Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpactsWest Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-1 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc SECTION 6: CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 6.1 - CEQA Requirements Section 15310 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that the EIR discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the incremental effects of a project are cumulatively considerable. Cumulative impacts are defined as an impact that is created as a result of the combination of the project evaluated in the EIR together with other projects causing related impacts. Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects. According to the State CEQA Guidelines, elements considered necessary to provide an adequate discussion of cumulative impacts of a project include either: (1) list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts; or (2) a summary of projection contained in an adopted General Plan or related planning document which is designed to evaluate regional or area-wide conditions. 6.2 - Cumulative Impact Setting The cumulative analysis discussed in this section depends on the environmental component that is analyzed. The cumulative analysis for Transportation and Traffic and Noise assume development in accordance with an annual growth rate for the southwest Bakersfield area. Average rates were developed based on a review of historical growth rates and the Kern County Council of Governments (KernCOG) TPPLUS traffic model data for the Year 2030, and these rates were used to determine volumes for the Year 2015. The cumulative analysis for Air Quality includes various types of analysis. These include local evaluations for PM10 and odor, one-mile radius for hazardous air pollutants, and regional evaluations (i.e., traffic study area) for criteria pollutants. The cumulative analysis for Agricultural Resources, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Public Services, Recreation, and Utilities and Service Systems is based on a list of cumulative projects. A list of cumulative projects within the City and County is contained in Appendix O of this EIR. 6.3 - Cumulative Impact Analysis 6.3.1 - Agricultural Resources Impact 6.3.1.A The proposed project will contribute to a significant impact to agricultural resources that is considered cumulatively considerable. According to the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, a substantial conversion of prime agricultural land to urban uses have occurred in recent years and is anticipated to continue with the future implementation of the land uses in the Metropolitan Bakersfield area. The proposed project Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-2 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc and future development within the Metropolitan Bakersfield area will continue to convert prime farmland to non-agricultural uses. The proposed project will convert 2,182 acres of prime farmland to non-agricultural use, and this impact to agricultural resources is considered cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures No feasible mitigation measures are available at this time that would reduce the impacts to less than significant. Level of Significance After Mitigation Significant and unavoidable adverse impact. 6.3.2 - Air Quality The cumulative analysis is based, in part, on a quantitative analysis of projects in the vicinity of the proposed project, and is supplemented with the State of California Department of Finance population projections, and an analysis of data utilized by the Kern Council of Governments’ (Kern COG) adopted regional growth forecast used for the regional air quality conformity analysis required by the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA). The nearby project analysis (traffic affected analysis) quantifies operational project impacts along with all identified projects in the vicinity of the project site for comparison with San Joaquin Valley Air Basin and the basin’s Kern County portion totals for NOx and ROG. The Kern COG analysis confirms whether the proposed project, when added to existing and proposed development and compared with local and regional growth forecasts, are in line with those forecasts, and therefore, in conformance with SIP emission budgets or baseline emissions for NOx, ROG, CO and PM10. Along with CO “Hot Spot” analysis, TACs, visibility and odor, the combined analyses provide a detailed description of the project’s overall contribution to the cumulative impact on air quality. The Air Quality Impact Assessment considered the affects of the proposed project with the cumulative impacts of growth in the area. The Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts under CEQA defines cumulative impacts as two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts. The document also states “any proposed project that would individually have a significant air quality impact… would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. Impacts of local pollutants (CO, TACs) are cumulatively significant when modeling shows that the combined emissions from the project and other existing and planned projects will exceed air quality standards.” If a project related air quality impact is individually less than significant, the impacts of reasonably anticipated future activities, probable future projects and past projects are included based on similar air quality impacts, transport considerations and geographic location. West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-3 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Criteria Pollutants Impact 6.3.2.A: The project would contribute to a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Regional Analysis An analysis of the existing and proposed projects within an area identified in the traffic study where roadway segments and intersections will require improvements due to project-generated traffic was conducted. The projects identified were determined based on cumulative project information obtained from City and County planning personnel. Thirty-five proposed residential development, four mixed use, and twenty-four commercial projects have been identified and modeled using the URBEMIS 2002 Version 8.7 computer model to predict cumulative impacts. A build-out rate of 4 dwelling units a month was applied for each other identified project when no other information was available. Emissions for the operational phase of the proposed projects were based on housing lot totals and commercial square feet totals provided by the City of Bakersfield Planning Department and the Kern County Planning Departments. The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin has been designated as a non-attainment area for the ozone standards, both federal and state. A quantitative modeling analysis was conducted to address potential cumulative criteria pollutant impacts in the project area. The modeling approach employed is consistent with federal, state and District guidance for considering the impacts from industrial facilities. Under federal modeling guidance, “nearby” sources are considered to determine cumulative ambient impacts. The federal Guideline on Air Quality Models defines a “nearby” source as any source expected to cause a significant concentration gradient (net increase) in the vicinity of the proposed new source. Vicinity is defined as the “impact area,” which is a circular area with a radius extending from the source to the most distant point where the model predicts an impact in excess of the significance threshold. Under federal guidance, no additional modeling would be required if the maximum impacts do not exceed the significance threshold. The cumulative impact from surrounding sources was taken into consideration by adding the highest background value for the project area during the last three years to the modeled impacts. The highest value from any of these stations over the past three years was taken as the background concentration. Potential cumulative impacts from the proposed project were predicted using the U.S. EPA Industrial Source Complex Short Term Version 3 (ISCST3) atmospheric dispersion model. The ISCST3 model is appropriate for modeling the potential impacts of area sources, such as fugitive dust sources, in simple (i.e., flat) and complex (i.e., hilly) terrain. Regulatory default model control parameters were utilized. The maximum predicted total impacts were compared to the California and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS and NAAQS). The cumulative results show that total impacts (i.e., Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-4 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc modeled maximum cumulative impacts plus highest background values) of all the criteria pollutants are below the applicable state and federal standards, with exception of PM10 (216.6% of the 24-hour standard and 224.1% of the annual standard) and PM2.5 (106.5% of the 24-hour standard and 154.2% of the annual standard). Therefore, cumulative impacts of the other criteria pollutants from stationary sources are considered less than significant within the one-mile and six-mile radius. The cumulative impacts of PM10 and PM2.5 are considered significant within the one-mile and six-mile radius. In addition to the cumulative analysis that assumes full project buildout, an analysis of an intermediate year (i.e., 2015, when the project site has most of the commercial and industrial sources built out) was conducted. Therefore, all of the final year stationary sources were included in the intermediate year model. In addition, the construction equipment required to build out the various uses onsite were included in the model. The construction equipment included: 4 rough terrain forklifts, 4 skid steer loaders, 4 rubber tired loaders, 4 water trucks, a grader, a dump truck, a paver, one piece of paving equipment, and 2 rollers. In addition, two 20-acre area sources were modeled to represent fugitive dust emissions from grading activities that could be occurring. The construction equipment was placed around the project site based on the land uses throughout the site. This created a very conservative stationary source model. The maximum predicted total impacts were compared to the California and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS and NAAQS). The cumulative results for intermediate year 2015 show that the total impacts (i.e., modeled maximum project impacts for intermediate year 2015 plus highest background values) of all the criteria pollutants are below the applicable state and federal standards, with exception of PM10 (259.4% of the 24-hour standard) and PM2.5 (124.8% of the 24-hour standard and 159.2% of the annual standard). Therefore, the impacts of the other criteria pollutants from stationary sources are considered less than significant within the one-mile and six-mile radius. The cumulative impacts of PM10 and PM2.5 are considered significant. As shown above and based on the projects emission identified in Section 5.2, the projects contribution to cumulative PM10 and PM2.5 emission levels is considered cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implementation of mitigation measures 5.2.C.1 and 5.2.C.2 required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. Operational Emissions Impact 6.3.2.B: The operation of the project and cumulative development would contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation resulting in emissions that violate air quality standards or conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Air Quality Management Plan. Implementation of the proposed project along with future development would result in a substantial increase in emissions within the Air Basin. When project emissions are added to future development West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-5 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc emissions, a total of 253.22 tons per year (tpy) of ROG, 205.86 tpy of NOx, 3,798.54 tpy of CO, 206.3 tpy of PM10 and 4.37 tpy of Sox would be generated. As described in Section 5.2, the proposed project would result in a significant increase in ROG, NOx, and PM10 emissions. Therefore, the project’s contribution to the cumulative impact on air quality is considered cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implementation of mitigation measures 5.2.C.1 and 5.2.C.2 required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. Public Health/Hazards Impact 6.3.2.C: Cumulative development would not contribute substantial pollutant concentrations to exposed sensitive receptors. . Toxic Air Contaminants Cumulative analysis for Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs), or Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) focused on local impacts on sensitive receptors. The District recommends screening a radius of 1 mile for TAC cumulative impacts. According to the Air Quality Assessment in Appendix C of this Draft EIR, no further industrial-zoned acreage exists within the project site one-mile radius; therefore, the cumulative health risk is the same as the project’s direct health risk. As previously discussed in Section 5.2 - Air Quality under Impact 5.2-4, modeling was performed for all TACs estimated to be emitted from the proposed project with HARP. This modeling demonstrated that at the maximum point of impact at the nearest fence line, and at the proposed location of the schools, the health based standards were not exceeded. Therefore, cumulative health risk impacts are considered to be less than significant. Carbon Monoxide Impacts The cumulative carbon monoxide impacts are accounted for in the CO “Hot Spot” screening analysis described earlier in Section 5.2 - Air Quality under Impact 5.2-4. As previously discussed in Section 5.2 - Air Quality under Impact 5.2-4, modeling was conducted to determine the impact of the mobile sources in accordance with the CO “Hot Spots” model, CALINE 4. The results are shown in Table 5.3-18 in Section 5.2 - Air Quality under Impact 5.2-4, and do not equal or exceed the standards. Therefore, cumulative CO impacts are considered to be less than significant. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-6 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Visibility Impacts Impact 6.3.2.D: Cumulative development would contribute to visibility impacts. According to the Air Quality Assessment in Appendix C of this Draft EIR, the threshold for California Standard-based visibility is correlated to the standard Extinction Coefficient of 0.23 per kilometer. This equates to 90 µg/m3 of PM10. The maximum modeled PM10 cumulative impact of 108.08 µg/m3 (as shown on Table 7.1-5 in the Air Quality Assessment in Appendix C of this Draft EIR) is over 90 µg/m3. This is due to the background concentration (104.3 µg/m3) exceeding the 90 µg/m3. Since cumulative development will contribute PM10 to an air basin that is in non-attainment of PM10, development of the cumulative projects, including the proposed project would result in a significant visibility impact. The project’s contribution to the cumulative visibility impact is considered cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implementation of mitigation measures 5.2.C.1 and 5.2.C.2 are required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. Odor Impacts Impact 6.3.2.E: The project may potentially contribute substantial objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. . According to the Air Quality Assessment in Appendix C of this Draft EIR, cumulative analysis for odors focused on local impacts on sensitive receptors; therefore, cumulative odor impacts are the same as the project’s direct odor impacts. As previously discussed in Section 5.2 - Air Quality under Impact 5.2-5, odor assessments in accordance with GAMAQI were conducted and no odor complaints were found. Modeling was conducted through ISCST3 for individual odor producing chemicals that may be emitted from the proposed project. The results are contained in Table 5.3-19 in Section 5.2 - Air Quality under Impact 5.2-5. The odor thresholds are not met or exceeded for the operational phase. Therefore, cumulative odor impacts are considered to be less than significant, and the projects contribution to cumulative odor impacts in not considered cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures No additional mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-7 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc 6.3.3 - Biological Resources Impact 6.3.3.A: The proposed project will contribute to a significant impact to biological resources that is considered cumulatively considerable. . Implementation of the proposed project, in conjunction with future development associated with the General Plan buildout, would contribute to the loss of habitat in the region, resulting in a decline of biological resources and species diversity. The proposed project would not result in the loss of sensitive habitat or plant species. However, since the San Joaquin kit fox and burrowing owl are known to exist in the general area, implementation of the proposed project as well as future development associated with General Plan buildout could result in a significant cumulative impact on this species. Since the proposed project could result in significant impacts on these species, the project’s impact to biological resources is considered cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implementation of mitigation measures 5.3.A.1 through 5.3.A.4 is required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. 6.3.4 - Cultural Resources Impact 6.3.4.A: The proposed project will contribute to a significant impact to cultural resources that is considered cumulatively considerable. The proposed project and future projects associated with General Plan buildout are located in an area known to contain cultural resources. The record search conducted for the proposed project identified a substantial number of cultural sites in the project vicinity. The project site previously contained 10 archaeological sites and 19 isolates. Therefore, implementation of the project and other projects could potentially result in significant cumulative impacts to cultural resources. The project’s contribution to potential cumulative impacts on cultural resources is considered cumulatively considerable; and therefore, significant. Mitigation Measures Implementation of mitigation measures 5.4.A,1, 5.4.C.1, and 5.4.D.1 is required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. 6.3.5 - Geology and Soils Impact 6.3.5.A: The proposed project will result in liquefaction and erosion impacts; however, the project’s contribution to these impacts are considered less than cumulatively considerable. . Soils and geologic influences are site specific and there is little, if any cumulative relationship between the development of the proposed project and development within the greater cumulative project area. For instance, development at the project site will not result in altering geologic events or Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-8 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc soil features/characteristics, such as groundshaking, seismic intensity, or soil expansion; therefore, development at the project site will not affect the level of intensity at which a seismic event on an adjacent site is experienced. However, future development within the project site and the project area may expose future populations on the project site to liquefaction and erosion impacts; however, these potential impacts would not be cumulatively considerable and therefore less than significant. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. 6.3.6 - Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impact 6.3.6.A: The proposed project will contribute to a cumulative increase in the use of hazardous materials in the project vicinity; however, the proposed project and cumulative projects would result in a less than significant cumulative impact related to hazardous materials. . The presence of hazardous materials associated with the past onsite oil production and agricultural activities as well as the future potential storage and use of hazardous materials associated with the proposed project may result in public health issues; however, these potential issues are considered site-specific. The proposed project could cumulatively increase the use and storage of hazardous materials in the project vicinity as development intensifies on the site. Implementation of the proposed project as well as other future projects in the vicinity could use a variety of hazardous materials; however, all hazardous materials would be required to be stored and used in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Adherence to the applicable laws and regulations would minimize the potential cumulative health hazards to less than significant. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. 6.3.7 - Hydrology and Water Quality Impact 6.3.7.A: The proposed project will increase drainage and degrade surface water quality; however, the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. . The implementation of the proposed project and other future projects could increase the degradation of surface water quality during construction and operational activities. The construction activities on the project site could result in runoff to the Kern River and may contribute cumulatively with potential runoff from other projects. The project’s potential contribution to surface water quality degradation is considered cumulatively considerable. West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-9 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Mitigation Measures Implementation of mitigation measure 5.7.A.1 is required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. Impact 6.3.7.B: The proposed project includes housing and potentially other structures within an area currently designated as a 100-year flood hazard area. The project’s contribution to cumulative flooding impacts would be considered cumulatively considerable. . The project’s potential flooding impact is considered site specific and would not cumulatively add to future flooding in other areas of Metropolitan Bakersfield. As additional development occurs in the vicinity of the Kern River, there may be more housing and people proposed to reside in areas that are currently subject to flooding from 100-year flood events. Therefore, the project’s contribution of increasing potential flooding impacts is considered cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implementation of mitigation measure 5.7.F.1 is required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. 6.3.8 - Noise Impact 6.3.8.A: The proposed project would contribute to cumulative noise levels offsite that would expose land uses to noise levels that exceed the established City of Bakersfield noise thresholds. . Implementation of the proposed project would result in the generation of traffic that would increase noise levels in areas off of the project site. The cumulative noise levels were based on the cumulative traffic volumes identified in the Traffic Report that is located in Appendix L. The City of Bakersfield Noise Element identifies the standards for cumulative noise impacts for mobile sources. These standards are as follows: The project’s contribution to noise increase would normally be considered cumulatively considerable and considered significant when ambient noise levels affect noise sensitive land uses (receptors) and when the following occurs. • A project increases the ambient (cumulative without project) noise level by 1 dB or more; and • The cumulative with project noise level cause the following • An increase of the existing ambient noise level by 5 dB or more, where the existing ambient level is less than 60 dB CNEL; • An increase of the existing ambient noise level by 3 dB or more, where the existing ambient level is 60 to 65 dB CNEL; Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-10 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc • An increase on the existing ambient noise level by 1.5 dB or more, where the existing ambient level is greater 65 dB CNEL. Future noise impacts to the surrounding area were derived through the use of the TNM Model. These future noise levels were calculated for the years 2015 and 2030. Table 6-1 shows that the cumulative noise levels for the year 2015. As shown in Table 6-1, the proposed project’s contribution to the cumulative noise increase along five roadway segments of Buena Vista Road would be considered cumulatively considerable. Table 6-1: Year 2015 Cumulative Off Site Noise Analysis CNEL, dB Roadway Segment 2004 No Project 2015 With Project Chg. 2015 No Project 2015 With Project Chg. Cumulatively Significant? West of Heath — 43.3 — 42.7 43.3 0.6 No Heath to Renfro — 49.8 — 49.5 49.8 0.3 No Renfro to Jenkins 46.7 51.6 4.9 51.6 51.6 0.0 No Jenkins to Allen 52.3 54.0 1.7 54.0 54.0 0.0 No Hageman Road Allen to Calloway 56.3 58.5 2.2 58.5 58.5 0.0 No Enos to Nord 61.6 62.9 1.3 62.9 62.9 0.0 No Nord to Heath 62.3 64.0 1.7 63.9 64.0 0.1 No Heath to Renfro 63.4 63.9 0.5 63.8 63.9 0.1 No Renfro to Jenkins 57.4 57.6 0.2 57.6 57.6 0.0 No Jenkins to Allen 58.4 57.8 -0.6 57.8 57.8 0.0 No Allen to Jewetta 60.5 60.9 0.4 60.9 60.9 0.0 No Jewetta to Calloway 61.3 61.8 0.5 61.8 61.8 0.0 No Rosedale Highway Calloway to Coffee 62.7 63.7 1.0 63.7 63.7 0.0 No Renfro to Jenkins 55.9 58.6 2.7 58.6 58.6 0.0 No Jenkins to Allen 58.5 60.5 2.0 60.5 60.5 0.0 No Allen to Jewetta 54.7 54.7 0.0 54.6 54.7 0.1 No Jewetta to Calloway 57.8 59.2 1.4 59.2 59.2 0.0 No Brimhall Road Calloway to Coffee 59.4 60.6 1.2 60.4 60.6 0.2 No West of Enos 60.4 62.7 2.3 62.7 62.7 0.0 No Enos to Nord 56.1 59.1 3.0 59.0 59.1 0.1 No Nord to Wegis 56.7 59.9 3.2 59.8 59.9 0.1 No Wegis to Heath 57.7 60.1 2.4 60.0 60.1 0.1 No Heath to Renfro 58.0 55.4 -2.6 55.4 55.4 0.0 No Stockdale Highway Renfro to Allen 61.4 59.6 -1.8 59.6 59.6 0.0 No West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-11 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Table 6-1 (Cont.): Year 2015 Cumulative Off Site Noise Analysis CNEL, dB Roadway Segment 2004 No Project 2015 With Project Chg. 2015 No Project 2015 With Project Chg. Cumulatively Significant? Allen to Buena Vista 60.9 60.4 -0.5 60.4 60.4 0.0 No Buena Vista to Old River 59.1 62.2 3.1 61.3 62.2 0.9 No Old River to Gosford 61.0 61.8 0.8 61.5 61.8 0.3 No Gosford to Ashe 62.1 62.8 0.7 62.7 62.8 0.1 No Ashe to New Stine 62.7 63.3 0.6 63.2 63.3 0.1 No East of New Stine 67.3 68.3 1.0 68.3 68.3 0.0 No West Beltway to Ming Project Entrance — 59.7 — 58.2 59.7 1.5 No Ming Project Entrance to South Allen — 57.6 — 53.2 57.6 4.4 No South Allen to Buena Vista — 57.8 — 56.2 57.8 1.6 No Buena Vista to Old River 57.6 61.6 4.0 60.7 61.6 0.9 No Old River to Gosford 61.3 63.4 2.1 63.0 63.4 0.4 No Gosford to Ashe 62.2 63.6 1.4 63.4 63.6 0.2 No Ashe to New Stine 64.1 65.0 0.9 64.9 65.0 0.1 No New Stine to “Old” Stine 63.4 64.1 0.7 63.9 64.1 0.2 No “Old” Stine to Real 63.4 64.1 0.7 64.1 64.1 0.1 No Real to Wible 63.4 63.9 0.5 63.8 63.9 0.1 No Ming Avenue East of Wible 61.9 63.1 1.2 63.0 63.1 0.1 No West Beltway to South Allen — 62.3 — 61.4 62.3 0.9 No South Allen to East White Project Entrance — 58.1 — 57.6 58.1 0.5 No East White Entrance to Buena Vista — 58.1 — 57.6 58.1 0.5 No Buena Vista to Old River 57.2 60.2 3.0 59.2 60.2 1.0 No White Lane Old River to Gosford 59.8 62.4 2.6 61.9 62.4 0.5 No Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-12 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Table 6-1 (Cont.): Year 2015 Cumulative Off Site Noise Analysis CNEL, dB Roadway Segment 2004 No Project 2015 With Project Chg. 2015 No Project 2015 With Project Chg. Cumulatively Significant? Gosford to Ashe 62.0 63.8 1.8 63.7 63.8 0.1 No Ashe to Stine 62.0 63.4 1.4 63.3 63.4 0.1 No Stine to Wible 63.6 64.4 0.8 64.3 64.4 0.1 No Wible to SB 99 Ramps 62.7 64.4 1.7 64.4 64.4 0.0 No SB 99 Ramps to NB 99 Ramps 61.6 62.2 0.6 62.1 62.2 0.1 No NB 99 Ramps to South “H” 60.1 61.3 1.2 61.3 61.3 0.1 No West of Buena Vista 57.1 65.3 8.2 65.3 65.3 0.0 No Buena Vista to Old River 53.5 65.9 12.4 65.9 65.9 0.0 No Old River to Gosford 54.1 65.9 11.8 65.9 65.9 0.0 No Gosford to Ashe 54.1 62.4 8.3 62.3 62.4 0.1 No Ashe to Stine 56.5 62.5 6.0 62.4 62.5 0.1 No Stine to Wible 58.0 63.1 5.1 63.1 63.1 0.0 No Wible to SB 99 Ramps 59.8 63.4 3.6 63.4 63.4 0.0 No SB 99 Ramps to NB 99 Ramps 59.7 61.9 2.2 61.9 61.9 0.0 No Panama Lane East of NB 99 Ramps 59.6 62.2 2.6 62.2 62.2 0.0 No West of Buena Vista 59.3 63.6 4.3 63.6 63.6 0.0 No Buena Vista to Old River 59.7 64.3 4.6 64.3 64.3 0.0 No Old River to Gosford 61.7 63.7 2.0 63.7 63.7 0.0 No Taft Highway Gosford to Ashe 59.1 63.9 4.8 63.9 63.9 0.0 No North of Rosedale 62.5 63.9 1.4 63.9 63.9 0.0 No Rosedale to Brimhall 57.7 60.2 2.5 60.2 60.2 0.0 No Brimhall to Stockdale 57.7 60.2 2.5 60.2 60.2 0.0 No Enos Lane South of Stockdale 57.7 61.3 3.6 61.3 61.3 0.0 No West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-13 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Table 6-1 (Cont.): Year 2015 Cumulative Off Site Noise Analysis CNEL, dB Roadway Segment 2004 No Project 2015 With Project Chg. 2015 No Project 2015 With Project Chg. Cumulatively Significant? North of Rosedale 48.7 52.1 3.4 52.1 52.1 0.0 No Rosedale to Brimhall 57.4 55.0 -2.4 55.0 55.0 0.0 No Nord Road Brimhall to Stockdale 56.1 53.8 -2.3 53.8 53.8 0.0 No North of Hageman 48.7 50.5 1.8 50.5 50.5 0.0 No Hageman to Rosedale 48.7 47.3 -1.4 47.3 47.3 0.0 No Rosedale to Brimhall 57.4 57.2 -0.2 57.2 57.2 0.0 No Heath Road Brimhall to Stockdale 56.8 58.8 2.0 58.7 58.8 0.1 No North of Hageman 50.4 58.5 8.1 58.3 58.5 0.2 No Hageman to Rosedale 53.5 57.9 4.4 57.9 57.9 0.0 No Rosedale to Brimhall 57.1 58.2 1.1 58.2 58.2 0.0 No Renfro Road Brimhall to Stockdale 51.7 57.2 5.5 57.2 57.2 0.0 No Hageman to Rosedale 50.4 54.1 3.7 54.1 54.1 0.0 No Jenkins Road Rosedale to Brimhall 51.3 53.2 1.9 53.2 53.2 0.0 No North of Hageman 49.4 51.9 2.5 51.8 51.9 0.1 No Hageman to Rosedale 55.3 60.3 5.0 60.2 60.3 0.1 No Rosedale to Brimhall 55.7 59.9 4.2 59.7 59.9 0.2 No Brimhall to Westside Pwy WB Ramps 55.9 60.7 4.8 60.6 60.7 0.1 No WSP WB Ramps to WSP EB Ramps 55.9 60.9 5.0 60.5 60.9 0.4 No WSP EB Ramps to Stockdale Hwy 55.9 61.3 5.4 60.4 61.3 0.9 No Allen Road Stockdale to Ming 56.1 60.5 4.4 59.0 60.5 1.5 No Ming to Chamber — 64.6 — 62.7 64.6 1.9 No Chamber to White — 65.0 — 62.7 65.0 2.3 No South Allen Road White to Campus Park — 65.8 — 64.2 65.8 1.6 No Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-14 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Table 6-1 (Cont.): Year 2015 Cumulative Off Site Noise Analysis CNEL, dB Roadway Segment 2004 No Project 2015 With Project Chg. 2015 No Project 2015 With Project Chg. Cumulatively Significant? North of Hageman 53.6 56.5 2.9 56.5 56.5 0.0 No Hageman to Rosedale 54.7 56.8 2.1 56.7 56.8 0.1 No Rosedale to Brimhall 53.7 56.4 2.7 56.3 56.4 0.1 No Brimhall to Stockdale 54.0 55.1 1.1 54.4 55.1 0.7 No Ming to Chamber 52.4 61.4 9.0 59.8 61.4 1.6 Yes Chamber to White 52.4 61.2 8.8 59.9 61.2 1.4 Yes White to Campus Park 52.1 61.1 9.0 58.5 61.1 2.6 Yes Campus Park to South Proj Entrance 52.1 59.9 7.8 58.5 59.9 1.4 Yes South Proj Entrance to Panama Ln 52.1 59.6 7.5 58.6 59.6 1.0 Yes Panama Ln to McCutchen 48.1 59.5 11.4 59.4 59.5 0.1 No Jewetta Avenue McCutchen to Taft Hwy 48.1 54.8 6.7 54.6 54.8 0.2 No North of Hageman 49.1 59.7 10.6 59.7 59.7 0.0 No Hageman to Rosedale 59.8 62.4 2.6 62.3 62.4 0.1 No Rosedale to Brimhall 59.4 62.3 2.9 62.2 62.3 0.1 No Brimhall to Westside Pkwy WB Ramps 59.5 62.9 3.4 62.8 62.9 0.1 No WSP WB Ramps to WSP EB Ramps 59.5 63.4 3.9 63.2 63.4 0.2 No Calloway Drive WSP EB Ramps to Stockdale Hwy 59.5 64.3 4.8 64.0 64.3 0.3 No West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-15 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Table 6-1 (Cont.): Year 2015 Cumulative Off Site Noise Analysis CNEL, dB Roadway Segment 2004 No Project 2015 With Project Chg. 2015 No Project 2015 With Project Chg. Cumulatively Significant? Stockdale to Ming 58.9 62.4 3.5 62.4 62.4 0.0 No Ming to White 60.7 63.2 2.5 63.2 63.2 0.0 No White to Pacheco 60.4 59.8 -0.6 59.8 59.8 0.0 No Pacheco to Panama — ` — 56.3 56.3 0.0 No Panama to McCutchen 40.7 55.6 14.9 55.3 55.6 0.3 No McCutchen to Taft Hwy 40.7 53.9 13.2 53.4 53.9 0.5 No Old River Road South of Taft Hwy 54.0 58.0 4.0 57.9 58.0 0.1 No North of Rosedale 64.7 67.0 2.3 67.0 67.0 0.0 No Rosedale to Brimhall 61.8 63.5 1.7 63.4 63.5 0.1 No Brimhall to Westside Pkwy WB Ramps 68.6 69.8 1.2 69.8 69.8 0.0 No WSP WB Ramps to WSP EB Ramps 68.6 70.1 1.5 70.1 70.1 0.0 No WSP EB Ramps to Stockdale Hwy 68.6 70.3 1.7 70.3 70.3 0.0 No Ming to White 60.1 62.7 2.6 62.7 62.7 0.0 No White to Pacheco 58.5 63.1 4.6 63.1 63.1 0.0 No Pacheco to Harris 57.3 62.1 4.8 61.7 62.1 0.4 No Harris to Panama 56.0 61.1 5.1 60.7 61.1 0.4 No Panama to McCutchen 54.2 60.7 6.5 60.6 60.7 0.1 No Coffee Road McCutchen to Taft 54.2 57.5 3.3 57.3 57.5 0.1 No Stockdale to Ming 54.3 55.3 1.0 55.3 55.3 0.0 No Ming to White 58.7 59.9 1.2 59.9 59.9 0.0 No Ashe White to Panama 56.9 59.6 2.7 59.6 59.6 0.0 No Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-16 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Table 6-1 (Cont.): Year 2015 Cumulative Off Site Noise Analysis CNEL, dB Roadway Segment 2004 No Project 2015 With Project Chg. 2015 No Project 2015 With Project Chg. Cumulatively Significant? Panama to McCutchen 45.7 58.9 13.2 58.9 58.9 0.0 No McCutchen to Taft 45.7 56.4 10.7 57.3 57.5 0.2 No Stockdale to Ming 61.9 63.1 1.2 63.1 63.1 0.0 No Ming to White 61.0 62.3 1.3 62.3 62.3 0.0 No White to Panama 58.4 60.7 2.3 60.7 60.7 0.0 No New Stine / Stine Road Panama to Taft 54.7 56.4 1.7 56.4 56.4 0.0 No Chg. - Change Source: Brown-Buntin & Associates, Inc., May 2006 Table 6-2 shows that the cumulative noise levels for the year 2030. As shown in Table 6-2, the proposed project’s contribution to the cumulative noise increase along two roadway segments of Allen Road and six roadway segments of Buena Vista Road would be considered cumulatively considerable. Therefore, the project’s increase in noise is considered significant. Table 6-2: Year 2030 Cumulative Off Site Noise Analysis CNEL, dB Roadway Segment 2004 No Project 2030 With Project Chg.2030 No Project 2030 With Project Chg. Cumulatively Significant? West of Heath — 46.1 — 45.4 46.1 0.7 No Heath to Renfro — 52.6 — 52.3 52.6 0.3 No Renfro to Jenkins 46.7 53.6 6.9 53.7 53.6 -0.1 No Jenkins to Allen 52.3 55.1 2.8 55.1 55.1 0.0 No Allen to Calloway 56.3 59.8 3.5 59.8 59.8 0.0 No Nord to Heath 62.3 65.0 2.7 64.9 65.0 0.1 No Heath to Renfro 63.4 64.3 0.9 64.2 64.3 0.1 No Renfro to Jenkins 57.4 57.7 0.3 57.7 57.7 0.0 No Jenkins to Allen 58.4 57.2 -1.2 57.2 57.2 0.0 No Allen to Jewetta 60.5 61.3 0.8 61.3 61.3 0.0 No Jewetta to Calloway 61.3 62.1 0.8 62.1 62.1 0.0 No Hageman Road Calloway to Coffee 62.7 64.4 1.7 64.4 64.4 0.0 No West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-17 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Table 6-2 (Cont.): Year 2030 Cumulative Off Site Noise Analysis CNEL, dB Roadway Segment 2004 No Project 2030 With Project Chg.2030 No Project 2030 With Project Chg. Cumulatively Significant? Renfro to Jenkins 55.9 60.1 4.2 60.1 60.1 0.0 No Jenkins to Allen 58.5 61.8 3.3 61.8 61.8 0.0 No Allen to Jewetta 54.7 54.7 0.0 54.6 54.7 0.1 No Jewetta to Calloway 57.8 60.2 2.4 60.1 60.2 0.1 No Brimhall Road Calloway to Coffee 59.4 61.4 2.0 61.2 61.4 0.2 No West of Enos 60.4 64.1 3.7 64.0 64.1 0.1 No Enos to Nord 56.1 60.7 4.6 60.6 60.7 0.1 No Nord to Wegis 56.7 61.5 4.8 61.4 61.5 0.1 No Wegis to Heath 57.7 61.5 3.8 61.4 61.5 0.1 No Heath to Renfro 58.0 49.1 -8.9 50.0 49.1 -0.9 No Renfro to Allen 61.4 56.9 -4.5 57.0 56.9 -0.1 No Allen to Buena Vista 60.9 60.0 0.9 59.8 60.0 0.2 No Buena Vista to Old River 59.1 63.9 4.8 62.6 63.9 1.3 No Old River to Gosford 61.0 62.4 1.4 61.9 62.4 0.5 No Gosford to Ashe 62.1 63.4 1.3 63.2 63.4 0.2 No Ashe to New Stine 62.7 63.7 1.0 63.6 63.7 0.1 No Stockdale Highway East of New Stine 67.3 69.0 1.7 69.0 69.0 0.0 No West Beltway to Ming Project Entrance — 62.5 — 61.0 62.5 1.5 No Ming Project Entrance to South Allen — 60.5 — 56.0 60.5 4.5 No South Allen to Buena Vista — 60.7 — 58.9 60.7 1.8 No Buena Vista to Old River 57.6 63.5 5.9 62.4 63.5 1.1 No Old River to Gosford 61.3 64.6 3.3 64.1 64.6 0.5 No Gosford to Ashe 62.2 64.6 2.4 64.3 64.6 0.3 No Ashe to New Stine 64.1 65.6 1.5 65.5 65.6 0.1 No New Stine to “Old” Stine 63.4 64.6 1.2 64.4 64.6 0.2 No “Old” Stine to Real 63.4 64.7 1.3 64.5 64.7 0.2 No Real to Wible 63.4 64.2 0.8 64.1 64.2 0.1 No Ming Avenue East of Wible 61.9 63.9 2.0 63.9 63.9 0.0 No Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-18 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Table 6-2 (Cont.): Year 2030 Cumulative Off Site Noise Analysis CNEL, dB Roadway Segment 2004 No Project 2030 With Project Chg.2030 No Project 2030 With Project Chg. Cumulatively Significant? West Beltway to South Allen — 65.1 — 64.1 65.1 1.0 No South Allen to East White Project Entrance — 60.8 — 60.3 60.8 0.5 No East White Entrance to Buena Vista — 60.9 — 60.3 60.9 0.6 No Buena Vista to Old River 57.2 61.9 4.7 60.4 61.9 1.5 No Old River to Gosford 59.8 63.9 4.1 63.2 63.9 0.7 No Gosford to Ashe 62.0 65.0 3.0 64.8 65.0 0.2 No Ashe to Stine 62.0 64.3 2.3 64.1 64.3 0.2 No Stine to Wible 63.6 64.9 1.3 64.9 64.9 0.1 No Wible to SB 99 Ramps 62.7 65.5 2.8 65.4 65.5 0.1 No SB 99 Ramps to NB 99 Ramps 61.6 62.6 1.0 62.5 62.6 0.1 No White Lane NB 99 Ramps to South “H” 60.1 62.2 2.1 62.1 62.2 0.1 No West of Buena Vista 57.1 67.6 10.5 67.8 67.6 -0.2 No Buena Vista to Old River 53.5 68.6 15.1 68.5 68.6 0.1 No Old River to Gosford 54.1 68.4 14.3 68.5 68.4 -0.1 No Gosford to Ashe 54.1 64.9 10.8 64.7 64.9 0.2 No Ashe to Stine 56.5 64.7 8.2 64.6 64.7 0.1 No Stine to Wible 58.0 65.2 7.2 65.1 65.2 0.1 No Wible to SB 99 Ramps 59.8 65.2 5.4 65.1 65.2 0.1 No SB 99 Ramps to NB 99 Ramps 59.7 63.2 3.5 63.1 63.2 0.1 No Panama Lane East of NB 99 Ramps 59.6 63.6 4.0 63.6 63.6 0.0 No West of Buena Vista 59.3 65.4 6.1 65.5 65.4 -0.1 No Buena Vista to Old River 59.7 66.3 6.6 66.3 66.3 0.0 No Old River to Gosford 61.7 64.8 3.1 64.9 64.8 -0.1 No Taft Highway Gosford to Ashe 59.1 65.9 6.8 65.9 65.9 0.0 No North of Rosedale 62.5 64.8 2.3 64.8 64.8 0.0 No Rosedale to Brimhall 57.7 61.6 3.9 61.6 61.6 0.0 No Brimhall to Stockdale 57.7 61.6 3.9 61.6 61.6 0.0 No Enos Lane South of Stockdale 57.7 63.1 5.4 63.0 63.1 0.1 No West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-19 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Table 6-2 (Cont.): Year 2030 Cumulative Off Site Noise Analysis CNEL, dB Roadway Segment 2004 No Project 2030 With Project Chg.2030 No Project 2030 With Project Chg. Cumulatively Significant? North of Rosedale 48.7 53.8 5.1 53.8 53.8 0.0 No Rosedale to Brimhall 57.4 50.4 -7.0 50.4 50.4 0.0 No Nord Road Brimhall to Stockdale 56.1 49.7 -6.4 49.7 49.7 0.0 No North of Hageman 48.7 51.7 3.0 51.7 51.7 0.0 No Hageman to Rosedale 48.7 45.7 -3.0 45.7 45.7 0.0 No Rosedale to Brimhall 57.4 56.6 -0.8 57.0 56.6 -0.3 No Heath Road Brimhall to Stockdale 56.8 60.0 3.2 59.8 60.0 0.2 No North of Hageman 50.4 60.9 10.5 60.7 60.9 0.2 No Hageman to Rosedale 53.5 59.8 6.3 59.8 59.8 0.0 No Rosedale to Brimhall 57.1 59.0 1.9 59.0 59.0 0.0 No Renfro Road Brimhall to Stockdale 51.7 59.2 7.5 59.3 59.2 -0.1 No Hageman to Rosedale 50.4 55.9 5.5 55.9 55.9 0.0 No Jenkins Road Rosedale to Brimhall 51.3 54.4 3.1 54.4 54.4 0.0 No North of Hageman 49.4 53.3 3.9 53.2 53.3 0.1 No Hageman to Rosedale 55.3 62.3 7.0 62.3 62.3 0.0 No Rosedale to Brimhall 55.7 61.7 6.0 61.6 61.7 0.2 No Brimhall to Westside Pwy WB Ramps 55.9 62.7 6.8 62.6 62.7 0.2 No WSP WB Ramps to WSP EB Ramps 55.9 63.0 7.1 62.4 63.0 0.6 No WSP EB Ramps to Stockdale Hwy 55.9 63.5 7.6 62.4 63.5 1.1 Yes Allen Road Stockdale to Ming 56.1 62.6 6.5 60.5 62.6 2.1 Yes Ming to Chamber — 67.5 — 65.5 67.5 2.0 No Chamber to White — 67.8 — 65.4 67.8 2.4 No White to Campus Park — 68.7 — 67.0 68.7 1.7 No Campus Park to Pacheco — 63.5 — 62.0 63.5 1.5 No Pacheco to Harris — 64.3 — 63.5 64.3 0.8 No Harris to Panama — 62.2 — 61.8 62.2 0.4 No Panama to McCutchen — 57.0 — 56.7 57.0 0.3 No South Allen Road McCutchen to Taft Hwy — 52.6 — 52.4 52.6 0.2 No North of Hageman 53.6 58.1 4.5 58.0 58.1 0.1 No Hageman to Rosedale 54.7 58.1 3.4 58.0 58.1 0.1 No Rosedale to Brimhall 53.7 58.0 4.3 57.7 58.0 0.3 No Jewetta Avenue Brimhall to Stockdale 54.0 56.0 2.0 54.7 56.0 1.3 No Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-20 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Table 6-2 (Cont.): Year 2030 Cumulative Off Site Noise Analysis CNEL, dB Roadway Segment 2004 No Project 2030 With Project Chg.2030 No Project 2030 With Project Chg. Cumulatively Significant? Stockdale to Ming 58.3 64.3 6.0 63.0 64.3 1.3 Yes Ming to Chamber 52.4 63.9 11.5 62.1 63.9 1.8 Yes Chamber to White 52.4 63.8 11.4 62.2 63.8 1.6 Yes White to Campus Park 52.1 63.7 11.6 60.8 63.7 2.9 Yes Campus Park to South Proj Entrance 52.1 62.3 10.2 60.8 62.3 1.5 Yes South Proj Entrance to Panama Ln 52.1 62.0 9.9 60.9 62.0 1.1 Yes Panama Ln to McCutchen 48.1 62.1 14.0 62.0 62.1 0.1 No Buena Vista Road McCutchen to Taft Hwy 48.1 57.1 9.0 56.9 57.1 0.2 No North of Hageman 49.1 62.2 13.1 62.3 62.2 -0.1 No Hageman to Rosedale 59.8 63.9 4.1 63.8 63.9 0.1 No Rosedale to Brimhall 59.4 63.9 4.5 63.7 63.9 0.2 No Brimhall to Westside Pkwy WB Ramps 59.5 64.7 5.2 64.5 64.7 0.2 No WSP WB Ramps to WSP EB Ramps 59.5 65.2 5.7 65.0 65.2 0.2 No Calloway Drive WSP EB Ramps to Stockdale Hwy 59.5 66.3 6.8 65.9 66.3 0.4 No Stockdale to Ming 58.9 63.9 5.0 64.1 63.9 -0.2 No Ming to White 60.7 64.5 3.8 64.7 64.5 -0.2 No White to Pacheco 60.4 59.2 -1.2 59.1 59.2 0.1 No Pacheco to Panama — 59.1 — 59.0 59.1 0.1 No Panama to McCutchen 40.7 58.3 17.6 57.9 58.3 0.4 No McCutchen to Taft Hwy 40.7 56.5 15.8 56.0 56.5 0.5 No Old River Road South of Taft Hwy 54.0 59.9 5.9 59.8 59.9 0.1 No North of Rosedale 64.7 68.4 3.7 68.4 68.4 0.0 No Rosedale to Brimhall 61.8 64.6 2.8 64.5 64.6 0.1 No Brimhall to Westside Pkwy WB Ramps 68.6 70.7 2.1 70.6 70.7 0.1 No WSP WB Ramps to WSP EB Ramps 68.6 71.1 2.5 71.1 71.1 0.0 No Coffee Road WSP EB Ramps to Stockdale Hwy 68.6 71.3 2.7 71.3 71.3 0.0 No West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-21 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Table 6-2 (Cont.): Year 2030 Cumulative Off Site Noise Analysis CNEL, dB Roadway Segment 2004 No Project 2030 With Project Chg.2030 No Project 2030 With Project Chg. Cumulatively Significant? Stockdale to Ming 62.2 65.5 3.3 65.5 65.5 0.0 No Ming to White 60.1 64.1 4.0 64.2 64.1 0.1 No White to Pacheco 58.5 65.0 6.5 65.1 65.0 -0.1 No Pacheco to Harris 57.3 64.1 6.8 63.7 64.1 0.4 No Harris to Panama 56.0 63.2 7.2 62.7 63.2 0.5 No Panama to McCutchen 54.2 63.0 8.8 62.9 63.0 0.1 No Gosford Road McCutchen to Taft 54.2 59.1 4.9 58.9 59.1 0.2 No Stockdale to Ming 54.3 56.0 1.7 56.0 56.0 0.0 No Ming to White 58.7 60.7 2.0 60.7 60.7 0.0 No White to Panama 56.9 61.2 4.3 61.1 61.2 0.1 No Panama to McCutchen 45.7 61.5 15.8 61.5 61.5 0.0 No Ashe Road McCutchen to Taft 45.7 59.0 13.3 59.0 59.0 0.0 No Stockdale to Ming 61.9 63.9 2.0 63.9 63.9 0.0 No Ming to White 61.0 63.1 2.1 63.1 63.1 0.0 No White to Panama 58.4 62.0 3.6 62.0 62.0 0.0 No New Stine / Stine Panama to Taft 54.7 57.5 2.8 57.5 57.5 0.0 No Chg. - Change Source: Brown-Buntin & Associates, Inc., May 2006 Mitigation Measures No feasible measures are available. Level of Significance After Mitigation Significant and unavoidable. The project’s contribution to cumulative noise level increases would remain significant; however, the noise levels would be 65 dB CNEL or less which is the City’s exterior noise level standard. 6.3.9 - Public Services Fire and Police Services Impact 6.3.9.A: The proposed project will increase the need for fire and police protection facilities; however, the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. . Development resulting from future growth in the area as well as development of the proposed project will include the introduction of new structures to the area, and an increased risk of fire hazards as the area transitions from rural to urban. This cumulative development in the project vicinity will result in a substantial need for fire and police protection services. The proposed project along with future development will result in the development of new arterial and collector streets that will provide Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-22 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc improved access to the project site and the surrounding areas, allowing fire and emergency vehicles greater access to the area. According to the City of Bakersfield Fire Department, fire station 15 along with the future fire station projected to be constructed south of the project site within the McAllister Ranch would adequately serve future development in the project vicinity. The City of Bakersfield Police Department recently constructed a police substation north of the project site. This new substation is expected to adequately serve future development as well as the proposed project in the future. To ensure adequate equipment is provided at the fire stations and police substation that would serve the project site and other future development sites, the applicants and the City would enter into a development agreement so that the applicants would provide a fair-share contribution for purchase of additional fire prevention and police equipment to be used by the Bakersfield Fire Department and Bakersfield Police Department. In addition to the fair-share contribution, local sales tax revenue would be generated by operation of commercial and industrial uses to provide additional funds to the City for fire and police protection. Furthermore, property tax revenues would also be generated by development projects that could also be used for equipment, facilities, and personnel. As required by the Uniform Fire Code and the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code Sections 15.64.010 to 15.64.480, the proposed project and other development projects will be required to include specific design features such as ensuring appropriate emergency access, and requiring structures to be built with approved building materials, etc. Conformance with these codes helps reduce the risks associated with fire hazards. Implementation of the proposed project and other future development projects would result in less than significant cumulative effects related to fire and police protection services. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. School Services Impact 6.3.9.B: The proposed project will result in a substantial increase in students on the project site. Future developments in the project vicinity are also expected to substantially increase students. The project’s contribution to cumulative school impacts would be considered cumulatively considerable. . Implementation of the proposed project and future growth in the project vicinity is expected to result in a substantial increase in residences as well as school age children. The proposed project is projected to increase the number of children by 5,550. This student generation would contribute to significant cumulative school impacts and would be considered cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implementation of 5.9.C.1 is required. West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-23 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. 6.3.10 - Recreation Impact 6.3.10.A: The proposed project will increase the residential population on the project site as well as provide adequate recreational facilities on the site. Future developments in the project vicinity are expected to substantially increase the demand for recreational facilities. Since the project includes adequate recreational facilities, the project would not contribute to cumulative impacts on recreational facilities. . Implementation of cumulative development within the project vicinity would increase the demand on existing recreational facilities. Since the proposed project would include the provision of 56 acres of public recreational facilities and 35 acres of private recreational facilities, the proposed project would not contribute to the cumulative demand of existing recreational facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not contribute to cumulative impacts on existing recreational facilities. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance After Mitigation No impact. 6.3.11 - Transportation and Traffic 6.3.11.A: The proposed project will contribute to the cumulative increase in traffic and exceeding the City’s level of service standard for intersections and roadways. . To evaluate the cumulative impact of the project and future traffic growth on the transportation network, traffic projections for Years 2015 and 2030 volumes with the proposed project were prepared. The cumulative projections were obtained from the KernCOG’s regional traffic model. Year 2015 and Year 2030 traffic volumes were determined using data from the regional cumulative projects traffic model prepared by KernCOG. The KernCOG model uses traffic software, which bases traffic projections on Traffic Analysis Zone (T.A.Z.) Socio-Economic data projected for future year scenarios. A traffic model run was requested from KernCOG for the Year 2030 with projected background traffic, traffic attributable to the proposed project, along with traffic from all other future proposed projects that add traffic to the surrounding roadway network. Future traffic volumes are based on socio-economic data for all the proposed projects and predicted growth for future years. This model accounts for cumulative impacts of all proposed projects when performing impact analysis on the existing and proposed street network. The data from this cumulative projects model run was used to derive the traffic volumes for analysis of the “Future Year 2015 Projected Volumes with Project” and the “Future Year 2030 Projected Volumes with Project” scenario. An additional model run was requested from KernCOG that removed socio-economic data related to the proposed project which was used to derive the projections for the “Future Year 2015 Projected Volumes without Project” and the “Future Year 2030 Projected Volumes without Project”. The data from this Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-24 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc model run was compared to the data from the cumulative model run to approximate traffic volumes attributable to the proposed project. The cumulative traffic data was used to evaluate the cumulative impacts on intersections and roadways in the years 2015 and 2030. Year 2015 Year 2015 traffic volume projections were used to analyze project generated traffic impacts at the time of the anticipated half buildout of the project. This scenario assumed that Westside Parkway and West Beltway would be operational. Intersections With the implementation of cumulative development and a portion of the proposed project in the year 2015, a total of 40 intersections will exceed the City’s established thresholds during either the AM, PM, or both AM and PM peak hours. The intersections identified below would be affected with the addition of traffic from cumulative project developments. • Allen Road and WB Westside Parkway (PM Peak) • Allen Road and EB Westside Parkway (PM Peak) • Ming Avenue and Project Entrance No. 1 (PM Peak) • Ming Avenue and South Allen Park (AM and PM Peak) • Ming Avenue and Ashe Road (PM Peak) • South Allen Road and Chamber Boulevard (AM and PM Peak) • South Allen Road and Project Entrance No. 2 (AM and PM Peak) • White Lane and Campus Park Drive(AM and PM Peak) • White Lane and South Allen Road (AM and PM Peak) • White Lane and Windermere Street (AM and PM Peak) • White Lane and Buena Vista Road (AM Peak) • South Allen Road and Campus Park Drive (AM and PM Peak) • Buena Vista Road and Campus Park Drive (AM and PM Peak) • Panama Lane and NB West Beltway (PM Peak) • Panama Lane and South Allen Road (AM and PM Peak) • Panama Lane and Buena Vista Road (PM Peak) • Panama Lane and Mountain Vista Drive (AM Peak) • Panama Lane and Ashe Road (PM Peak) • Rosedale Hwy & Allen Road (PM Peak) • Rosedale Highway and Calloway Drive (AM and PM Peak) • Rosedale Highway and Coffee Road (AM and PM Peak) • Brimhall Road and Allen Road (PM Peak) • Allen Roadway and Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps (AM Peak) • Calloway Drive and Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps (AM and PM Peak) • Calloway Drive and Westside Parkway Eastbound Ramps (AM and PM Peak) West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-25 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc • Coffee Road and Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps (AM and PM Peak) • Ming Avenue and Gosford Road (PM Peak) • Ming Avenue and New Stine Road (PM Peak) • Buena Vista Road and Chamber Blvd. (AM and PM Peak) • White Lane and Buena Vista Road (AM and PM Peak) • White Lane and Ashe Road - (PM Peak) • White Lane and Wilson Road (PM Peak) • White Lane and Wible Road (AM and PM Peak) • South Allen Road and Harris Road/Pensinger (AM and PM Peak) • Panama Lane and SB West Beltway (AM and PM Peak) • Panama Lane and Windermere Street (PM Peak) • Panama Lane and Gosford Road (AM and PM Peak) • Panama Lane and Reliance Drive (AM and PM Peak) • Panama Lane and Wible Road (AM and PM Peak) • McCutchen Road and Buena Vista Road (PM Peak) Roadway Segments In the year 2015, the implementation of cumulative development and a portion of the proposed project would result in 43 roadway segments exceeding the City’s established thresholds. The roadway segments identified below would be affected with the addition of traffic from cumulative project developments. • Stockdale Highway - Gosford Road to Ashe Road • Allen Road - Stockdale Highway to Ming Avenue • South Allen Road - Ming Avenue to Chamber Boulevard • South Allen Road - Chamber Boulevard to White Lane • South Allen Road - White Lane to Campus Park Drive • South Allen Road - Campus Park Drive to Pacheco • South Allen Road - Harris Road to Panama Lane • Buena Vista Road - White Lane to Campus Park Drive • Buena Vista Road - Campus Park Drive to South Project Entrance • Buena Vista Road - South Project Entrance to Panama Lane • Buena Vista Road - Panama Lane to McCutchen Road • Calloway Drive - Brimhall Road to WB Westside Parkway • Calloway Drive - WB Westside Parkway to EB Westside Parkway • Calloway Drive - EB Westside Parkway to Stockdale Highway • Coffee Road - Brimhall Road to WB Westside Parkway • Coffee Road - WB Westside Parkway to EB Westside Parkway • Gosford Road - Panama Lane to McCutchen Road • Rosedale Highway - Calloway Drive to Coffee Road • Stockdale Highway - Enos Road to Nord Avenue Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-26 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc • Stockdale Highway - Nord Avenue to Wegis Road • Stockdale Highway - Wegis Road to Heath Road • Stockdale Highway - East of New Stine Road • Ming Avenue - West Beltway to Ming Project Entrance • Ming Avenue - Ming Project Entrance to South Allen Road • Ming Avenue - South Allen Road to Buena Vista Road • Ming Avenue - Ashe Road to New Stine Road • White Lane - West Beltway to South Allen Road • White Lane - South Allen Road to White Lane Project Entrance • White Lane - White Lane Entrance to Buena Vista Road • White Lane - Wible Road to SB 99 Ramps • Panama Lane - Gosford Road to Ashe Road • Panama Lane - Stine Road to Wible Road • Allen Road - Rosedale Highway to Brimhall Road • Allen Road - Brimhall Road to WB Westside Parkway Ramps • Allen Road - EB Westside Parkway Ramps to Stockdale Highway • Allen Road - Stockdale Highway to Ming Avenue • South Allen Road - Ming Avenue to Chamber Boulevard • South Allen Road - Chamber Boulevard to White Lane • South Allen Road - White Lane to Campus Park Drive • South Allen Road - Campus Park Drive to Pacheco Road • South Allen Road - Pacheco Road to Harris Road • South Allen Road - Harris Road to Panama Lane • South Allen Road - Panama Lane to McCutchen Road Year 2030 Year 2030 traffic volume projections were used to analyze project generated traffic impacts at the time of the anticipated buildout of the project. This scenario assumed that Westside Parkway and West Beltway would be operational. Intersections With the implementation of cumulative development and a portion of the proposed project in the year 2030, a total of 60 intersections will exceed the City’s established thresholds during either the AM, PM, or both AM and PM peak hours. The intersections identified below would be affected with the addition of traffic from cumulative project developments. • Allen Road and EB Westside Parkway (AM Peak) • Calloway Drive and WB Westside Parkway (PM Peak) • Calloway Drive and EB Westside Parkway (PM Peak) • Stockdale Highway and Buena Vista Road (AM and PM Peak) • Stockdale Highway and Old River (PM Peak) West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-27 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc • Ming Avenue and Project Entrance No. 1 (AM and PM Peak) • Ming Avenue and South Allen Road (AM and PM Peak) • Ming Avenue and Buena Vista Road (AM and PM Peak) • Ming Avenue and Gosford Road (PM Peak) • South Allen Road and Chamber Boulevard (AM and PM Peak) • South Allen Road and Project Entrance No. 2 (Am and PM Peak) • White Lane and Campus Park Drive (AM and PM Peak) • White Lane and South Allen Road (AM and PM Peak) • White Lane and Windermere Street (AM and PM Peak) • White Lane and Buena Vista Road (AM and PM Peak) • White Lane and Gosford Road (PM Peak) • South Allen Road and Campus Park Drive (AM and PM Peak) • Buena Vista Road and Campus Park Drive (AM and PM Peak) • South Allen Road and South Allen Entrance (AM and PM Peak) • Buena Vista Road and Harris Road/Pensinger (AM Peak) • Old River Road and Harris Road (AM Peak) • Buena Vista Road and South Project Entrance (AM and PM Peak) • South Allen Road and Harris Road/Pensinger (AM Peak) • Harris Road and Gosford Road (AM Peak) • Panama Lane and Buena Vista Road (PM Peak) • Panama Lane and Gosford Road (AM Peak) • Hageman Road and Calloway Drive (AM and PM Peak) • Rosedale Highway and Calloway Drive (AM and PM Peak) • Rosedale Highway and Coffee Road (AM and PM Peak) • Rosedale Hwy & Allen Road (AM and PM Peak) • Brimhall Road and Allen Road (AM and PM Peak) • Brimhall Road and Jewetta Avenue (AM Peak) • Brimhall Road and Coffee Road (PM Peak) • Allen Road and Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps (AM and PM Peak) • Truxtun Avenue and Coffee Road (AM and PM Peak) • Stockdale Highway and Allen Road (PM Peak) • Stockdale Highway and Gosford Road (AM and PM Peak) • Stockdale Highway and New Stine Road (AM and PM Peak) • Ming Avenue and Buena Vista Road (AM and PM Peak) • Ming Avenue and Ashe Road (PM Peak) • Ming Avenue and Old Stine Road (PM Peak) • White Lane and Buena Vista (PM Peak) • White Lane and Old River (AM and PM Peak) • White Lane and Ashe Road (AM and PM Peak) • •White Lane and Wilson Road (PM Peak) Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-28 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc • White Lane and Stine Road (PM Peak) • White Lane and Wible Road (AM and PM Peak) • South Allen Road and Harris Road/Pensinger (AM and PM Peak) • Harris Road/Pensinger and Buena Vista Road (PM Peak) • Panama Lane and SB West Beltway (AM and PM Peak) • Panama Lane and NB West Beltway (AM and PM Peak) • Panama Lane and South Allen Road (AM and PM Peak) • Panama Lane and Mountain Vista Drive (AM and PM Peak) • Panama Lane and Reliance Drive (AM and PM Peak) • Panama Lane and Ashe Road (AM and PM Peak) • Panama Lane and Golden Gate/Mountain Ridge (AM and PM Peak) • Panama Lane and Stine Road (AM and PM Peak) • Panama Lane and Wible Road (AM and PM Peak) • McCutchen Road and Buena Vista Road (AM and PM Peak) • McCutchen Road and Old River Road (AM and PM Peak) Roadway Segments In the year 2030, the implementation of cumulative development and a portion of the proposed project would result in 44 roadway segments exceeding the City’s established thresholds. The roadway segments identified below would be affected with the addition of traffic from cumulative project developments. • Stockdale Highway - Buena Vista Road to Old River Road • Ming Avenue - Ming Avenue Project Entrance to South Allen Road • Ming Avenue - South Allen Road to Buena Vista Road • Ming Avenue - Gosford Road to Ashe Road • Ming Avenue - Ashe Road to New Stine Road • Ming Avenue - Old Stine Road to Real • White Lane - West Beltway to South Allen Road • Allen Road - Rosedale Highway to Brimhall Road • Allen Road - Brimhall Road to WB Westside Parkway Ramps • Allen Road - WB Westside Parkway Ramps to EB Westside Parkway Ramps • Allen Road - EB Westside Parkway Ramps to Stockdale Highway • Allen Road - Stockdale Highway to Ming Avenue • South Allen Road - Ming Avenue to Chamber Boulevard • South Allen Road - Chamber Boulevard to White Lane • South Allen Road - White Lane to Campus Park Drive • South Allen Road - Campus Park Drive to Pacheco • Buena Vista Road - Ming Avenue to Chamber Boulevard • Buena Vista Road - Chamber Boulevard to White Lane • Buena Vista Road - White Lane to Campus Park Drive West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-29 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc • Buena Vista Road - Campus Park Drive to South Project Entrance • Buena Vista Road - South Project Entrance to Panama Lane • Coffee Road - Rosedale Highway to Brimhall Road • Gosford Road - Harris Road to Panama Lane • Buena Vista Road - Stockdale Highway to Ming Avenue • Buena Vista Road - Panama Lane to McCutchen Road • Calloway Drive - Hageman Road to Rosedale Highway • Calloway Drive - Rosedale Highway to Brimhall Road • Calloway Drive - Brimhall Road to WB Westside Parkway • Calloway Drive - WB Westside Parkway to EB Westside Parkway • Calloway Drive - EB Westside Parkway to Stockdale Highway • Old River Road - South of Taft Highway • Gosford Road - Panama Lane to McCutchen Road • Stockdale Highway - Enos Road to Nord Avenue • White Lane - South Allen Road to White Lane Project Entrance • White Lane - White Lane Entrance to Buena Vista Road • White Lane - Gosford Road to Ashe Road • White Lane - Stine Road to Wible Road • White Lane - Wible Road to SB 99 Ramps • Panama Lane -Gosford Road to Ashe Road • Panama Lane - Ashe Road to Stine Road • Panama Lane - Stine Road to Wible Road • Panama Lane - Wible Road to NB 99 Ramps • South Allen Road - Pacheco Road to Harris Road • South Allen Road - Harris Road to Panama Lane Mitigation Measures 6.3.11.A.1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the Regional Transportation Impact Fee (RTIF) program as well as paying the proportional share for local mitigation improvements (those not covered by the RTIF). The intersection and roadway improvements that are required with cumulative development in the years 2015 and 2030 are as follows: 2015 Intersection • Rosedale Hwy & Allen Road - Construct one northbound through lane. \ • Rosedale Highway and Calloway Drive - Construct one northbound left turn lane, one northbound right turn lane, and one eastbound through lane. • Rosedale Highway and Coffee Road - Construct one eastbound through lane and one westbound through lane. Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-30 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc • Brimhall Road and Allen Road - Construct one southbound through lane • Allen Roadway and Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps - Install signal. • Calloway Drive and Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps - Install signal. • Calloway Drive and Westside Parkway Eastbound Ramps - Install signal. • Coffee Road and Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps - Install signal. • Coffee Road and Westside Parkway Eastbound Ramps - Install signal. • Ming Avenue and South Allen Road - Provide all-way-stop. • Ming Avenue and Gosford Road - Construct one westbound right turn lane and one northbound right turn lane - “Providing Full expansion per COB std Det T-4.” • Ming Avenue and Ashe Road - Construct one eastbound right turn lane and one northbound right turn lane. • Ming Avenue and New Stine Road - Construct one southbound right turn lane. • Buena Vista Road and Chamber Blvd. - Install signal. • White Lane and South Allen Road - Install signal. • White Lane and Buena Vista Road - Construct one southbound left turn lane and one southbound through lane. • White Lane and Ashe Road - Construct one eastbound left turn lane and one westbound left turn lane. • White Lane and Wilson Road - Construct one southbound right turn lane. • White Lane and Wible Road - Construct one westbound through lane. • Buena Vista Road and Campus Park Drive - Install signal. • South Allen Road and Harris/Pensinger Road - Install signal. • Panama Lane and West Beltway - Install signal and construct one westbound left turn lane, two southbound right turn lanes, and one eastbound through lane. • Panama Lane and West Beltway - Install signal and construct two eastbound left turn lanes, one westbound right turn lane, one northbound right turn lane, and one westbound through lane. • Panama Lane and South Allen Road - Install signal and construct two eastbound left turn lanes, one westbound left turn lane, one northbound left turn lane, two West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-31 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc southbound left turn lanes, one westbound through lane, and one eastbound through lane. • Panama Lane and Windermere Street - Construct one eastbound through lane and one westbound through lane. • Panama Lane and Buena Vista Road - Install signal and construct one eastbound left turn lane, one westbound left turn lane, one westbound right turn lane, one northbound left turn lane, one southbound left turn lane, and one eastbound through lane. • Panama Lane and Mountain Vista Drive - Construct one eastbound through lane and one westbound through lane. • Panama Lane and Gosford Road - Construct one northbound through lane and one southbound left turn lane. • Panama Lane and Reliance Drive - Install signal. • Panama Lane and Ashe Road - Install signal and construct one southbound left turn lane. • Panama Lane and Wible Road - Construct one westbound through lane, one southbound through lane, and provide overlapping phase for northbound right turn lane. • McCutchen Road and Buena Vista Road - Provide all-way-stop. Roadway Segment • Buena Vista Road - Panama Lane to McCutchen Road - Add two lanes. • Calloway Drive - Brimhall Road to WB Westside Parkway - Add two lanes • Calloway Drive -Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps to Westside Parkway Eastbound Ramps - Add two lanes • Calloway Drive - Westside Parkway Eastbound Ramps to Stockdale Highway - Add two lanes • Coffee Road - Brimhall Road to Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps - Add two lanes. • Gosford Road - Panama Lane to McCutchen Road - Add two lanes. • Rosedale Highway - Calloway Drive to Coffee Road - Add two lanes. • Stockdale Highway - Enos Road to Nord Avenue - Construct divided roadway. • Stockdale Highway - Nord Avenue to Wegis Road - Add two lanes. • Stockdale Highway - Wegis Road to Heath Road - Add two lanes Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-32 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc • Stockdale Highway - East of New Stine Road - Add two lanes. • Ming Avenue - West Beltway to Ming Project Entrance - Construct two lane roadway • Ming Avenue - Ming Project Entrance to South Allen Road - Construct two lane roadway • Ming Avenue - South Allen Road to Buena Vista Road - Construct two lane roadway. • Ming Avenue - Ashe Road to New Stine Road - Add two lanes. • White Lane - West Beltway to South Allen Road - Construct two lane roadway. • White Lane - South Allen Road to White Lane Project Entrance - Construct two lane roadway. • White Lane - White Lane Entrance to Buena Vista Road - Construct two lane roadway. • White Lane - Wible Road to SR 99 Southbound Ramps - Add two lanes. • Panama Lane -Gosford Road to Ashe Road - Add two lanes, construct as divided roadway. • Panama Lane - Stine Road to Wible Road - Add two lanes. • Allen Road - Rosedale Highway to Brimhall Road - Add two lanes • Allen Road - Brimhall Road to Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps - Add two lanes. • Allen Road -Westside Parkway Eastbound Ramps to Stockdale Highway - Add two lanes. • South Allen Road - Ming Avenue to Chamber Boulevard - Construct two lane roadway • South Allen Road - Chamber Boulevard to White Lane - Construct two lane roadway • South Allen Road - White Lane to Campus Park Drive - Construct two lane divided roadway • South Allen Road - Campus Park Drive to Pacheco - Construct two lane divided roadway • South Allen Road - Pacheco Road to Harris Road - Construct four lane roadway • South Allen Road - Harris Road to Panama Lane - Construct two lane divided roadway • South Allen Road - Panama Lane to McCutchen Road - Construct two lane roadway. West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-33 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc 2030 Intersection • Buena Vista Road and Harris/Pensinger Road - Install signal. • Hageman Road and Calloway Drive - Construct one northbound through lane and one southbound through lane. • Rosedale Highway and Calloway Drive - Construct one eastbound left turn lane and one westbound left turn lane. • Rosedale Highway and Coffee Road - Construct one eastbound right turn lane, one westbound left turn lane, one northbound left turn lane, and provide overlapping phase for northbound right turn lane. • Rosedale Highway & Allen Road - Construct one southbound left turn lane. • Brimhall Road and Allen Road - Construct one southbound left turn lane. • Brimhall Road and Jewetta Avenue - Construct one southbound through lane. • Brimhall Road and Coffee Road - Construct one northbound left turn lane. • Allen Roadway and Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps - Construct one westbound left turn lane and one westbound right turn lane. • Calloway Drive and Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps - Construct two northbound left turn lanes, one northbound through lane, and one southbound through lane. • Calloway Drive and EB Westside Parkway - Channelize eastbound right turn lane; and construct one southbound left turn lane, one northbound through lane, and one southbound through lane. • Truxtun Avenue and Coffee Road - Construct one northbound through lane. • Stockdale Highway and Allen Road - Construct one eastbound left turn lane and provide overlapping phase for westbound right turn lane. • Stockdale Highway and Old River Road - Construct one westbound through lane “for Full expansion per COB Det T-4. • Stockdale Highway and Gosford Road - Construct one westbound right turn lane and one northbound right turn lane. • Stockdale Highway and New Stine Road - Construct eastbound left turn lane, one northbound right turn lane, and one southbound through lane. • Ming Avenue and Buena Vista Road - Construct one westbound right turn lane, one northbound turn lane, and one southbound through lane. Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-34 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc • Ming Avenue and Ashe Road - Construct one westbound right turn lane. • Ming Avenue and New Stine Road - Construct one eastbound right turn lane and one westbound right turn lane. • Ming Avenue and Old Stine Road - Construct one eastbound left turn lane. • White Lane and South Allen Road - Construct one northbound through lane. • White Lane and Buena Vista - Construct one westbound right turn lane. • White Lane and Old River - Construct one northbound through lane and provide overlapping phase for westbound right turn lane. • White Lane and Gosford Road - Construct one westbound left turn lane, one southbound left turn lane, one northbound left turn lane, and one northbound through lane. • White Lane and Ashe Road - Construct one southbound left turn lane and one northbound left turn lane. • White Lane and Wilson Road - Construct one eastbound left turn lane. • White Lane and Stine Road - Construct one westbound right turn lane and one southbound right turn lane. • White Lane and Wible Road - Construct one eastbound right turn lane, one northbound through lane, southbound through lane, and provide overlapping phase for northbound right turn lane. • South Allen Road and Harris/Pensinger Road - Construct one eastbound left turn lane, two eastbound right turn lanes, one westbound left turn lane, one westbound right turn lane, one northbound left turn lane, one southbound left turn lane, one southbound right turn lane, one southbound through lane, and provide overlapping phase for southbound right turn lane. • Harris Road and Old River Road - Construct one northbound through lane and one southbound through lane. • Harris Road and Gosford Road - Construct one southbound left turn lane. • Panama Lane and West Beltway Southbound Ramps - Channelize southbound right turn lane; and construct one eastbound right turn lane, one westbound through lane, and one eastbound through lane. • Panama Lane and West Beltway Northbound Ramps - Construct one westbound right turn lane, one northbound right turn lane, one eastbound left turn lane and one westbound through lane. West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-35 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc • Panama Lane and South Allen Road - Construct one eastbound right turn lane, one northbound right turn lane, one westbound through lane, and provide overlapping phases for westbound right turn lane and southbound right lane. • Panama Lane and Buena Vista Road - One eastbound left turn lane, one northbound right turn lane, one southbound right turn lane, one eastbound through lane, one southbound through lane, two northbound through lanes, two westbound through lanes, and provide overlapping phase for westbound right turn lane. • Panama Lane and Mountain Vista Drive - Install signal. • Panama Lane and Reliance Drive - Construct two eastbound through lanes, one westbound through lane, and one westbound left turn lane. • Panama Lane and Ashe Road - Construct one eastbound left turn lane, one westbound left turn lane, one northbound left turn lane, two eastbound through lanes, one westbound through lane, and one southbound through lane. • Panama Lane and Golden Gate/Mountain Ridge Drive - Install signal. • Panama Lane and Stine Road - Construct one eastbound through lane. • Panama Lane and Wible Road - Construct one westbound left turn lane. • McCutchen Road and Buena Vista Road - Install signal and construct one eastbound left turn lane, one northbound left turn lane, one southbound left turn lane, and one southbound right turn lane. • McCutchen Road and Old River Road - Install signal. • McCutchen Road and Gosford Road - Install signal. Roadway Segment • Buena Vista Road - Stockdale Highway to Ming Avenue - Add two lanes. • Buena Vista Road - Panama Lane to McCutchen Road - Construct as divided roadway. • Calloway Drive - Hageman Road to Rosedale Highway - Add two lanes. • Calloway Drive - Rosedale Highway to Brimhall Road - Add two lanes. • Calloway Drive - Brimhall Road to Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps - Add two lanes. • Calloway Drive -Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps to Westside Parkway Eastbound Ramps - Add two lanes. • Calloway Drive - Westside Parkway Eastbound Ramps to Stockdale Highway - Add two lanes, construct as divided roadway. • Old River Road - South of Taft Avenue - Add two lanes. Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-36 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc • Gosford Road - Panama Lane to McCutchen Road - Add two lanes, construct as divided roadway. • Gosford Road - McCutchen Road to Taft Highway - Construct as divided roadway. • Stockdale Highway - Enos Road to Nord Avenue - Add two lanes. • Ming Avenue - South Allen Road to Buena Vista Road - Construct as divided roadway. • Ming Avenue - Old Stine Road to Real Road - Add two lanes. • White Lane - West Beltway to South Allen Road - Construct as divided roadway. • White Lane - South Allen Road to White Lane Project Entrance - Add two lanes • White Lane - White Lane Entrance to Buena Vista Road - Add two lanes roadway. • White Lane - Gosford Road to Ashe Road - Add two lanes. • White Lane - Stine Road to Wible Road - Add two lanes. • White Lane - Wible Road to SR 99 Southbound Ramps - Add two lanes. • Panama Lane - Gosford Road to Ashe Road - Add two lanes. • Panama Lane - Ashe Road to Stine Road - Add two lanes. • Panama Lane - Stine Road to Wible Road - Add two lanes. • Panama Lane - Wible Road to SR 99 Southbound Ramps - Add two lanes. • Allen Road - Brimhall Road to Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps - Construct as divided roadway. • Allen Road - Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps to Westside Parkway Eastbound Ramps - Construct as divided roadway. • Allen Road -Westside Parkway Eastbound Ramps to Stockdale Highway - Construct as divided roadway. • South Allen Road - White Lane to Campus Park Drive - Construct as divided roadway. • South Allen Road - Campus Park Drive to Pacheco Road - Construct as divided roadway. • South Allen Road - Pacheco Road to Harris Road - Add two lanes, construct as divided roadway. • South Allen Road - Harris Road to Panama Lane - Construct as divided roadway. Level of Significance After Mitigation Significant and unavoidable. After the implementation of the above mitigation measures, the cumulative development along with the proposed project would result in the degradation of a level of service that began at or below LOS C without the project. The following facilities would experience a significant and unavoidable impact. The level of service after mitigation is provided below. West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-37 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc • Ming Avenue from Ashe Road to New Stine Road (LOS B to LOS D); • Calloway Drive from Westside Parkway Eastbound Ramps to Stockdale Highway (LOS A to E); • White Lane from Wible Road to Southbound 99 Ramps (LOS C to LOS D); • Calloway Drive from Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps to Stockdale Highway (LOS A to LOS E); • Coffee Road from Brimhall Road to Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps (LOS A to LOS E); and • Coffee Road from Westside Parkway Westbound Ramps to Westside Parkway Eastbound Ramps (LOS A to LOS E). Impacts to the remaining roadway segments and all of the intersections would be less than significant after implementation of the above mitigation measures. 6.3.12 - Utilities and Service Systems Implementation of the proposed project and future development projects in the vicinity of the project site would result in additional demands on water, sewer, drainage, and solid waste facilities. Water Impact 6.3.12.A: The implementation of the proposed project as well as other future development in the project vicinity will increase the water demand from the City of Bakersfield. The project’s contribution to cumulative water demand is considered less than cumulatively considerable. . The build out of the proposed project as well as other development projects over the next 20 years will increase the demand for water from the City of Bakersfield. According to the SB 221/SB 610 Water Supply Assessment, the future year 2025 supply of water from the Kern River, State Water Project, and reclaimed water available to the City is projected to be a range of 240,250 acre-feet per year (single dry year) to 357,725 acre-feet per year (normal year) of water compared to a projected demand within the City’s water service area of 50,375 acre-feet per year of water. As a result, the project’s contribution to cumulative water demand is considered less than cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-38 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Impact 6.3.12.B: The implementation of the proposed project as well as other future development in the project vicinity will result in the construction of new water facilities which could cause environmental effects. . As the proposed project is phased and other projects are developed, additional water facilities will be required. The proposed project includes onsite water wells; and, the project will require offsite water facilities to be built to serve the project. Water facilities associated with other projects may also result in environmental effects. Therefore, the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts associated with the construction of water facilities for other development would be considered cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implementation of mitigation measures 5.12.B.1 is required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. Wastewater Impact 6.3.12.C: The implementation of the proposed project as well as other future development in the project vicinity will result in the construction of new wastewater facilities which could cause significant environmental effects. . The development of the proposed project as well as other projects in the vicinity will increase the demand on the existing sewer facilities in the vicinity of the project site (i.e., the existing sewer lift station on the project site and the existing trunk sewer lines that convey wastewater from the project vicinity to the City’s Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 3). This increased demand may result in the need for expanded or new sewer facilities. The potential construction of these facilities may result in significant environmental impacts. The proposed project’s contribution to the demand for sewer facilities as well as the potential effects associated with construction activities would be considered cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures Implementation of mitigation measures 5.12.B.1, 5.12.C.2, and 5.12.C.3 are required Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. Stormwater and Drainage Impact 6.3.12.D: The implementation of the proposed project as well as other future development in the project vicinity will result in the construction of new drainage facilities which could cause significant environmental effects. . As development occurs on the project site as well as in the vicinity of the site, drainage facilities will be required. The proposed project includes a series of onsite retention and detention facilities and storm drain lines that connect these facilities. Future development that occur in the project vicinity will also be required to construct drainage facilities to adequately accommodate projected storm water West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR Cumulative Impacts Michael Brandman Associates 6-39 H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc flows. However, these drainage facilities would occur off the project site. Because the proposed project includes an onsite drainage system, it would not result in the need to construct offsite facilities. As a result the project’s contribution to potential cumulative impacts associated with the construction of drainage facilities is considered less than cumulatively considerable and therefore less than significant. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. Solid Waste and Landfills Impact 6.3.12.E: The implementation of the proposed project as well as other future development in the project vicinity could be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate cumulative solid waste disposal needs. . The development of the proposed project and cumulative development within the City would increase the generation of solid waste. Solid waste facilities are planned by the Kern County Waste Management Department, and the anticipated disposal capacity of the Bena Landfill based on growth projections is the year 2018. As disposal capacity reduces, the County plans for additional landfill capacity through expansions or new landfills. Implementation of the proposed project and future development projects would reduce existing landfill capacities; however, this reduction is not inconsistent with the County’s projections. Therefore, the project’s contribution to the cumulative impact on landfill capacity would be considered less than cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant. 6.3.13 - Population and Housing Impact 6.3.13.A: The implementation of the proposed project as well as other future development in the project vicinity will induce substantial population growth in the project area. . The development of the proposed project and future development projects in the vicinity of the project site would substantially increase housing and population in the project vicinity. The City is anticipated to increase its population by approximately 189,725 and its housing by approximately 90,659 from 2006 to 2030. These growth projections are considered to include the population and housing anticipated from the proposed project as well as cumulative development. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to the cumulative impact on projected population and housing growth is considered less than cumulatively considerable. Cumulative Impacts West Ming Specific Plan - Draft EIR 6-40 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\DEIR 9-1\02160029_Sec06-00 CumulativeImpacts.doc Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant.