enrollment data from Blake School District, Buttonwillow School District, Caliente Union School District, Di Giorgio School District, Kernville Union School District, Linns Valley-Poso Flat School District, Lost Hills Union School District, Maple School District, South Fork Union School District, and Vineland School District). In addition, the unincorporated County is served by the following 9`~ through 12`~ grade school districts: Delano Joint Union High School District, Kern Union High School District, Southern .Kern Unified High School District, and Wasco Union High School District. Based on data contained in the Project Building Permit Data for areas served by kindergarten through 8`~ grade school districts in the unincorporated County which did provide student enrollment data to DTA, 1,625 single family detached, zero (0) single family attached, and 330 multifamily units were constructed during the previous five (5) years. As for the high school level, for which DTA did receive complete student data from 9`h through 12`~ grade school districts in the unincorporated County, 1,769 single family detached, zero (0) single family attached, and 341 multifamily units were constructed during the previous five (5) years. Due to the fact that some of the school districts that serve kindergarten through 8`~ grade in the unincorporated County have an elementary school and a middle school configuration while other school districts have an elementary and a junior high school configuration, DTA has calculated a set of SGRs for each scenario. Upon comparison of the Project Residential Data to the student enrollment data of those school districts listed above, a total of 1,355 students in kindergarten through 8`h grade and SO1 students in 9`~ through 12`~ grade were identified as being generated from the residential units constructed in the unincorporated County during the previous five (5) years. Table 11 lists the SGRs by unit type and school level in the unincorporated County for school districts with an elementary school and a middle school configuration and Table 12 lists the SGRs by unit type and school level for school districts with an elementary school and a junior high school configuration. Exhibit I contains specific numbers and counts used in calculating the SGRs for the unincorporated County. TABLE 11 STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN SGRs for SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School (Grades K - 5) 0.482 0.000 0.439 Middle School (Grades 6 - 8) 0.236 0.000 0.133 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.247 0.000 0.188 Total 0.965 0.000 0.760 Kern County Ojfice ojEducation 14-114 Page 10 Calculation o/'Student Generation Rates - SB SO January ~ 2000 1 '~ 1 1 1 1 ~~ ~~ rl TABLE 12 STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN SGRs for SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School , (Grades K - 6) 0.559 0.000 0.485 Junior High School (Grades 7 & 8) 0.159 0.000 0.088 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.247 0.000 0.188 Total 0.965 0.000 0.761 Similar to the Ciry of Bakersfield, DTA discovered variances in the type of residential units that were constructed during the past five (5) years when calculating SGRs for the County. Therefore DTA has calculated SGRs for the East Region and the West Region of the unincorporated County. West Region of the Unincorporated Portion of Kern County Students in kindergarten through 8`~ grade in the West Region of the unincorporated County are served by Buttonwillow School District, Fruitvale School District, Lakeside Union School District, Norris School District, Panama- Buena Vista Union School District, Richland-Lerdo School Districts, Rio-Bravo Greeley Union School District, and Rosedale Union School District (DTA did not receive student enrollment data from Buttonwillow School District). While students in 9`~ through 12`h grade in the West Region of the unincorporated County aze served by Kern Union High School District. Based on data contained in the Project Building Permit Data for areas served by kindergarten through 8`~ grade school districts in the West Region of the unincorporated County which did provide student enrollment to DTA, 739 single family detached, zero (0) single family attached, and 38 multifamily units were constructed in the previous five (5) years. As for the high school level, which DTA did receive complete student enrollment data for all grades 9`~ through 12`s school districts in the West Region of the unincorporated County, 752 single family detached, zero (0) single family attached, and 42 multifamily units were constructed during the previous five (5) yeazs. Due to the fact that some of the school districts that serve kindergarten through 8`~ grade in the West Region of the unincorporated County have an elementary school and a middle school configuration while other school districts have an elementary school and a junior high school configuration, DTA has calculated a set of SGRs for each scenario. Upon comparison of the Project Residential Data to the student enrollment data of those school districts listed Kern County Office ojEdueation 14-115 _ _ Page 1! Calculation o~Student Generation Rates - SB SO january 3, 2000 1 above, a total of 511 students from kindergarten through 8`h grade and 171 students in 9`s through 12`h grade were identified as being generated from the residential units constructed in the West Region of the unincorporated County during the previous five (5) years. Table 13 lists the SGRs by unit type and ' school level in the West Region of the unincorporated County for school districts with an elementary school and middle school configuration and Table 14 lists the SGRs by unit type and school level for school districts with an elementary school ' and a junior high school configuration. Exhibit J contains specific numbers and counts used in calculating the SGRs for the West Region of the unincorporated County. ' TABLE 13 STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR WEST REGION OF , THE UNINCORPOTATED PART OF TNF. rnTTNTV nF uFViv .SGRs for SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School (Grades K - 5) 0.464 0.000 0.342 Middle School (Grades 6 - 8) 0.206 0.000 0.079 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.226 0.000 0.024 Total 0.896 0.000 0.445 TABLF. 14 i u STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR WEST REGION OF THE LJ1vINCORPOTATFD PART nF TNF r~nTnvTV nF u~v~r SGRs for SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School (Grades K - 6) 0.530 0.000 0.368 Junior High School (Grades 7 &.8) 0.140 0.000 0.053 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.226 0.000 0.024 Total 0.896 a 0~~000 0.445 t Kern County Office o Education Calculation of Student Generation Rates - SB SO 14-116 January 3a2000 1 East Region of the Unincorporated Portion of Kern County Students in kindergarten through 8`" grade in the East Region of the unincorporated County are served by Arvin Union School District, Bakersfield City School District, Beardsley School District, Blake School District, Caliente ' Union School District, Delano Union School District, Di Giorgio School District, Edison School District, Fairfax Union School District, General Shaffer School District, Greenfield Union School District, Kernville Union School District, Lamont School District, Liens Valley-Poso Flat School District, Lost Hills Union School District, Maple School District, Pond Union School District, Semitropic School District, South Fork Union School District, Southern Kern Unified School District, Standard School District, Vineland School District, and Wasco Union School District (DTA did not receive student enrollment data from Blake School District, Caliente Union School District, Di Giorgio School District, Kernville Union School District, Lines Valley-Poso Flat School District, Lost Hills Union School District, Maple School District, South Fork Union School District, and Vineland School District). While students in 9`" ' through 12t° grade in the East Region of the unincorporated County are served by Delano Joint Union High School District, Kern Union High School District, ' Southern Kern Unified High School District, and Wasco Union High School District. Based on data contained in the Project Building Permit Data for areas served by kindergarten through 8`~ grade school districts in the East Region of the unincorporated County which did provide student enrollment to DTA, 886 ' single family detached, zero (0) single family attached, and 292 multifamily units were constructed during the previous five (5) years. As for the high school ' level, which DTA did receive complete student enrollment data for 9`~ through 12`~ grade school districts in the East Region of the unincorporated County, 1,017 single family detached, zero (0) single family attached, and 299 ' multifamily units were constructed during the previous five (5) years. Due to the fact that some of the school districts that serve kindergarten through 8`~ grade have an elementary school and a middle school configuration while other school districts have an elementary school and a junior high school configuration, DTA has calculated a set of SGRs for each scenario. Upon comparison of the Froject Residential Data to the student enrollment data of ' those school districts listed above, a total of 844 students in kindergarten through 8`" grade and 327 students in 9`~ through 12`~ grade were identified as being generated from the residential units constructed within the last five (5) ' years. Table 15 lists the SGRs by unit type and school level for school districts in the East Region of the unincorporated County with an elementary school and ' a middle school configuration and Table 16 lists the SGRs by unit type and school level for school districts with an elementary school and a junior high school configuration. Exhibit K contains specific numbers and counts used in ' calculating the SGRs for the East Region of the unincorporated County. Kern County Office ojEducation 14-117 Page 13 Calculation oiStudent Generation Rates - SB S6 January 3 2000 TABLE 15 STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR EAST REGION OF THE Ui~1INCORPOTATED PART OF THE COUNTY OF KERN SGRs for SGRs for SGRs for School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School (Grades K - 5) 0.498 0.000 0.452 Middle School (Grades 6 - 8) 0.259 0.000 0.140 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.265 0.000 0.214 Total 1.022 0.000 - 0.806 TABLE 16 STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR EAST REGION OF THE UNINCORPOTATED PART OF THE COUNTY OF KERN SGRs for SGRs for SGRs fore School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Unts Elementary School (Grades K - 6) 0.582 0.000 0.500 Junior High School (Grades 7 & 8) 0.175 0.000 0.092 High School (Grades 9 - 12) 0.265 0.000 0.214 Total 1.022 0.000 0.807 Kern County Ojfrce ojEducation Pa a 14 Calculation of Student Generation Rates - SB St ~ 4 ~ ~ 8 January 3 2000 EXHIBIT A LIST OF PARTICIPATING SCHOOL DISTRICTS 14-119 1 OFFICE OF KELLY F. BLANTON KERN COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS School District Facility Services ' District JPA Agreements of File (Participating School Districts) Arvin Union School District Bakersfield City School District ' Beardsley School District Buttonwillow Union School District Caliente Union School District ' Delano Union School District Delano Joint Union High School District Di Giorgio School District Edison School District Elk Hills School District Fairfax School District , Fruitvale School District General Shafter School District ' Greenfield Union School District Kern High School District Kernville Union School District r Lakeside Union School District Lamont School District Lost Hills Union School District ' Maricopa Unified School District McFarland Unified School District Norris School District ' Panama-Buena Vista Union School District Pond Union School District Richland-Lerdo Union School District ' Rio Bravo-Greeley Union School District - Rosedale Union School District South Fork Union School District ' Southern Kern Unified School District Standard School District Vineland School District Wasco Union Elementary School District Wasco Union High School District ' 14-120 EX~IIBIT B STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR THE CITY OF ARVIN 14-121 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF ARVIN Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Arvin Union School District Item Number of Students Number of Elementary School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-5) 1,714 Number of Middle School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 6-8 704 Number of Students that could be Matched 2,418 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Students Matched to MH Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 963 4 303 86 1,356 Middle School 436 1 104 46 587 Total Students 1,399 5 407 132 1,943 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Students I Total Apport to Students MH Units I A rt. Elementary School 254 1 80 23 358 Middle School ( 87 ~ 0 ~- 21 9 i l 17 Total Students 341 1 101 32 !I 475 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total ' Students for j MH Units Total Students Element School 1,217 5 383 109 1,714 Middle School 523 1 125 55 704 Total Students 1,740 6 508 164 2,418 12!29/99 14-122 oa:3o:as PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH STH GRADE IN THE CITY OF ARVIN Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the City of Arvin during the Previous Five Years Item Number of Number of SFD Units SFA Units Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 181 0 20 201 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 142 0 8 150 Middle School 56 0 1 57 Total Students 198 0 9 207 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Total Studenu A rt. Elementary School 37 0 2 39 Middle School 11 0 0 11 Total Students 48 0 2 50 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students Elementary School 179 0 ]0 189 Middle Schoo! 67 0 1 68 Total Students 246 0 I 1 257 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the City of Arvin during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School 0.9890 0.0000 0.5000 Middle School 0.3702 0.0000 0.0500 Total SGR 1.3:;92 0.0000 0.5500 14-123 04:30:45 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF ARVIN Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Kern Union High School District Item Number of Students Number of Hi h School Students Enrolled in the District 26,747 Number of Students that could be Matched ~ 26,747 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Leve! Students Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Matched Hi h School 19,683 235 3 320 634 23 872 Total Students 19,683 235 3,320 634 23,872 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Apport to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units A rt. Hi h School 2,371 28 400 76 2,875 Total Students 2,371 28 400 76 2,875 r Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level Total Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Students Hi h School 22 054 263 3,720 710 .26,747 Total Students 22,054 263 3,720 710 26,747 t u29/99 14-124 04:36: t2 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF ARVIN Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the City of Arvin during the Previous Five Years Item Number of I Number of SFD Units SFA Units Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Uniu 181 I 0 20 201 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Students ~ Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Matched Hi h School 72 0 1 73 Total Students 72 0 1 73 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) Students I Students ~ Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Students School Level SFD Units I SFA Units MF Units A rt. Hi h School 9 i 0 0 9 Total Students 9 ! 0 0 9 F Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Total ~ Total Total Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Students Hi h School 81 0 1 82 Total Students 81 I 0 1 82 Step 9: SGI2.s for Units Constructed in the City of Arvin during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD I SFA Units Units MF Units Hi h School 0.4475 0.0000 O.OS00 Total SGR 0.4475 I 0.0000 0.0500 14-125 04:36:[2 PM 1 EX~IIBIT C STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR 1'HE CITY OF DELANO 1 1 t t t 1 14-126 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 t I~ I~ 1 1 '~ I n9/99 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF DELANO Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Delano Union School District Item Number of Students Number of Element School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-5) 4,371 Number of Middle School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 6-8 ~ 1,771 Number of Students that could be Matched 6,142 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Students Matched to MH Units Total ~ Studenu Matched Elementary School 3,166 3 564 201 3,934 Middle School 1,356 1 178 84 I 1,619 Total Students 4,522 4 742 285 ~ 5,553 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Students ~ Apport to ~ MH Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 352 0 63 22 437 Middle School ~ 127 ~ 0 ~ 17 8 !~ 152 Total Students 479 0 79 30 I 589 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total ' Students for i! Total MH Units I Students Element School 3,518 3 627 223 ~ 4,371 Middle School 1,483 1 195 92 1,771 Total Students 5,001 4 821 315 6,142 14-127 04:31:23 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF DELANO Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the City of Delano during the Previous Five Years Item Number of SFD Units Number of Number of SFA Units MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 1,032 0 56 1,088 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Elemen School 735 0 27 762 Middle School 293 0 10 303 Total Students 1,028 0 37 1,065 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 82 0 3 85 Middle School 28 0 1 29 Total Students 110 0 4 1 ]4 . Step 8:.Tota1 Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students Elementary School 817 0 30 847 Middle School 321 0 11 332 Total Students 1,138 0 41 1,179 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the City of Delano during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School 0.7917 0.0000 0.5357 Middle School 0.3110 O.OMO 0.1964 Total SGR 1.1027 0.000 0.7321 t 2/29!99 14-128 04:3 i :23 Pit 1 1 1 i~ t i~ 12/29/99 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF DELANO Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Delano Joint Union High School District and in the County of Kern Item Number of Students Number of Hi h School Students Enrolled in the District ~ 3,076 _ Number of Hi h School Students Enrolled in the Count of Tulare _ 633 Number of Students that could be Matched 2,443 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Matched to Studenu School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Matched Hi h School 1,858 1 214 81 2,154 Total Students 1,858 1 214 81 2,154 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Apport to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units A rt. Hi h School ~ 249 0 29 I1 289 Total Students i 249 0 29 I 1 289 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level Total Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Students Hi h School 2,107 I 243 92 2,443 Total Students 2,107 1 243 92 2,443 14-129 04:36:55 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF DELANO Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the City of Delano during the Previous Five Years Item Number of SFD Units Number of SFA Units Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 1,032 0 56 1,088 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified~in Step 5 by School Level Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Matched Hi h School 376 0 11 387 Total Students 376 0 I 1 387 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) Students Students Students Total Apport. to f Apport. to Apport. to Students School Level SFD Units i SFA Units MF Units A rt. Hi h School 50 0 1 51 Total Students 50 0 1 51 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Students Hi h School 426 0 12 438 Total Students 426 0 12 438 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the City of Delano during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Hi School 0.4128 0.0000 0.2143 Total SGR 0.4128 0.0000 0.2143 12/29/99 14130 oa:36:ss PM EX~IIBIT D STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR TIC CITY OF SHAFTER 14-131 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF SHAFTER Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Richland-Lerdo School District Item Number of Students Number of Elementary Schooi Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-6) 1,998 Number of Junior Hi h School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 7-8 454 Number of Students that could be Matched 2,452 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Students Matched to MH Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 1,420 0 231 58 1,709 Junior Hi h School 360 0 40 12 412 Total Students 1,780 0 271 70 2,121 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Students Apport to MH Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 240 0 39 10 289 Junior Hi School 37 0 4 1 42 Total Students 277 0 43 1 l 331 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Totai Students for MF Units Totai Students for MH Units Total Students Element School 1,660 0 270 68 1,998 Junior Hi h School 397 0 44 13 454 Total Students 2,057 0 314 81 2,452 [2/29/99 14-132 04:31:52 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF SHAFTER Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the City of Shafter during the Previous Five Years Item Number of Number of Number of SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 287 0 21 308 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Elemen School 218 0 9 22? Junior Hi School S4 0 1 SS Total Students 272 0 10 282 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) School Level Students Apport. to SFD-Units Students ! Students Apport. to I Apport. to SFA Units MF Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 37 0 2 39 Junior Hi h School 6 0 0 6 Total Students 43 ~ 0 2 45 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step S by School Level ! School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students Elementary School 255 0 11 266 Junior Hi h School 60 0 1 61 Total Students 315 0 12 327 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the City of Shatter during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD SFA Units Units MF Units Elementary School 0.8885 0.0000 0.5238 Junior Hi h School 0.2091 0.0000 0.0476 Total SGR 1.0976 0.0000 0.5714 14-133 04:31:52 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF SHAFTER Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Kern Union High School District Item Number of Students Number of Hi h School Students Enrolled in the District 26,74? Number of Students that could be Matched 26,747 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Matched Hi School 19 683 235 3 320 634 23 872 Total Students 19,683 235 3,320 634 23,872 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Apport to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units A rt. Hi h School 2,371 28 400 76 2,875 Total Students 2,371 28 400 76 2,875 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level Total Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Students Hi h School 22,04 263 3,720 710 26,747 Total Students 22,054 263 3,720 710 26,747 1 1 1 1 ~~ ~I 1 1 1 i 1 1 17129/99 14-134 043720 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR- 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF SHAFTER Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the City of Shafter during the Previous Five Years Item Number of SFD Units Number of SFA Units Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 287 0 21 308 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Matched Hi h School 60 0 2 62 Total Students 60 0 2 62 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) Students Students Students Total Apport: to Apport. to Apport. to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units A rt. Hi h School 7 0 0 7 Total Students 7 0 0 7 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Students Hi h School 67 0 2 59 Total Students 67 0 2 69 Step 9: SG1Zs for Units Constructed in the City of Shafter during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Hi h School 0.2334 0.0000 0.0952 Total SGR 0.2334 0.0000 0.0952 14-135 w _~: .~.. 04:3720 PM ~: EXHIBIT E STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR THE CITY OF WASCO t 14-136 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF WASCO Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Wasco Union School District Item Number of Students Number of Element School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-6) 2,283 Number of Junior Hi h Schooi Students Enrolled in the District Grades 7-8 591 Number of Students that could be Matched 2,874 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Students Matched to MH Units Total_ _ Students Matched Elementary School 1,367 l7 174 56 1,614 Junior Hi h School 396 S 36 13 450 Total Students 1,763 22 210 69 2,064 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Students Apport to MH Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 567 7 72 23 ~,. 669 Junior Hi h School 124 2 11 4 141 Total Students 691 9 83 27 810 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level School Level Total- Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students for MH Units Total Students Elementary School 1,934 24 246 79 2,283 Junior Hi h School 520 7 47 17 591 Total Students 2,454 31 293 96 2,874 14-137 04:38:12 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF WASCO Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the City of Wasco during the Previous Five Years Item Number of Number of SFD Units SFA Units Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 227 8 8 243 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Element School 172 10 3 185 Junior Hi h School 44 4 0 48 Total Students 216 14 3 233 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Yeaz Level) School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 71 4 1 76 Junior Hi h School 14 1 0 15 Total Students , 85 5 1 91 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Total Total Students for Students for SFD Units SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students Elementary School 243 14 4 261 Junior Hi h School 58 5 0 63 Total Students 301 19 4 324 Step 9: SG1Ts for Units Constructed in the City of Wasco during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School 1.0705 1.7500 0.5000 Junior Hi h School _ 0.2555 0.6250 0.0000 Total SGR ~ ~ ~ 1.3260 2.3750 0.5000 r J ~, IJ39/99 14-138 04:38:12 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF WASCO Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Wasco Union High School District Item Number of Students Number of Hi h School Students Enrolled in the District 1,160 Number of Students that could be Matched 1,160 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Matched Hi School 655 6 SI 12 724 Total Students 655 6 51 12 724 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students ' Students ~ Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Apport to Students School Level SFD Uniu SFA Units MF Units MH Units A rt. Hi h School 394 4 31 7 436 Total Students 394 4 31 7 436 f Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level Total Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Students Hi h School 1,049 10 82 19 1,160 Total Students 1,049 10 82 19 1,160 14-139 04:37:45 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF WASCO Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the City of Wasco during the Previous Five Years Item Number of SFD Units Number of SFA Units Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 227 8 8 243 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step S by School Level Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Ut»ts Matched Hi h School 62 5 1 68 Total Students 62 5 1 68 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step S by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Yeaz Level) Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units A rt. Hi h School 37 3 1 4l Total Students 37 3 1 41 . Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Students Hi h School 99 8 2 109 Total Students 99 8 2 109 Step 9: SGIZs for Units Constructed in the City of Wasco during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA MF Units Units Hi h School 0.4361 1.0000 0.2500 Total SGR 0.4361 1.0000 0.2500 [?!29/99 14-140 04:37:45 PM 1 1 1 1 i 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 EX~IIBIT F STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 14-141 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Beardsley School District, Standard School District, Bakersfield City School District, Fairfax School District, Lamont School District, Greenfield Union School District, Norris School District, Fruitvale School District, Rosedale Union School District, Rio-Bravo Greeley Union School District, Panama-Buena Vista Union School District, and Lakeside Union School District Item Number of Students Number of Elementary School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-5) 43,338 Number of Middle School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 6-8 19,758 Number of Students that could be Matched 63,096 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units I Students I Matched to MH Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 30,768 514 8,651 j 1,044 ~ 40,977 Middle School L 14,809 ~ 211 ~ 3,117 478 18,615 Total Students 45,577 725 11,768 i 1,522 59,592 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students at by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units ~ ~ Students Apport to MH Units ~. Total Students A rt. Elementary School 1,773 ~ 30 498 i 60 2,361 Middle School 909 13 191 I 29 1,143 Total Students 2,682 43 690 I 90 3,504 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students for MH Units Total Students Elementary School 32,541 544 9,149 I 1,104 43,338 Middle School 15,718 224 3,308 I 507 19,758 Total Students 48,259 768 12,458 ~ 1,612 63,096 1'J29/99 14-142 04:56:54 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the City of Bakersfield Item Number of SFD Units Number of SFA Units Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 6,901 0 -1,048 7,949 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Element School 2,692 0 324 3,016 Middle School 1,200 0 133 1 333 Total Students 3,892 0 457 4,349 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 155 0 19 l74 Middle School 74 0 8 82 Total Students 229 0 27 256 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students Elementary School 2,847 0 343 3,190 Middle School 1,274 0 141 1 415 Total Students 4,121 0 484 4,605 Step 9: SG12s for Units Constructed in the City of Bakersfield during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Element School 0.4125 0.0000 0.3273 Middle School 0.1847 0.0000 0.1345 Total SGR 0.5972 0.0000 0.4618 Y 14-143 04:56:54 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Beardsley School District, Standard School District, Bakersfield City School District, Fairfax School District, Lamont School District, Greenfield Union School District, Norris School District, Fruitvale School District, Rosedale Union School District, Rio-Bravo Greeley Union School District, Panama-Buena Vista Union School District, and Lakeside Union School District Item Number of Students Number of Elementary School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-6) 49,932 Number of Junior Hi h School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 7-8 13,164 Number of Students that could be Matched 63,096 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Students Matched to MH Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 35,665 597 9,761 1,187 47,210 Junior Hi h School 9,9]2 128 2,007 335. 12,382 Total Students 45,577 725 11,768 1,522 59,592 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Students Apport. to Apport to MF Units MH Units .. Total Students A rt. Elementary School 2,056 34 563 68 2,722 Junior Hi h School 626 8 127 21 782 Total Students 2,682 43 690 90 3,504 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students for MH Units Total Students Elementary School 37,721 631 10,324 1,255 49,932 Junior Hi hSchool 10,538 136 2,134 356 13,164 Total Students 48,259 768 12,458 1,612 63,096 11J29l99 14-144 04:57:OZ PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the City of Bakersfield Item Number of SFD Units Number of SFA -Units Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 6.901 0 1,048 7,949 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Element School 3,091 0 365 3,456 Junior Hi h School 801 0 92 893 Total Students 3,892 0 457 4,349 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 178 0 21 199 Junior Hi h School 51 0 6 57 Total Students 229 0 27 256 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Uniu Total Students Elementary School 3,269 0 386 3,655 Junior lii School 852 0 98 950 Total Students 4,121 0 484 4,605 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the City of Bakersfield during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School 0.4737 0.0000 0.3683 Junior Hi h School 0.1235 0.0000 0.0935 Total SGR 0.5972 0.0000 0.4618 14-145 04:57:03 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE , IN THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Kern Union High School District Item Number of Students Number of Hi School Students Enrolled in the District 26,747 Number of Students that could be Matched 26,747 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level- Students Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Lcvel SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Matched Hi h School 19 683 235 3 320 634 23 872 Total Students 19,683 235 3,320 634 23,872 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Apport to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units A rt. Hi h School 2,371 28 400 76 2,875 Total Students 2,371 28 400 76 2,875 f Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level Total Total Total Total Students for Students for Studenu for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Students Hi h School 22,OS4 263 3,720 710 26,747 Total Students 22,054 263 3,720 710 26,747 12/29/99 14-146 05:02:33 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the City of Bakersfield during the Previous Five Years Item Number of SFD Units Number of SFA Units Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 6,90] 0 1,048 7,949 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Matched Hi h School 1,158 0 137 1,295 Total Students 1,158 0 137 1,295 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units A rt. Hi h School 139 0 16 155 Total Students 139 0 16 155 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Students Hi h School 1,297 0 153 1,450 Total Students 1,297 0 153 1,450 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the City of Bakersfield during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Hi h School ! 0.1879 0.0000 0.1460 Total SGR I 0.1879 0.0000 0.1460 14-147 05:02:33 PM 1 1 EX~IIBIT G STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR ' THE WEST REGION OF TIC CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ' ~~ II LJ n 1 14-148 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE WEST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be iVlatched in Norris School District, Fruitvale School District, Rosedale Union School District, Rio-Bravo Greeley Union School District, Panama-Buena Vista Union School District, and Lakeside Union School District Item Number of -Students Number of Elementary School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-5) ~~ 13,955 Number of Middle School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 6-8 7,127 Number of Students that could be Matched 21,082 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students I Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Students Matched to MH Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 10,797 293 1,479 273 12,842 Middle School 5,770 131 564 128 6,593 Total Students 16,567 424 2,043 401 19,435 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students ; Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Students Apport to MH Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 936 2~ j 128 24 1,113 Middle School 467 11 46 10 534 Total Students 1,403 36 174 34 1,647 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Leve! School Level Total j Students for ~ SFD Units ! Total i Students for ~ SFA Units I Total Students for MF Units Total Students for MH Units Total Students Elementary School 11,733 i, 318 ~ 1,607 297 13,955 Middle School 6.237 I 142 I 610 138 7,127 Total Students 17,970 460 2,217 435 21,082 14-149 05:11:33 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE WEST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step S: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the West Region of the City of Bakersfield and in the School Districts listed in Step 1 during the Previous Five Years Item Number of SFD Units Number of SFA Units Number of MF Units Total Numbec of Units Total Units 6,082 0 591 6,673 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level .Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Element School 2,260 0 132 2,392 Middle School 1,028 0 62 1090 Total Students 3,288 0 194 3,482 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level ('T'his Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Total Students A rt. Element School 196 0 12 208 Middle School 83 0 5 gg Total Students 279 0 17 296 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students Elemen School 2,456 0 144 2,600 Middle School 1,111 0 67 1,178 Total Students 3,567 0 211 3,778 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the West Region of the City of Bakersfield during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA Units IviF Units Elementary School _ 0.4038 0.0000 0.2~t36 Middle School 0.1827 0.0000 0.1134 Total SGR 0.5865 0.0000 0.370 t v'-'9i`~ 14-150 05:11:34 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE WEST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be. Matched in Norris School District, Fruitvale School District, Rosedale Union School District, Rio-Bravo Greeley Union School District, Panama-Buena Vista Union School District, and Lakeside Union School District Item Number of Students Number of Elementary School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-6) 16,227 Number of Junior Hi h School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 7-8 4,855 Number of Students that could be Matched 21,082 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Students Matched to MH Units Total Students Matched Elementary Schoo] ]2,615 341 1,693 307 14,956 Junior Hi h School 3,952 83 350 94 4,479 Total Students 16,567 424 2,043 I 401 19,435 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Students Apport to MH Units Total ~. Students A rt. Elementary School 1,072 29 144 ~ 26 1,271 Junior Hi h School 332 7 29 8 376 Total Students 1,404 36 173 I 34 1,647 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students for MH Units Total Students Elementary School 13,687 370 1,837 333 16,227 Junior Hi h School 4,284 90 379 102 4,855 Total Students 17,971 460 2,216 435 21,082 14-151 05:11:53 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE WEST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the West Region of the City of Bakersfield and in the School Districts listed in Step 1 during the Previous Five Years Item Number of SFD Units Number of SFA Uni s Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 6,082 0 591 6,673 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Elemen School 2,598 0 150 2,748 Junior Hi h School 690 0 4d 734 Total Students 3,288 0 194 3,482 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 221 0 13 234 Junior Hi h School 58 0 4 62 Total Students 279 0 17 296 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students Element School 2,819 0 163 2,982 Junior Hi h School 748 0 48 796 Total Students 3,567 0 211 3,778 f Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the West Region of the City of Bakersfield during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School 0.4635 0.0000 0.2758 Junior Hi h School 0.1230 0.0000 0.0812 Total SGR 0.5865 0.0000 0.3570 1J29/99 14-152 05:11:53 Pbt ~~:'~ ~ ~~ "~ ~ t STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE WEST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Kern Union High School District Item Number of Students Number of Hi h School Students Enrolled in the District 26,747 Number of Students that could be Matched 26,747 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Matched Hi h School 19,683 235 3 320 634 23 872 Total Students 19,683 235 3,320 634 23,872 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Apport to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units A rt. Hi h School 2,371 28 400 76 2,875 Total Students 2,371 28 400 76 2,875 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level Total Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Students Hi h School 22,054 263 3 720 710 26,747 Total Students 22,054 263 3,720 710 26,747 14-153 05:05:25 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE WEST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the West Region of the City of Bakersfield during the Previous Five Years Item Number of Number of SFD Units SFA Units Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 6,082 0 591 6,673 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Matched Hi h School 991 0 50 1,041 Total Students 991 0 50 1,041 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level ('This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units A rt. Hi h School 119 0 6 125 Total Students 119 0 6 125 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step S by School Level Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Students Hi h School l,l 10 0 56 1,166 Total Students 1,110 0 56 1,166 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the West Region of the City of Bakersfield during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Hi h School 0.1825 0.0000 0.0948 Totai SGR 0.1825 0.0000 0.0948 i t v-'9/`~ 14-154 OS:o5:25 PM EXHIBIT H STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR , THE EAST REGION OF TIC CITY OF BAKERSFIELD 14-155 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE EAST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Beardsley School District, Standard School District, Bakersfield City School District, Fairfax School District, Lamont School Dtstrict, and Greenfield Union School District Item Number of Students Number of Elementary School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-5) 29,383 Number of Middle School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 6-8 12,631 Number of Students that could be Matched 42,014 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Leve! School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Students Matched to MH Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 19,971 221 7,172 771 28,135 Middle School 9,039 80 2,553 350 12,022 Total Students 29,010 301 9,725 1,121 40,157 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students at by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Students Apport to MH Units Total _ Students A n. Element School 886 10 318 34 1,248 Middle School 458 4 129 18 609 Total Students 1,344 14 447 52 1,857 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students for MH Units Total Students Elemen School 20,857 231 7,490 805 29,383 Middle School 9 497 84 2,682 368 12,631 Total Students 30,354 315 10,172 1,173 42,014 t'1'-9/99 14-1 56 05:10:41 PM ~. 1 t f i J 1 t r 12!29/99 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE EAST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the East Region of the City of Bakersfield and in the School Districts 1uted in Step I during the Previous Five Years Item Number of SFD Units Number of SFA Units Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 819 0 437 i ,276 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Taal Students Matched Element School 432 0 192 624 Middle School 172 0 71 243 Total Students 604 0 263 867 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students AppoR. to MF Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School l9 0 9 28 Middle School 9 0 4 13 Total Students 28 0 I 13 41 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students Element School 451 0 201 652 Middle School 181 0 75 256 Total Students 632 0 276 908 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the East Region of the City of Bakersfield during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA ~ MF Units ~ Units Elementary School 0.5507 0.0000 j 0.4398 Middle Schoot 0.2210 0.0000 ! 0.1641 Total SGR 0.7717 0.0000 0.6039 14-157 05:10:41 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE EAST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Beardsley School District, Standard School District, Bakersfield City School District, Fairfax School District, Lamont School District, and Greenfield Union School District Item Number of Students Number of Elementary School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-6) 33,705 Number of Junior Hi h School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 7-8 8.309 Number of Students that could be Matched 42,014 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Students Matched to Matched to MF Units MH Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 23,050 256 8;068 880 32,254 Junior Hi h School 5,960 45 1,657 241 7,903 Total Students 29,010 301 9,725 I 1,121 40,157 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units ~ Students j Apport to MH Units II ~ Total Students A rt. Elementary School 1,037 12 363 ~ 40 1,451 Junior Hi h School 306 2 85 12 406 Total Students 1,343 14 448 52 1,857 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level .School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students for MH Units Total Students Element School 24,087 268 8,431 920 33,705 Junior Hi h School 6,266 47 1,742 253 8,309 Total Students 30,353 315 10,173 1,173 42,0] 4 i?/30/99 14-158 08:34:23 AM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE EAST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the East Region of the City of Bakersfield and in the School Districts listed in Step I during the Previous Five Years Item Number of SFD Units Number of Number of SFA Units MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 819 0 i 457 1,276 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students ( Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Element School 493 ~ 0 215 708 Junior Hi h School 111 i 0 48 159 Total Students 604 I 0 263 867 Step 7: Apportionment of Unratched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) I School Level Students i Apport. to SFD Units ! Students ~ Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 22 0 , 10 32 Junior Hi h School 6 0 I 3 9 Total Students 28 ~ 0 i 13 41 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units ' Total Students for MF Units Total Students Element School 515 0 225 740 Junior Hi h School 117 0 51 168 Total Students 632 I 0 276 908 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the East Region of the City of Bakersfield during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School 0.6288 0.0000 0.4923 Junior Hi h School 0.1429 0.0000 0.1116 Total SGR 0.7717 0.0000 ~ 0.6039 14-159 08:34:2a Atvt STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE EAST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Kern Union High School District Item Number of Students Number of Hi h School Students Enrolled in the District 26,747 Number of Students that could be Matched 26,747 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Matched Hi h School 19 683 235 3,320 634 23 872 Total Students 19,683 235 3,320 634 23,872 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to I Apport to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units I MH Units A rt. Hi h School 2,371 28 400 76 2,875 Total Students 2,371 28 400 76 2,875 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level Total Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for I Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Students Hi h School 22 054 263 3,720 710 26,747 Total Students 22,054 263 3,720 ~ 710 26,747 tv29N9 14-160 05:05:54 Pbt STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE EAST REGION OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the East Region of the City of Bakersfield during the Previous Five Years Item Number of Number of SFD Units SFA Units Number of MF Units Tots! Number of Units Total Units 819 0 457 1,276 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by Schooi Level Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Matched Hi h School 167 0 87 254 Total Students 167 0 87 254 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level ('T'his Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units A rt. Hi h School 20 0 10 30 Total Students 20 0 10 30 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Students Hi h School 187 0 97 284 Total Students 187 0 97 284 r i Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the East Region of the City of Bakersfield during the Previous Five Years School Level I SFD ~ SFA Units Units MF Units Hi h School 0.2283 0.0000 0.2123 Total SGR 0.2283 0.0000 0.2123 14-161 OS:o5:54 PM EXHIBIT I 1 1 i STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR TIC UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN ~' 1 ~~ ~~~ ~. ~~ f ~. 14-162 ~' STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN ` ~ Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Beardsley School District, Standard School District, Bakersfield City School District, Fairfax School District, Lamont School District, Greenfield Union School District, Edison School District, General Shafter School District, Arvin Union School District, Sernitropic School District, Southern Kern Unified School District, Detano Union School District, Pond Union School District, Wasco Union School District, Norris School District, Fruitvale School District, Rosedale Union School District, Rio-Bravo Greeley Union School District, Panama-Buena Vista Union School District, Lakeside Union School District, and Richland-Lerdo School District 1 1 t Item Number of- Students Number of Element School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-5) 55,898 Number of Middle School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 6-8 25,049 Number of Students that could be Matched 80,947 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Students Matched to MH Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 38,773 537 9,937 1,693 50,940 Middle School 18,392 219 3,547 788 22,946 Total Students 57,165 756 13,484 2,481 73,886 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students AppoR. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Students Apport to MH Units Total Students A rt. Element School 3,774 52 967 165 4,958 Middle School 1,686 20 325 72 2,103 Total Students 5,459 72 1,292 237 7,061 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students for MH Units Total Students Elementary School 42,547 589 10,904 1,858 55,898 Middle School 20,078 239 3,872 860 25,049 Total Students 62,624 828 14,776 2,718 80,947 1?l29/99 14-163 05:31:41 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH STH GRADE IN THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the Unincorporated County of Kern Item Number of Number of SFD Units SFA Units • Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 1,625 0 330 1,955 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 714 0 132 846 Middle School 350 0 40 390 Total Students 1,064 0 172 1,236 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) School Level Students Students Apport. to Apport. to SFD Units SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 69 0 13 82 Middle School 33 0 4 37 Total Students 102 0 17 119 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students Element School 783 0 145 928 Middle School 383 0 44 427 Total Students 1,166 0 189 1,355 f Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the Unincorporated County of Kern during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD SFA Units Units MF Units Elementary School 0.481 ~ 0.0000 0.4394 Middle School 0.2358 0.0000 0.1333 Total SGR 0.7176 0.0000 0.5727 t2/2q~gg 14-164 05:31:41 PM ___ ___ STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step I: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Beardsley School District, Standard School District, Bakersfield City School District, Fairfax School District, Lamont School District, Greenfield Union School District, Edtson School District, General Shatter School District, Arvin Union School District, Semitropic School District, Southern Kern Unified School Dutri~t, Delano Union School District, Pond Union School District, Wasco Union School District, Norris School District, Fruitvale School District, Rosedale Union School District, Rio-Bravo Greeley Union School District, Panama-Buena Vista Union School District, Lakeside Union School District, and Richland-Lerdo School District 1 1 1 w 1 1?/29/99 Item Number of Students Number of Element School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-6) 64,290 Number of Junior Hi h School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 7-8 16,657 Number of Students that could be Matched 80,947 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by -Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students I Students Matched to Matched to MF Units MH Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 44,876 621 11,200 1,954 58,651 Junior Hi h School 12,289 135 2,284 527 15,235 Total Students 57,165 756 13,484 ~ 2,481 73,886 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students at by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students I Students Apport. to Apport to MF Units ~ MH Units Total Students A n. Elementary School 4,315 60 1,077 188 5,639 Junior Hi h School 1,147 13 213 49 1,422 Total Students 5,462 72 1,290 ~ 237 7,061 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total I Students for MF Units Total Students for MH Units Total Students Elementary School 49,191 681 12,277 I 2,142 64,290 Junior Hi h School 13,436 148 2,497 576 16,657 Total Students 62,627 828 14,774 2,718 80,947 14-165 05:32:16 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step S: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the Unincorporated County of Kern Item Number of SFD Units . Number of SFA Units Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 1,625 0 330 1,955 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Elemen School 828 0 146 974 Junior Hi School 236 0 26 262 Total Students 1,064 0 172 1,236 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 80 0 14 94 Junior Hi h School 22 0 3 25 Total Students 102 0 17 119 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students Element School 908 0 160 1,068 Junior Hi School 258 0 29 287 Total Students -1,166 0 189 1,355 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the Unincorporated County of Kern during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Elementary School 0.5588 0.0000 0.4848 Junior Hi h School 0.1588 0.0000 0.08'. ~ Total SGR 0.7176 0.0000 0.5727 12/9/99 14-166 05:32:16 PM 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A i~ 1 1 1 12/29/99 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Kern Union High School District, Wasco Union High School District, Delano Joint Union High School District, and Southern Kern Unified School District Item Number of Students Number of High School Students Enrolled in the District 31,893 Number of Hi h School Students Enrolled in the Coun of Tulare 633 Number of Students that could be Matched 31,260 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Uniu SFA Units MF Units MH Units Matched Hi h School 22,685 242 3,609 857 27,393 Total Students 22,685 242 3,609 857 27,393 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Apport to .Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units A rt. Hi h School 3,202 34 509 l21 3,867 Total Students 3,202 34 509 121 ; .3,867 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level Total Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Students Hi h School 25,887 276 4,118 978 31 260 Total Students 25,887 276 4,118 978 31,260 14-167 05:36:13 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the Unincorporated County of Kern during the Previous Five Years Number of Number of Number of Total Number Item SFD Units SFA Units MF Units of Units Total Units 1,769 0 341 2,110 ' ote: Due to the act that DTA rccerved grade 9t throng 12t student cttro ment data or a wi r area an or grades kindergarten through 8th. the number of units in grade 9th through 12th SGR calculation is larger than the number of uniu used in the rades kinder amen throw h 8th SGR calculation. Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Matched Hi h School 383 0 56 439 Total Students n 383 0 , 56 439 Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units A rt. Hi h School 54 0 8 62 Total Students 54 0 8 62 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Students Hi h School 437 0 64 501 Total Students 437 0 64 501 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) Step 9: SGIts for Units Constructed in the Unincorporated County of Kern during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Hi School 0.2470 0.0000 0.1877 Total SGR 0.2470 0.0000 0.1877 14-168 05:36:13 PM 1?/29/99 EX~IIBIT J STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR THE WEST REGION OF THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN t 14-169 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE WEST REGION OF THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Norris School District, Fruitvale School District, Rosedale Union.School District, Rio-Bravo Greeley Union Sc)iool District, Panama-Buena Vista Union School District, Lakeside Union School Dtstrict, and Richland-Lerdo School District Item Number of Students Number of Elementary School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-5) 15,698 Number of Middle School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 6-8 7,836 Number of Students that could be Matched 23,534 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Students Matched to MH Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 12,031 293 1,683 326 14,333 Middle School 6,316 131 631 145 7,223 Taal Students 18,347 424 2,314 471 21,556 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Students Apport to MH Units Total Students A ort. Elementary School 1,146 28 160 31 1,365 Middle School 536 l 1 54 12 613 Total Students 1,682 39 214 43 1,978 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Total Students for Students for MF Units MH Units Total Students Element School 13,177 321 1,843 357 15,698 Middle School 6,852 142 685 157 7,836 Total Students 20,029 463 2,528 514 23,534 ' 14-170 05:33:26 PM 12/_9/99 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE WEST REGION OF THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step S: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the West Region of the Unincorporated County of Kern and in the School Districts listed in Step 1 during the Previous Five Years Item Number of SFD Units Number of SFA Units Number of - MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 739 0 .38 777 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Element School 313 0 12 325 Middle School 140 0 3 143 Total Students 453 0 15 468 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) i~ School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 30 0 1 31 Middle School 12 0 0 - 12 Total Students 42 0 1 43 1 1 i~ i~ 1 1 it Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for . MF Units Total Students Elementary School 343 0 13 356 Middle School 152 0 3 155 Total Students 495 0 16 511 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the West Region of the County of Kern during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA MF Units Units Elementary School 0.4641 0.0000 0.3421 Middle School 0.2057 0.0000 0.0789 Total SGR 0.6698 0.0000 0.4210 14-171 05:33:26 PM !?!29/99 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE WEST REGION OF THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Norris School District, Fruitvale School District, Rosedale Union School District, Rio-Bravo Greeley Union School District, Panama-Buena Vista Union School District, Lakeside Union School District, and Richland-Lerdo School District Item Number of Students Number of Elementary School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-6) 18,225 Number of Junior Hi h School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 7-8 5,309 Number of Students that could be Matched 23,534 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Students Matched to MH Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 14,035 341 1,924 365 16,665 Junior Hioh School 4,312 83 390 106 4,891 Total Students 18,347 424 2,314 471 21,556 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students at by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Students Apport to MH Units ~. Total Students A rt. Elementary School 1,314 32 180 34 1,560 Junior Hi h School 369 7 33 9 418 Total Students 1,682 39 213 43 1,978 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students for MH Units Total Students Element School 15,349 373 2,104 399 18,225 Junior Hi h School 4,681 90 423 1 IS 5,309 Total Students 20,029 463 2,527 514 23,534 14-172 05:34:12 PM l'J29/99 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE WEST REGION OF THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the West Region of the Unincorporated County of Kern and in the School Districts listed in Step 1 during the Previous Five Years . Item Number of SFD Units Number of Number of Total Number SFA Units MF Units of Units Total Units 739 0 38 777 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Element School 358 0 13 371 Junior Hi h School 95 0 2 97 Total Students 453 0 15 468 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students ~ Students Apport. to Apport. to SFA Units MF Units ~ Total Students A rt. Elementary School 34 0 1 35 Junior Hi h School 8 0 0 8 Total Students 42 0 1 43 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Totai Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students Elementary School 392 0 14 406 Junior Hi h School ~ 103 0 2 ~ 105 Total Students 495 0 16 511 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the West Region of the County of Kern during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA MF Units Units Elementary School 0.5304 0.0000 0.3684 Junior Hi h School 0.1394 0.0000 0.0526 Total SGR 0.6698 0.0000 0.4210 14-173 o53a:t2 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE WEST REGION OF THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step Il: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Kern Union High School District Number of Item Students Number of Hi h School Students Enrolled in the District 26,747 Number of Students that could be Matched 26,747 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Matched Hi h School 19,683 235 3,320 634 23,872 Total Students 19,683 235 3,320 634 23,872 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to AppoR. to Apport to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units A rt. Hioh School 2,371 28 400 76 2,875 Total Students 2,371 28 400 76 .2,875 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level Total Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Students Hi h School 22,054 263 3,720 710 26,747 Total Students 22,054 263 3,720 710 26,747 ./ 14-174 05:41:28 PM 1 J29/99 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE WEST REGION OF THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the West Region of the Unincorporated County of Kern and in Kern Union High School District during the Previous Five Years Number of Number of Number of Total Number Item SFD Units SFA Units MF Units of Units Total Units 752 0 42 794 • [Vote: Due to the act that DTA receive gra ug I2 stu ent enro ment to or a wider area an or grades kindcrgarten through 8th, the number of units in grade 9th through 12th SGR calculation is larger than the number of units used in the rades kinder amen throw h 8th SGR calculation. Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Matched Hi h School 152 0 1 153 Total Students l52 0 I 153 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units A rt. Hi h School 18 0 0 18 Total Students 18 0 0 18 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Total Total Total - Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Students Hi h School 170 0 1 171 Total Students 170 0 1 171 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the West Region of the Unincorporated County of Kern during the Previous Five Years SFD School Level Units SFA -__ Units _ _ MF Units Hi h School 0.2261 0.0000 0.0238 Total SGR 0.2261 0.0000 0.0238 14-175 05:41:29 PM EXHIBIT K STUDENT GENERATION RATES FOR TIC EAST REGION OF TIIE UNINCORPORATED COi7NTY OF KERN 14-176 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE EAST REGION OF THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Beardsley School District, Standard School District, Bakersfield City School District, Fairfax School District, Lamont School District, Greenfield Union School District, Edison School District, General Shaffer School District, Arvin Union School District, Semitropic School District, Southern Kern Unified School District, Delano Union School District, Pond Union School School District, and Wasco Union School District Item Number of Students Number of Elementary School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-5) 40,200 Number of Middle School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 6-8 17 213 Number of Students that could be Matched 57,413 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Students Matched to MH Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 26,742 244 8,254 ~ 1,367 36,607 Middle School 12,076 88 2,916 643 15,723 Tota! Students 38,818 332 11,170 2,010 52,330 a Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level '` School Level ~ Students Apport. to SFD-Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Students Apport to - MH Units Total Students -• A ort. Elementary School 2,625 24 810 134 3,593 Middle School ~ 1,144 ~ _ 8 276 61 1,490 Total Students 3,769 32 1,086 195 5,083 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units ~ Total Students for MH Units Total Students Elementary School 29,367 268 9,064 1,501 40,200 Middle School 13,220 96 3,192 704 17,213 Total Students I 42,587 364 12,256 2,205 57,413 14-177 05:29:54 Pht STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE EAST REGION OF THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the East Region of the Unincorporated County of Kern and in the School Districts listed in Step 1 during the Previous Five Years Item Number of SFD Units Number of Number of I Total Number SFA Units MF Units of Units Total Units 886 0 292 I 1,178 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Elementary School 401 0 120 521 Middle School 210 0 37 247 Total Students 611 0 157 768 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level ("This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units Students Apport. to SFA Units Students I~ Total Apport. to ~I Students ~~ A rt. MF Units Elementary School 40 0 _ 12 ~ 52 Middle School r 20 0 4 I 24 Total Students 60 0 16 76 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for ; Total MF Units Students Element School 441 0 132 573 Middle School 230 0 41 271 Total Students 671 0 173 i 844 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the East Region of the County of Kern during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD SFA Units Units MF Units Elementary School 0.4977 0.0000 J.4521 Middle School 0.2596 0.0000 0.1404 Total SGR 0.7573 0.0000 0.5925 1?/29/99 14-178 05:29:54 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE EAST REGION OF THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Beardsley School District, Standard School District Bakersfield City School District, Fairfax School District, Lamont School District, Greenfield Union School District, Edison School District, General Shaffer School District, Arvin Union School District, Semitropic School District, Southern Kern Unified School District, Delano Union School District, Pond Union School School District, and Wasco Union School District Item Number of Students Number of Element School Students Enrolled in the District (Grades K-6) 46,065 Number of Junior Hi h School Students Enrolled in the District Grades 7-8 11 348 Number of Students that could be Matched I 57,413 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Students I Matched to ~ MH Units I Total Students Matched Element School 30,841 280 9,276 1,589 41,986 Junior Hi h School 7,977 52 1,894 421 10,344 Total Students 38,818 332 11,170 2,010 52,330 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students by Unit Type and School Level +- Students Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Apport to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units A rt. Elementary School 2,996 27 901 154 4,079 Junior Hi h School 774 5 184 41 1,004 Total Studenu 3,771 32 1,085 195 5,083 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level Total Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Students Elementary School 33,837 307 10,177 1,743 ~ 46,065 Junior Hi h School 8,751 57 2,078 462 l 1,348 Total Students 42,589 364 12,255 2,205 57,413 ' 14-179 05:30:58 ent l?129/99 STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 8TH GRADE IN THE EAST REGION OF THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the East Region of the Unincorporated County of Kern and in the School Districts listed in Step I during the Previous Five Years Item Number of Number of SFD Units SFA Units Number of MF Units Total Number of Units Total Units 886 0 292 1,178 Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level School Level Students Matched to SFD Units Students Matched to SFA Units Students Matched to MF Units Total Students Matched Elemen School 470 0 133 603 Junior Hi h School 141 0 24 165 Total Students 611 .0 l57 768 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by the Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) School Level Students Apport. to SFD Units I Students Apport. to SFA Units Students Apport. to MF Units Total Students A rt. Elementary School 46 0 13 59 Junior Hi h School 14 0 3 17 Total Students 60 0 16 76 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step S by School Level School Level Total Students for SFD Units Total Students for SFA Units Total Students for MF Units Total Students Element School 516 0 146 662 Junior Hi h School 155 0 27 182 Total Students 671 0 173 844 Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the East Region of the County of Kern during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD I Units SFA Units MF Units Element School 0.5824 ~ 0.0000 0.5000 Junior Hi h School 0.1749 0.0000 0.0925 Total SGR 0.7573 ! 0.0000 0.5925 1 ?J29/99 14-180 05:30:59 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE EAST REGION OF THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step 1: Identify the Total Number of Students that could be Matched in Kern Union High School District, Wazco Union High School District, Delano Joint Union High School District, and Southern Kern Unified School District Item Number of Students Number of High School Students Enrolled in the District 31,893 Number of Hi h School Students Enrolled in the Count of Tulare 633 Number of Students that could be Matched 31,260 Step 2: Number of Students Matched by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Matched Hi h School 22,685 242 3,609 857 27,393 Total Students 22,685 242 3,609 857 27,393 Step 3: Apportionment of Unmatched Students.by Unit Type and School Level Students Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Apport to .Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units A Hi h School 3,202 34 509 121 3,867 Total Students 3,202 34 509 121 3,867 Step 4: Total Students Enrolled by Unit Type and School Level Total Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units MH Units Students Hi h School 25,887 276 4,118 978 31,260 Total Students 25,887 276 4,118 978 31,260 14-181 05:37:12 PM STUDENT GENERATION RATE CALCULATION FOR 9TH THROUGH 12TH GRADE IN THE EAST REGION OF THE UNINCORPORATED COUNTY OF KERN Step 5: Identify the Number of Units that were Constructed in the East Region of the Unincorporated County of Kern during the Previous Five Years Number of Number of Number of Total Number Item SFD Units SFA Units MF Units of Units Total Units 1,017 0 299 1,316 • Note: Due to a act t at TA receive grade through 12th student enro ment to or a wt r area or the number of units in grade 9th through 12th SGR calculation is larger than the h 8 h grades kindergarten throug t , number of units used in the dcs kinder amen throw h 8th SGR calculation. Step 6: Number of Students Matched to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Students Students Students Total Matched to Matched to Matched to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Matched Hi h School 231 0 55 286 Total Students 231 0 55 286 Step 7: Apportionment of Unmatched Students to the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level (This Apportionment is done by weighting the Total Unmatched Students by [he Students Matched at the Districtwide Level to Students Matched at the Five Year Level) Students Students Students Total Apport. to Apport. to Apport. to Students School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units A rt. High School 33 0 8 41 Total Students 33 4 8 41 Step 8: Total Students Enrolled from the Units Identified in Step 5 by School Level Total Total Total Students for Students for Students for Total School Level SFD Units SFA Units MF Units Students Hi h School 264 0 63 327 Total Students 264 0 63 327 v Step 9: SGRs for Units Constructed in the East Region of the Unincorporated County of Kern during the Previous Five Years School Level SFD Units SFA . Units MF Units Hi h School 0.2596 0.0000 0.2107 Total SGR 0.2596 0.0000 0.2107 14-182 05:37:!2 PM I J29/99 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR Res onse to Comment No. 8 Stephen Hartsell, Kern County Superintendent of Schools ' May 17, 2000 ' 8A. Within Section 5.10 of the Final EIR, the schools subsection (existing conditions, impacts and mitigation measures) has been revised as follows: EXISTING CONDITIONS For grades kindergarten through eight, the project sites are within the jurisdiction of the Beardsley School District (BSD) and Fruitvale School District (FSD). For grades nine through 12, the project sites are within jurisdiction of the Kern High School District (KHSD). Table 5.10-1, School Facilities, details the school facilities which would serve the project sites. ' As is evidenced in Table 5.10-1, the elementary and intermediate schools are presently over capacity. In order to meet the existing need, portable classrooms have been located on these school campuses adjacent to the playgrounds. Plans for construction ' of a new school are currently in the early stages of development. Table 5.10-2 ' SCHOOL FACILITIES r-, School Grade Level Maximum Capacity 'Present Enrol{ment Average Class Size North Beardsley Elementary' K - 3 755 786 20 Beardsley Intermediate' 4 - 6 450 517 31 Beardsley Junior High' 7 - 8 525 348 25 Discovery 5choolt K - G 660 651'; North High School2 9-12 2,042 30 F~uitvale~)unior High 5chu~l' 7 - 8 756 641'x ` Centennial High School3 9 - 12 2,147 30 Source: Beardsley School District, f-ruitvale;5choo~ uistnct and Kern t-iign Scnooi uistnct. 1. These schools are located approximately one mile from the project area. 2. Approximately four miles from the project area. 3. Approximately two miles from the project area. Comments and Responses JN 10-100278 14-183 May 24, 2000 1 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR IMPACTS Schools 5.10-3 Pro ject implementation may create the need for additional ~s ~-~i~tt~saf public facilities. Significance: ~ Potentially Significant Impact. ' ' ' 'Government Code Section 65995 is currently 'deemed to ,provide. full and complete mitigation. . , / fi - ~ - r i ' , . i 1 1 1 1 ~I 1 1 ' i i i i Comments and Responses JN 1 0-1 002 78 14-184 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR i~ 1 ~1ifdE Mt~XYnTttlll ~ r~-~`r^e''32ttt ~ " 61t t AYRt~t~7fC ~ ~-1_' CI ass " LZyCi fTT~TT n C ~~ nY~~ TTC3 'l C:' JT LC '. V 2 ~C ~~ ~t ^nn ~ 9 JV Trl ~ 7T76 1 J U ~ 7 ~~ 7GJ ~-`iV '~7 ~ ~~6 TJ Z1tJ 8 t} }"~ 1i~ 198 tTc~ 19~ '~'~i ~ t7 ~} fr2"1- z~- ' Beardsley Schoo) Districf The number of potential :dwelling units within the Beardsley School District is 218'. ' The Kern County Superintendent of Schools identifies a student generation rate per household for Kindergarten through. 8`r' grade of 0.5972 students per household. This would mean 130 new students for-the Beardsley School District. The District has been; ' ~ and continues to be overcrowded especially in grades K=6. Current°overcrowding is exacerbated by,other development taking place in the District. The 130 additional students from'this project cannot be accommodated by adding relocatabledassrooms ' to existing sites. For,example, North Beardsley School already has seven relocatahles on-site and another two will be_added this summer. _ titore classrooms at this site` can only be seen as a temporary measure until ~~ new elementary chool is constructed. ' The District and this project's proponent have been in discussions reg~irding the District's acquisition of a'schoo("site in the project area. The school site would make it possible for the district to construct the new school necessary to accommodate the remaining students vvho would come from this project:. Fruitvale School District The proposed development within the Fruitvale Schoo{`District is ..estimated at`50 ' dwelling units. The'student generation rate,-based upon data from the Kern'County Superintendent of Schools, is 0.5865 per .household... This would' mean 2~)8 new students''for the Fruitvale School District. The project would create :236 K-6 students ' who would create severe ;.overcrowding of Discovery School. Fruitvale Junior High School, with seven re(ocatables already on-site, has a capacity of 756 and a current ' Comments and Responses JN 10-100278 14-185 May 24, 2000 GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR enrollment of 631. 1n isolation, there would appear to be capacity to accommodate the remaining 62 new junior high students, hovvever,'when combined with other development"in the Distrit t, the. cumulative effects would be significant at the j-union ' high level as_ well. The overcrowded status of the District's facilities has _been - recognized by the St~rte Allocation Board which .has determined that the District is eligible;for new construction funding;. at all grade levels; Depending on when these 298 students.. arrive, it is possible that at least some; of them can be accommodated by adding `'relocatables at existing schools. .However, based on current enrollment projections, the district would have to construct at least one new elementaryry school to ' accommodate: students from this project and other students expected to enter districfi schools'`in the future. Kern`High;School District ' , The,Kern High School The total .number of residences, ro osed in this project is 727. p p District student generation rate `per household for grade'9 through 12 is 0..1825.''' This would mean 133 new students for the Kern High School District. The District has been , and continues to be overcrowded. While the districts high schools have .been permitted to go over their capacity in' the short-term by using relocatable classrooms, the overcrowding of specialized classrooms, rest rooms,cafeteria,and athletic faci l ities , .means that this can only.-be seenas an .interim measure until a new high school is built -- toaccommodate students'from this project and otherstudents expected to enterd'istrict schools`'in the future. MITIGATION MEASURES 5.10-3 In accordance with A.B. 2926, the developer shall pay development fees ~-t-~r~ levied in accordance with '__ Education Code Section 17G20 and Government Code Sections 6599'.5, 65995.5:. and 65r3~t5.7". ,_ _ - , 1 1 Comments and Responses , JN 10-100278 14-186 May 24, 2000 _rlHr-cruu l-iun io:ua resldcnr li 1 I T rLt11YlY 1 NU ..~ Tel v~?~- ~..+ :~ .... ' .. ,. .,~ :.':T May 19, 2000 1 J 1 1 1 Stanley C. Grady,. Planning Director City of Bakersfield Development Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 rnn lru. ouu ucruu~iu 1 , VL ~~ ~ ~~ ~weENTEf-ir~RISEB LlC Shdl 6 7cHnco worwJr.e 7r,gairi+r COMMENT NO. 9 Hand Delivered GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT/zONE CHANGE P99-0482; COMMENTS ON DRAFT EIR Dear Mr. Grady: Equilon Enterprises LLC (Equilor~) operates two interconnected petroleum refining facilities located at 6451 Rosedale Highway and 3663 Gibson Street in the Bakersfield area of Kern County. The subject residential development project originally consisted of 530 acres and over 1500 homes located adjacent to Equilon's Gibson Street facility. In January 2000, Equilon purchased approximately 233 acres of the project area located south of the proposed extension of Hageman Road and east of the proposed extension of Mohawk Street. Since that time, the applicant has reduced the scope of the proposed residential development to areas north of Hageman Road end Vy~S1 of Mohawk Street. According to the original project description and the draft EIR, the proposed alignment for Landco Road is adjacent to the Equilon's petroleum products tank farm at the Gibson Street facility. As expressed during the public hearing for the subject EIR on May 4, 2000, Equilon staff are concerned about the proposed alignment of Landco Road. This tank farm stores a variety of petroleum products. including coker feed, heavy and light coker gas oils, and coker naphtha. An automobile on a public street adjacent to this tank farm poses a danger to the driver, the facility, and the community as a potential source of ignition of any vapor that could be unexpectedly released to the atmosphere from a tank, pipeline, or process unit. As a result of the recent changes to the scope of the residential development, Equilon staff understand the City of Bakersfield will only require the applicant to complete Landco Road from Hageman Road to Olive Drive. The responsibility to construct the remainder of Landco Road from Hageman Road south to Rosedale Highway would fall upon the current or future landowners as a condition of future development. ' 14-187 9A Bakcrs[ield Rcrlning Company e Division or Hqulron EnMrpriscs, LLC P.O. Box 1476 Bakersfield. CA 93302.147E __ __ _ f1HY-L~-UU f1UN 1 b~ 1 U L 1 I Y YLHNN 1 NU h H1S NU. Z3U5 U~ t ub4b r. u~ Mr. Stanley Grady ~ page 2 May 19, 2000 Even though we understand that the EIR did not address the issue of the future development of Landco Road (this was confirmed by Planning Dept. Staff at the May 4'" , Planning Commission meeting), we feel that as the current landowner, Equilon must express an objection to the prapased ;alignment of (.andco Drive a$ described by the 9A draft EIR. By this letter, Equilon reserves the right to negotiate the future alignment with ' the City of Bakersfield, the County of Kem, and other nearby property owners to prgvide a safe distance between the extension of Landco Road and Equilon's tank farm. If you should have any questions, please contact Mr. Steven D. Overman at 661-326 4351. V Sincerely, (JlJ ~ - ~cJ !~'~ Saw W. T. (Tom) Purves ~ l C: Kern County Fire Dept. -Phil Castle Bakersfield Fire Dept. -Jim Shapazian Kern County Environmental Health Services Oept. -Dart Starkey ~, Kern County Planning Dept. -- Ted James !, Kyle Carter Homes -Kyle Carter i San Joaquin RRwming Company, Inc. - Majid Mojibi Klein DeNatale and Goldner -Thomas C. Fallgatter ' SDO/ i 14-188 I ,% . GPA/ZC P99-0482 PROGRAM EIR ' mment No. 9 Response to Co W.T. (Tom) Purves, Equilon Enterprises ' May 19, 2000 ' 9A. Refer to Response to Comment No. 3A. i t ^ Comments and Responses JN 10-100278 14-189 May 24, 2000