HomeMy WebLinkAbout02160029_Recirculated DEIR_PrefaceWest Ming Specific Plan - Recirculated Draft EIR Preface
Michael Brandman Associates v
H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\Recirculated DEIR\02160029_Recirculated DEIR.doc
PREFACE
On August 31, 2006, the draft environmental impact report (Draft EIR) for the West Ming Specific
Plan (State Clearinghouse Number 2005051055) was circulated by the Lead Agency, the City of
Bakersfield, for public comments. The comment review period ended on October 14, 2006.
Substantive comments were received on several issues addressed in the Draft EIR. A Response to
Comments Document was prepared and distributed to the public on December 8, 2006 that includes
responses to the various comments that were raised on the environmental information in the Draft
EIR. Subsequent to the distribution, additional comments were received on the environmental
documentation and additional information has been included in the EIR. The City of Bakersfield
Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 21, 2006 and on January 4, 2007
recommended certification of the EIR and approval of the project to the Bakersfield City Council.
Prior to the City Council taking action on the EIR and the project, the City decided to recirculate the
EIR. Although the City does not consider the new information that has been presented as part of the
EIR subsequent to the public distribution of the Draft EIR on August 31, 2006 as “significant”, the
City decided to provide the public additional review of the environmental information in the EIR in
accordance with Section 15088.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. Therefore,
the EIR is distributed to the public as a Recirculated Draft EIR.
In accordance with Section 15088.5(g) of the CEQA Guidelines, following is a summary of the
revisions that have been made to the previously circulated Draft EIR. In reviewing this recirculated
EIR, the public may provide new comments on the entire EIR and the substantive comments will be
considered by the City of Bakersfield.
DRAFT EIR TEXT
Executive Summary (Section 2)
To ensure consistency with Sections 5 and 6 of the Draft EIR as well as consistency with the
revisions identified in the various responses to comments in this Recirculated Draft EIR, Table 2-1,
Executive Summary, in the Draft EIR was revised.
Project Description (Section 3)
To ensure that the proposed project does not impact the known mineral resources in the area of
Crimson 52X-10 well, the project was revised to include a 2.5-acre (330 feet by 330 feet) drilling
island. A detailed description of the revision is provided in Response to Comment CRM-1-1 in the
Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 in this Recirculated Draft EIR). The addition of the
drilling island would result in the addition of a drill island to the West Ming Specific Plan thereby
Preface West Ming Specific Plan - Recirculated Draft EIR
vi Michael Brandman Associates
H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\Recirculated DEIR\02160029_Recirculated DEIR.doc
requiring a reduction in acreage in the residential land use (i.e., low density residential) to 445.5 acres
from 448 acres. This acreage is further discussed in Response to Comment S1-6 in the Responses to
Comments to the City of Shafter Letter Dated February 7, 2007 (see Chapter 5.6 of this Recirculated
Draft EIR).
An additional primary discretionary action has been added as discussed in Response to Comment
DWR-1 in the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR).
In Section 3.6.1 in the Draft EIR, there is a discussion of numerous Circulation Element amendments
that are required with the approval of the West Ming Specific Plan. One of the referenced
amendments required a minor modification that described the portion of Renfro Road that needed an
amendment. This modification is described on page 5-5 of the Response to Comments Document
(see Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR).
Agricultural Resources (Section 5.1)
A new mitigation measure to reduce project impacts due to the conversion of agricultural land was
added as described on page 5-4 of the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this
Recirculated Draft EIR); however, this new mitigation measure was revised as described on pages 2
through 4 of the Second Addendum to Response to Comments for West Ming Specific Plan (see
Chapter 4 of this Recirculated Draft EIR).
The new mitigation measure reduces the potential impact on agricultural land to the maximum extent
feasible and will be substantially lessened; however, the level of impact due to the conversion of
agricultural land is still considered significant and unavoidable.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Section 5.6)
Mitigation measure 5.6.G.1 was modified to remove the reference to idle wells as described on page
5-5 of the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR).
In addition, mitigation measure 5.6.F.3 was modified by removing the fourth bullet in this measure
which was identified as a setback distance of 1,000 feet. This setback distance was inaccurate and the
setback identified in the third bullet was correct which is 100 feet from dwellings (see Chapter 6.8 of
this Recirculated Draft EIR).
West Ming Specific Plan - Recirculated Draft EIR Preface
Michael Brandman Associates vii
H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\Recirculated DEIR\02160029_Recirculated DEIR.doc
Hydrology and Water Quality (Section 5.7)
The terminology of the flood hazard areas was modified as discussed on page 4 and 5 of the Third
Addendum to Response to Comments Document for West Ming Specific Plan (see Chapter 5 of this
Recirculated Draft EIR).
In addition, mitigation measure 5.7.A.1 was modified to clarify the process for the Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan. This modification is provided on page 5 of the Third Addendum to
Response to Comments Document for West Ming Specific Plan (see Chapter 5 of this Recirculated
Draft EIR).
Finally, Exhibits 5.7-1 and 5.7-2 in Section 5.7 of the Draft EIR were revised to accurately depict the
flood areas on the project site (as described on page 5 and depicted in Attachment 1 of the Third
Addendum to Response to Comments Document for West Ming Specific Plan (see Chapter 5 of this
Recirculated Draft EIR).
Noise (Section 5.8 and 6.3.8)
There were a few revisions to the project-specific and cumulative noise analysis. These revisions
included a discussion of the correct number of roadway segments with noise sensitive uses that would
experience greater than 65 dB CNEL, a discussion of the correct roadway segment that could increase
traffic noise to exceed the City’s interior noise standard on the project site, and a modification of a
roadway referenced in Table 6-1 in the Draft EIR. These revisions are described on pages 1 and 2 of
the Second Addendum to Responses to Comments for West Ming Specific Plan (see Chapter 4 of this
Recirculated Draft EIR).
Transportation and Traffic (Sections 5.11, 6.3.11, and 8.1)
There were a number of revisions to the project-specific and cumulative traffic discussions in Section
5.11 and Section 6.3.11 in the Draft EIR to ensure consistency with the Traffic Report prepared for
the West Ming Specific Plan. These revisions included modifications to intersection and roadway
improvements as well as revisions to the listings of intersections and roadways exceeding the City’s
established thresholds prior to and after implementation of mitigation measures. These modifications
are discussed on pages 5-5 through 5-11 of the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of
this Recirculated Draft EIR).
In addition, to ensure consistency with a recent traffic methodology revision for independent
assessment of regional impacts issued September 22, 2006 and after the distribution of the Draft EIR,
there were revisions to Mitigation Measures 5.11.A.1 and 6.3.11.A.1 were modified as described in
the City of Bakersfield Public Works Department response in Chapter 6.4 of this Recirculated Draft
Preface West Ming Specific Plan - Recirculated Draft EIR
viii Michael Brandman Associates
H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\Recirculated DEIR\02160029_Recirculated DEIR.doc
EIR and on pages 5 and 6 of the Third Addendum to Response to Comments Document for West
Ming Specific Plan (see Chapter 5 of this Recirculated Draft EIR).
Furthermore, there were concerns regarding regional improvements such as the West Beltway and
these concerns are addressed by the City of Bakersfield Public Works Department and City of
Bakersfield Water Resources Department in Chapter 6.6 of this Recirculated Draft EIR.
Section 8.1 of the Draft EIR includes a list of significant unavoidable adverse impacts that will result
from the implementation of the West Ming Specific Plan. This list is to include all project-specific
and cumulative significant unavoidable adverse impacts. Section 8.1 of the Draft EIR included the
list of project-specific significant unavoidable adverse traffic and transportation impacts; however,
the list of cumulative significant unavoidable adverse traffic and transportation impacts were not
included in this section. The cumulative significant unavoidable adverse traffic and transportation
impacts were, however, included in Section 6.3.11 of the Draft EIR. A discussion of the revision to
Section 8.1 of the Draft EIR is provided on page 5-11 of the Response to Comments Document (see
Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR).
Utilities and Service Systems (Section 5.12)
Information regarding the City’s water rights for the Kern River flows was modified as described on
page 5-5 of the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR).
Other Sections
Additional clarifications to a variety of environmental issues such as traffic, noise, Buena Vista Lake
shrew, water recharge, and water supply is provided in Chapter 6.3 of this Recirculated Draft EIR.
Other clarifications to environmental issues such as traffic, the Regional Transportation Impact Fee
Program, West Beltway, Native American Heritage Commission consultation, noise, and Buena Vista
Lake shrew is provided in Chapter 6.5 of this Recirculated Draft EIR.
Furthermore, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District identified that the methodology,
impact assessment, and mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR as well as in the Air Quality
Assessment in Appendix C of the Draft EIR are accurate and correct (see Chapter 6.7 of this
Recirculated Draft EIR).
West Ming Specific Plan - Recirculated Draft EIR Preface
Michael Brandman Associates ix
H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\Recirculated DEIR\02160029_Recirculated DEIR.doc
DRAFT EIR APPENDICES
Flood Study (Appendix I)
The appendices to the Flood Study were inadvertently not included in the previously circulated Draft
EIR as discussed on page 5-12 of the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this
Recirculated Draft EIR). The revised Flood Study is provided in Attachment 3 of the Response to
Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR).
Lake Report (Appendix I)
There is a minor revision to the Lake Report regarding the use of the proposed onsite detention basins
as described on pages 5-12 and 5-13 of the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this
Recirculated Draft EIR). The revised Lake Report is provided in Attachment 4 of the Response to
Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR).
Traffic Report (Appendix L)
The discussion of local and regional impact fees on page 36 of the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) and
Tables 6 and 10 of the TIS was revised as discussed on page 5-12 of the Response to Comments
Document (see Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR). The revised Traffic Study is provided in
Attachment 1 of the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft
EIR). Traffic issues relating to trip generation and distribution, traffic fee program, and the SR
99/Ming Avenue Interchange are discussed in Chapter 6.1 of this Recirculated Draft EIR.
Water Supply Assessment (Appendix M)
Various revisions were identified for the Water Supply Assessment (WSA). The primary revision
relates to the City of Bakersfield’s Kern River water rights. In addition, there were revisions to
Tables 7 and 8 in the WSA regarding the amount of recharged reclaimed water. Finally, there were
other revisions that were either minor clarifications and/or correction of typographical errors that did
not impact the context or analysis of the WSA. These various revisions are discussed on pages 5-13
through 5-15 of the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR).
The revised WSA is provided in Attachment 5 of the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter
2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR) and the WSA was further revised to address issues regarding the use
of wastewater and the Kern River supplies (see Chapter 6.2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR and
Response to Comments S3E-1, S5A, and S5B-1 through S5B-3 in Chapter 6.5 of this Recirculated
Draft EIR). A revised final version of the WSA is attached to the letter prepared by Provost &
Pritchard dated February 16, 2007 in Chapter 6.5 of this Recirculated Draft EIR).
Preface West Ming Specific Plan - Recirculated Draft EIR
x Michael Brandman Associates
H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\Recirculated DEIR\02160029_Recirculated DEIR.doc
ADDITIONAL TECHNICAL EVALUATIONS
In addition to the above revisions to the EIR text and EIR appendices, there were additional
evaluations of environmental issues that were not discussed in the previously circulated Draft EIR.
A Housing Needs Analysis was prepared and a brief summary of the analysis is provided in Section
5.2 of the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR). The
findings of the Housing Needs Analysis identified that the supply of housing provided by the West
Ming Specific Plan did not result in a substantial over supply of housing between 2006 and 2030
compared to the projected demand and resulted a supply of housing when there is a substantial under
supply of housing between 2006 and 2040 compared to projected demand. The entire Housing Needs
Analysis is provided in Attachment 6 of the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this
Recirculated Draft EIR).
An Urban Decay Study was prepared and a brief summary of the analysis is provided in Section 5.2
of the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR). The findings
of the Urban Decay Study stated that the West Ming Specific Plan would result in a less than
significant urban decay impact. The entire Urban Decay Study is provided in Attachment 7 of the
Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR).
A Fiscal Impact Analysis was prepared and a brief summary of the analysis is provided in Section 5.2
of the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft EIR). The findings
of the Fiscal Impact Study stated that the West Ming Specific Plan would result in a surplus of funds
for the City, which is considered a beneficial impact. The entire Fiscal Impact Analysis is provided in
Attachment 8 of the Response to Comments Document (see Chapter 2 of this Recirculated Draft
EIR).
A Land Use and Planning Evaluation was prepared and provided in the Addendum to Response to
Comments Document for West Ming Specific Plan (see Chapter 3 of this Recirculated Draft EIR).
The evaluation included a discussion of land use compatibility and the project’s consistency with the
City’s land use goals and policies. The findings of the evaluation were that the land use compatibility
impacts were less than significant and the project is consistent with the City’s land use goals and
policies.
A Global Climate Change Study was prepared and a brief summary is provided in the Third
Addendum to Response to Comments Document for West Ming Specific Plan (see Chapter 5 of this
Recirculated Draft EIR). The findings of the Global Climate Change Study stated that the West Ming
Specific Plan would result in a less than significant affect to global climate change. In addition, the
project’s contribution to cumulative impacts on global climate change would be considered less than
West Ming Specific Plan - Recirculated Draft EIR Preface
Michael Brandman Associates xi
H:\Client (PN-JN)\0216\02160029\Recirculated DEIR\02160029_Recirculated DEIR.doc
cumulatively considerable, and therefore, less than significant. The entire Global Climate Change
Study is provided in Attachment 3 of the Third Addendum to Response to Comments Document for
West Ming Specific Plan (see Chapter 5 of this Recirculated Draft EIR).