HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPR 21-0399_Staff Report and Attachments A, B,E,F, G, HFile SPR No. 21-0399 Page 1
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING DATE: September 7, 2023 AGENDA: 6.a
TO: Chair Bashirtash and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM:
DATE:
FILE:
WARD:
Paul Johnson, Planning Director
September 1, 2023
SPR 21-0399 (SCH #2022080337)
4
STAFF PLANNER: Louis Ramirez, Associate Planner II
REQUEST: Adopt California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15091 Findings, CEQA Section
15093 Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and certify
Final Environmental Impact Report to facilitate construction of an approximate 39,650 square foot
Department of Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Medical Clinic.
APPLICANT: OWNERS:
SASD Dev Group, LLC Lundy Family Trust Carosella Trust
4895 Pacific Highway 6607 Mt. Whitney Drive 8501 Pacheco Road #100
San Diego, CA 92110 Bakersfield, CA 93309 Bakersfield, CA 93311
PROJECT LOCATION: 5512 Knudsen Drive
APN: 565-020-28 and -30
PROJECT SIZE: ±10 acres CEQA: Environmental Impact Report
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: SI (Service Industrial)
EXISTING ZONE CLASSIFICATION: M-2 (General Manufacturing)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt Resolution adopting
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15091 Findings, CEQA Section 15093 Statement of
Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and certifying a Final
Environmental Impact Report.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The project site consists of two undeveloped parcels of land which are bounded
to the north, east and west by property within Kern County jurisdiction. Surrounding properties are
primarily developed as: north – commercial land; east – undeveloped land; south – self storage and
commercial land; and west – Kern County Fire Department Training Facility.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 2
BACKGROUND AND TIMELINE:
• July 28, 2012 - City Council approved the annexation of the project site into the City of Bakersfield
as part of Annexation No. 635 (Landco No. 2; Resolution No. 93-11).
• January 7, 2021 - City Planning Commission adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration for
environmental compliance for Site Plan Review No. 20-0102 to allow construction of a community-
based medical outpatient clinic located at 5512 Knudsen Drive (Resolution No. 03-21).
• January 8, 2021 - Development Services Director approved Site Plan Review No. 20-0102.
• January 15, 2021 - Progress for Bakersfield Veterans, LLC appealed approval of the Site Plan Review
to the City Planning Commission and appealed adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration to
the City Council.
• February 4, 2021 - City Planning Commission heard and denied the appeal and upheld the decision
of the Development Services Director approving Site Plan Review No. 20-0102 (Resolution No. 09-
21).
• February 12, 2021 - Progress for Bakersfield Veterans, LLC, appealed the City Planning Commission’s
approval of the Site Plan Review to City Council.
• March 3, 2021 - City Council heard and denied both appeals and upheld the decisions of the Planning
Commission by adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Resolution No. 029-2021) and
approving Site Plan Review No. 20-0102 (Resolution No. 030-2021).
• April 12, 2021 - California Environmental Quality Act lawsuit served on the City alleging:
o Project will have significant adverse effects on the environment;
o Onsite contamination requires testing the soil and groundwater;
o Failure to comply with land use requirements, including City’s General Plan and Zone Change
since the current zoning is inconsistent for the project;
o Impacts on biological resources, transportation, air quality, tribal cultural resources and
geology/soils, energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, hazard and hazardous materials,
hydrology/water quality, noise, traffic, utility services systems; and
o Abuse of discretion in approving the Site Plan Review based on inaccurate Project description.
Petitioner: Progress for Bakersfield Veterans, LLC, represented by Soluri Meserve, a Law
Corporation, Channel Law Group, LLP, and Hagan Denison, LLP (Kern County Superior Court Case
No. BCV-21-100778).
• July 14, 2021 - The project applicant (SASD Development Group, LLC), represented by their attorney
(Rutan & Tucker; Dustin Dodgin from Klein DeNatale Goldner) requested the City rescind
Resolutions for the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Site Plan Review as a result of the lawsuit.
• September 1, 2021 - City Council rescinded the Resolutions (Resolution No. 172-2021).
• September 17, 2021 - Applicant and Petitioners signed a confidential settlement agreement. The
City was not involved in settlement, nor did City pay out any money.
• September 28, 2021 - Lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 3
• October 19, 2021 - SASD Development Group, LLC submitted Site Plan Review No. 21-0399 for
construction of a community-based medical outpatient clinic located at 5512 Knudsen Drive.
• August 11, 2022 - City staff circulated a Notice of Preparation after determining an environmental
impact report is required for the Site Plan Review (State Clearinghouse No. 2022080337).
PROJECT ANALYSIS:
Site Plan Approval Required. Pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 17.08.060, no person shall
construct any improvements on land which require a building permit without first obtaining site plan
approval.
Site Plan Approval Process. Pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 17.08.080 the application for
site plan approval is reviewed by the Site Plan Review Committee (Committee) which is established and
consists of the Planning Director, Building Director, Fire Chief, and Public Works Director, or their
designated representatives. The site plans are reviewed by the following City Departments:
• Development Services Department/Building Division
• Development Services Department/Planning Division
• Fire Department
• Water Resources
• Public Works Department/Engineering Division
• Public Works Department/Traffic Division
• Public Works Department/Solid Waste Division
• Recreation and Parks Department (as needed)
• Bakersfield Police Department (as needed)
The Committee reviews and provides comments to the Planning Director who, in-turn, shall conduct an
environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) implementation
guidelines and state law to determine if the project is subject to CEQA. After considering the
recommendations from the Committee and the Planning Director, and after approving any necessary
CEQA documents, the Development Services Director may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the
site plan.
Site Plan Project Description. As noted above, Site Plan Review No. 21-0399 was submitted for a proposed
community-based medical outpatient clinic located at 5512 Knudsen Drive (Attachment A). The outpatient
clinic is designed to have a gross building floor area of up to 39,648 square feet with a net usable area of
30,100 square feet. The building floor plan will be separated into primary and specialty care clinic areas
including audiology, mental health, telehealth, ambulatory care, an eye clinic, physical and occupational
therapy, prosthetics, dental services, a lab and pharmacy, and ancillary and diagnostic services. The user
of the building will be the U.S. Veterans Heath Administration (VA).
The proposed building is rectangular in shape and will be positioned diagonally on the site with the long
sides of the building facing east and west and the shorter sides of the building facing north and south. The
structure will have a maximum height of ±31 feet to the top of the sloped roof. The building is designed
in a contemporary style and will be painted shades of gray, white, and blue. The main entrance to the
building and patient drop-off area will be in the northwest corner of the building, facing the main parking
area. Sloped roofs and glass curtain wall will be featured at the main entrance.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 4
A mix of shade trees, palm trees, small evergreen trees, screen trees, shrubs, and groundcover will be
planted along the perimeter of the Project site. Shade trees, accent trees, shrubs, and groundcover also
will be planted in the parking areas. Landscaping, featuring shade trees, small evergreen trees, accent
trees, shrubs, perennials, groundcover, and irrigated turf, will also occur at the building entries and around
the perimeter of the building. A healing garden is proposed on the northeast side of the building which
will include garden paths, benches, screen trees, shade trees, accent trees, shrubs, groundcover, and
irrigated turf.
Vehicular access to the community-based outpatient medical clinic will be provided by a main public
entrance on Knudsen Drive, a secondary public entrance on Lance Drive, a staff entrance on Landco Drive,
and a staff and service entrance on Street “A”, which is planned along the southern boundary of the site.
The Project will also include street improvements and the installation of site-adjacent Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant sidewalks and ramps for the street frontages on the east (Landco
Drive), south (Street "A"), and west (Knudsen Drive). The site design includes 214 parking stalls,
including 184 standard stalls, 6 motorcycle stalls, 19 accessible-standard stalls, and 5 accessible-van
stalls.
The Committee completed its review of Site Plan Review No. 21-0399 and as proposed, the Project
complies with City development standards (Attachment B).
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND DETERMINATION:
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Bakersfield is the Lead
Agency and determined that preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is now
appropriate for the project to adequately analyze the potential impacts of the Project to the existing
environment.
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15082, the Lead Agency filed a Notice of Preparation (NOP)
with the California Office of Planning and Research (State Clearinghouse) and the Kern County Clerk,
to provide notice that an EIR would be prepared to evaluate the Project’s potential impact to
the environment. The NOP was also distributed to potential responsible and trustee agencies and
other interested parties for a 30-day public review period that commenced on August 11, 2022. The
purpose of distributing the NOP was to solicit responses to assist the Lead Agency in identifying the
full scope and range of potential environmental concerns associated with the Project, so that these
issues could be fully examined in the EIR. In response, seven comment letters were received. Refer to the
Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), Table 1-1 for summarized comments received during the NOP
public review period (Attachment C).
Based on the analysis contained in the Initial Study and comments received in response to the NOP, a
Notice of Availability (NOA) and DEIR were prepared for the Project in accordance with CEQA. Due to
a federal holiday, the NOA/DEIR were circulated for a 46-day public and agency review period from May
5, 2023, to June 20, 2023 (State Clearinghouse No. 2022080337). A digital copy of the DEIR was
made available on the Bakersfield City Planning Division webpage and a printed copy was available
at the Planning Division office. In response, five comment letters were received from four commenting
parties. Refer to the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the letters, a summary of the
comments, and Lead Agency response (Attachment D).
Project Objectives. CEQA Guidelines Section 15124(b) requires a statement of project objectives.
The fundamental purpose and goal of this Project is to develop a modern, state-of-the-art community-
based outpatient medical facility to serve U.S. Military Veterans in the greater Bakersfield area. The
Project would achieve its purpose and goal through the following objectives:
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 5
A. Establish a new VA community-based outpatient medical clinic in Bakersfield on a site that has been
vetted by and selected by the U.S. Government within the following delineated area:
• North: East on Olive Drive, southeast on Roberts Lane, southeast on Manor Street and then
northeast on Panorama Drive to Fairfax Road.
• East: South on Fairfax Road to E. Brundage Lane.
• South: West on E. Brundage Lane, continuing on Brundage Lane to the intersection of Brundage
Lane and SR-99.
• West: The intersection of Gosford Road and White Lane, north to where Gosford Road becomes
Coffee Road, north to Olive Drive.
B. Establish a new VA community-based outpatient medical clinic that has a minimum size of 30,100
net usable square feet and meets the VA’s physical design requirements.
C. Provide high quality patient care for Veterans in a safe, advanced-care medical facility throughout
the Bakersfield area and surrounding communities.
D. Enable Veterans to receive health care at a medical facility that is easily accessible and nearby a
State highway system to reduce out of area health trips.
E. Develop a modern, state of the art VA medical clinic that is capable of providing a diverse range of
consolidated outpatient services, such as audiology, mental health, telehealth, ambulatory care, an
eye clinic, physical and occupational therapy, prosthetics, dental services, a lab and pharmacy, and
ancillary and diagnostic services, avoiding the need for Veterans to travel out of the Bakersfield area
for these services.
F. Create a comprehensively planned, advanced-care VA medical clinic that provides community
vitality, economic growth, and employment opportunities in the City of Bakersfield.
G. Construct a VA medical clinic with maximum operational efficiency to optimize health care
outcomes and create a space for increased patient and staff satisfaction.
Identification of Impacts. The thresholds of significance used in the EIR are based on the thresholds
presented in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G and as applied by the Lead Agency which take into account
Bakersfield’s Municipal Code; adopted City policies and ordinances; the judgment of the technical experts
that prepared the technical appendices; performance standards adopted, implemented, and monitored
by regulatory agencies; significance standards recommended by regulatory agencies; and the standards
in CEQA that trigger the preparation of an EIR.
The following terms are used to describe the level of significance related to the physical conditions within
the area affected by the proposed Project:
A. No Impact - An adverse change in the physical environment would not occur.
B. Less-than-Significant Impact - An adverse change in the physical environment would occur but the
change would not be substantial or potentially substantial and would not exceed the threshold(s)
of significance presented in this EIR.
C. Significant Impact - A substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the physical
environment would occur and would exceed the threshold(s) of significance presented in this EIR,
requiring the consideration of mitigation measures.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 6
If impacts are identified as significant after mandatory compliance with regulatory criteria, then feasible
mitigation measures are presented that would either avoid the impact or reduce the magnitude of the
impact. The following terms are used to describe the level of significance following the application of
recommended mitigation measures:
A. Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation - A substantial or potentially substantial adverse
change in the physical environment would occur that would exceed the threshold(s) of significance
presented in the EIR; however, the impact can be avoided or reduced to a less-than-significant level
through the application of feasible mitigation measure(s).
B. Significant and Unavoidable Impact - A substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the
physical environment would occur that would exceed the threshold(s) of significance presented in
this EIR. Feasible and enforceable mitigation measure(s) that have a proportional nexus to the
Project’s impact are either not available or would not be fully effective in avoiding or reducing the
impact to below a level of significance.
Effects Found Not to be Significant. Based on findings of the Initial Study, NOP, and the results of the
scoping process, it was determined the Project would have no potential to result in significant impacts to
7 environmental topics. Based on substantial evidence, the following topic areas did not warrant detailed
analysis in the EIR:
1. Agriculture and Forestry Resources 5. Mineral Resources
2. Population and Housing 6. Public Services
3. Recreation 7. Utilities and Services Systems
4. Wildfire
Less-than-Significant Impact / Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation. The EIR addresses all
potentially significant environmental impacts the Lead Agency identified during the Initial Study, NOP, and
scoping process. After further study and environmental review of the EIR, it was determined that impacts
to 12 topic areas would be less-than-significant or could be reduced to a less-than-significant level with
the incorporation of mitigation measures, mandatory regulatory compliance, and/or project design
features:
1. Aesthetics 7. Air Quality
2. Biological Resources 8. Cultural Resources
3. Energy 9. Geology and Soils
4. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 10. Hydrology and Water Quality
5. Land Use and Planning 11. Noise
6. Transportation 12. Tribal Cultural Resources
Significant and Unavoidable Impact. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(b) requires that an EIR disclose
the significant environmental effects of a project that cannot be avoided if the proposed project is
implemented. After study and environmental review in the EIR, it was determined the following impact
threshold would have significant and unavoidable impacts after the project complies with all regulatory
and statutory requirements and feasible and reasonable mitigation measures.
1. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Although the Project’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) emissions would only be a very small fraction of
the global GHG emissions that contribute to climate change, the City is using a net-zero threshold.
Because the Project would result in a net increase in GHG emissions as compared to existing conditions
even with the implementation of mitigation measures, the Project’s impacts due to GHG emissions would
be significant and unavoidable on a cumulatively considerable basis.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 7
Basis For Determining Significance of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Assembly Bill 1279, also known as the
California Climate Crisis Act, declares that it is the policy of the State to achieve net zero greenhouse gas
emissions as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, to achieve and maintain net negative greenhouse
gas emissions thereafter; and to ensure that by 2045, Statewide anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions
are reduced to at least 85% below the 1990 levels. According to Section VIII of Appendix G to the CEQA
Guidelines, the proposed Project would result in a significant impact to climate change if the Project or
any Project-related component would (Governor's Office of Planning and Research - OPR, 2019):
A. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact
on the environment.
B. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases.
To assess the significance of a proposed Project’s environmental impacts it is necessary to identify
quantitative or qualitative thresholds which, if exceeded, would constitute a finding of significance. Given
that the City of Bakersfield has not adopted a Climate Action Plan and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution
Control District (SJVAPCD) has not yet updated its GHG significance methodology guidance post year 2020,
there is no widely accepted significance threshold for GHG emissions in the City of Bakersfield at this time
for a development project such as the proposed Project. For that reason, this EIR uses a threshold of net
zero. Although a net zero threshold is more conservative than any higher numerical threshold or
comparison against Business as Usual (BAU) assumptions as previously promogulated by the SJVAPCD,
there are no provisions in CEQA that preclude a Lead Agency from applying a more conservative threshold
on a case-by-case basis. The City recognizes that a net zero threshold for GHG emissions is highly
conservative. In the 2009 Final Statement of Reasons for adoption of the CEQA Guidelines update for GHG
emissions it states, “Notably, [CEQA] section 15064.4(b)(1) is not intended to imply a zero net emissions
threshold of significance. As case law makes clear, there is no ‘one molecule rule’ in CEQA.” Regardless, a
net zero threshold aligns with the State’s carbon neutrality goals identified in Executive Order B-55-18
and the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) Draft 2022 Scoping Plan that evaluates a path for
California to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 (CARB, 2022a). Accordingly, the Project’s impacts due to
GHGs would be significant if the Project were to result in a net increase in GHG emissions as compared to
existing conditions.
Mitigation Measures. CEQA requires lead agencies to impose feasible mitigation measures as part of the
approval of a “project” in order to substantially lessen or avoid the significant adverse effects of the
project on the physical environment. CEQA Guidelines Section 15370 defines mitigation as: (1) Avoiding
the impact altogether; (2) Minimizing the impact by limiting its degree or magnitude; (3) Rectifying the
impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environmental resource; (4) Reducing or
eliminating the impact over time, through actions that preserve or maintain the resource; and (5)
Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environmental conditions,
including through permanent protection of such resources in the form of conservation easements. When
imposing mitigation, lead agencies must ensure there is a “nexus” and “rough proportionality” between
the measure and the significant impacts of the project. Additionally, all mitigation must be feasible and
fully enforceable, and all feasible mitigation must be imposed by lead agencies.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The EIR identified 18 mitigation measures to reduce
potentially significant impacts from the Project. To ensure that the mitigation measures are implemented,
CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 requires the public agency adopt a program for monitoring or reporting
on the measures it has imposed to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects. A Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) was prepared that describe the procedures for the
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 8
implementation of the mitigation measures to be adopted for the proposed Project as identified in the
Draft and Final EIR. The MMRP for the proposed Project will be in place through all phases of the Project,
including design (pre-construction), construction, and operation (post-construction both prior to and
post-occupancy) (Attachment E).
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 states that
no public agency shall approve a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more
significant environmental impacts of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written
findings for each significant impact, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding.
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 further requires that a discussion of the project's benefits be
included in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, which provides a basis for recommending
approval of the project despite possible and/or anticipated adverse environmental effects (Attachment
F).
As noted above, the Project would result in a net increase in GHG emissions as compared to existing
conditions. Even with the implementation of mitigation measures, the Project’s impacts on this topic
would be significant and unavoidable on a cumulatively considerable basis. However, the following
benefits and considerations, based largely on social, economic and environmental benefits outweigh the
significant and unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of the Project.
• The Project provides a much-needed new VA community-based outpatient medical clinic in
Bakersfield on a site that has been vetted by and selected by the U.S. Government, which is highly
desired by local Veterans.
• The Project provides a new VA community-based outpatient medical clinic that meets the VA’s
physical design requirements.
• The Project provides high-quality patient care for local Veterans in a safe, advanced-care medical
facility throughout the Bakersfield area and surrounding communities.
• The Project enables Veterans to receive health care at a medical facility that is easily accessible and
nearby a State highway system to reduce out-of-area health trips.
• The Project provides a VA medical clinic that is capable of providing a diverse range of consolidated
outpatient services, such as audiology, mental health, telehealth, ambulatory care, an eye clinic,
physical and occupational therapy, prosthetics, dental services, a lab and pharmacy, and ancillary
and diagnostic services, which are not all currently available in the City at the existing location,
avoiding the need for Veterans to travel out of the Bakersfield area for these services.
• The Project creates a comprehensively planned, advanced-care VA medical clinic that provides
community vitality, economic growth, and employment opportunities in the City of Bakersfield.
• Upon build-out, the Project provides a VA medical clinic with maximum operational efficiency to
optimize healthcare outcomes for Veterans and create a space for increased patient and staff
satisfaction.
• The Project enables Veterans to receive a full range of services not currently available in the City,
eliminating the need for long-distance driving to Los Angeles for certain services.
• The Project creates valuable short-term construction and long-term employment opportunities for
residents of the City.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 9
• The Project implements the City’s General Plan by developing an underutilized site that is adjacent
to urban infrastructure, with a land use consistent with the City’s General Plan and zoning code.
• The Project implements Federal and State policy by providing needed health care to a vulnerable
community of Veterans.
Alternatives. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 states an EIR must address "a range of reasonable
alternatives to the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but
would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project and evaluate the
comparative merits of the alternative." The alternatives should include those that offer substantial
environmental advantages over the proposed project and that may feasibly be accomplished considering
the various economic, environmental, social, technological, and legal factors. To meet the requirements
of CEQA Section 15126.6, the EIR considered a total of three project alternatives. The reasonable range
of alternatives provides the decision-makers with enough variation to support informed decision making.
Alternatives Analyzed in the EIR. There were three alternatives identified that could avoid or lessen
significant effects of the project and could feasibly attain project objectives (see Project Objectives
heading above). The alternatives were analyzed in more detail in Chapter 6 of the DEIR. The EIR discussion
presents a description of each alternative and considers its potential to achieve the project objectives and
reduce one or more of its identified significant impacts. The alternatives are summarized as follows.
1. No Project Alternative - This alternative considers a scenario in which the proposed Project does
not proceed. In this circumstance, the VA clinic is assumed to continue operating in its existing
location at 1801 Westwind Drive and the Project site would remain undeveloped. However, there
also is no guarantee that the VA clinic would continue to operate at the existing location if the No
Project Alternative is selected in which case local medical services would be provided elsewhere.
2. Net Zero Alternative - This alternative considers the development of a VA clinic on the Project site
with a design that would achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions. To achieve this result, a smaller
sized clinic than proposed by the Project and required by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
would be required. The Net Zero Alternative would reduce the size of the proposed clinic by 3,648
square feet and construct a 36,000 square feet clinic. Under this alternative, the exiting VA clinic
located at 1801 Westwind Drive would no longer operate and a 36,000 square feet clinic on the
Project site would achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions.
3. Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative - This alternative considers the development
of a VA clinic on the Project site with the same site design as proposed with the Project, but with
the inclusion of a solar system mounted on the building roof, the addition of canopy covers over
parking areas equipped with solar panels, and the addition of on-site battery storage such that site
operations could be powered without connecting to the electrical grid. Under this Alternative, the
exiting VA clinic located at 1801 Westwind Drive would no longer operate and the Alternative would
achieve a net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to the existing condition. The total
amount of energy needed to offset the Project is approximately 371,171 kWh/year. The building
itself is expected to need 341,211 kWh/year, and the remaining 29,960 kWh/year is for the parking
lot operations. These values are based on the mitigated electricity needs, which assumes a 10%
improvement over Title 24 requirements. Assuming that 1 kW of rooftop solar in Bakersfield can
generate about 1,650 kWh/year, solar panels capable of producing a total of 225 kW (207 kW for
the building and 18 kW for the parking lot) would be required. Assuming that approximately 100
square feet of surface area are needed to hold 1kW of rooftop solar, 22,500 square feet of solar
panel coverage would be required on the site.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 10
Environmentally Superior Alternative. An EIR must identify the environmentally superior alternative to
the proposed project. The No Project alternative would be environmentally superior to the proposed
Project based on its minimization or avoidance of physical environmental impacts. However, CEQA
Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) states that if the No Project alternative is found to be environmentally
superior, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.
Because the No Project alternative cannot be the Environmentally Superior Alternative under CEQA, the
Environmentally Superior Alternative is the Net Zero Alternative. If the Net Zero Alternative is determined
not feasible, then the Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative would become the
Environmentally Superior Alternative.
The Net Zero Alternative and Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative would not, however,
meet Project Objective B (listed above) because it does not meet the VA’s physical design requirements.
Further, approval of the smaller Net Zero Alternative would likely result in some veterans traveling out of
town, including to VA facilities in Los Angeles, to receive timely services, which would then increase air
quality, GHG and transportation impacts, thereby negating the impact reductions associated with
constructing and operating a smaller facility. Additionally, the Net Zero Alternative would not meet Project
Objective G (listed above) due to not utilizing all the available space on the Project site to construct a
larger building which would achieve operational efficiency and create optimal space for increased patient
and staff satisfaction. Furthermore, the Net Zero Alternative would not offer the full suite of services
needed by Veterans in the Bakersfield area.
The Net Zero Alternative and Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative would meet the
remaining Project Objectives A, C, D, E, and F (listed above). The feasibility of selecting these Alternatives
is outside of the jurisdictional authority of the City of Bakersfield because the physical characteristics of a
feasible Project are determined by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Modifications to the Project
by the City of Bakersfield are not possible because the Project applicant is limited to the design
improvements approved by the federal government as part of the already concluded federal procurement
process. As a result, the City has no jurisdiction or ability to select these alternatives because it would
conflict with the Project approved by the Federal Government. Also, the Renewable Energy System Project
Design Alternative has a potential for hazardous material impacts that would increase due to the
introduction of on-site battery storage, but the potential impacts would be less than significant with
mandatory regulatory compliance. However, it bears noting that GHG Mitigation Measure (MM) 4
essentially requires Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative, if approved by the VA
(Attachment E).
Alternatives Considered but Rejected. An EIR is also required to identify any alternatives that were
considered by the Lead Agency but were rejected as infeasible. Among the factors described by CEQA
Guidelines Section 15126.6 in determining whether to exclude alternatives from detailed consideration in
the EIR are: (a) failure to meet most of the basic project objectives; (b) infeasibility; or (c) inability to avoid
significant environmental impacts. With respect to the feasibility of potential alternatives to the Project,
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(1) notes:
“Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site
suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or
regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries…and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire,
control or otherwise have access to the alternative site…”
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 11
CEQA does not require that an analysis of alternative sites be included in an EIR. However, if the
surrounding circumstances make it reasonable to consider an alternative site, then an alternative sites
analysis should be considered and analyzed in the EIR. In making the decision to include or exclude an
analysis of an alternative site, the “key question and first step in analysis is whether any of the significant
effects of the project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the project in another
location. Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project
need to be considered for inclusion in the EIR” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(2)).
To provide additional background, on December 9, 2019, the VA issued a Solicitation for Offers for “up to
a 20-year lease for 30,100 Net Usable Square Feet of space for use by VA for personnel, furnishings, and
equipment to be operated as a Community Based Outpatient Clinic” in the geographic area described
above (Project Objective A). The VA received four proposals, for the following three locations:
1. Renovation of the existing VA clinic at 1801 Westwind Drive (two proposals).
2. A new clinic proposed by the existing landlord of the VA Clinic at 1801 Westwind Drive (referred to
as PBV, or Progress for Bakersfield Veterans, LLC), at an undisclosed location.
3. The Project site evaluated in this EIR.
The VA evaluated the four proposals and selected the Project site. PBV protested the VA’s determination
in several iterations administratively, and in the United States Court of Federal Claims, Case No. 20-1050C.
All appeals and challenges were denied, as detailed in the January 7, 2021 decision by the Court of Federal
Claims.
As a result, it is beyond the jurisdictional scope of the Lead Agency to evaluate other sites that have not
been offered to or selected by the VA, particularly those that have been rejected after a long and thorough
federal administrative and legal process; specifically including remodeling and rebuilding a clinic on the
existing site at 1801 Westwind Drive. As such, no alternative sites are feasible because the VA has already
selected the Project site for the Project, and an alternative sites analysis is thus not required in this EIR.
Project Compatibility. As part of the CEQA analysis, the Project was reviewed for compatibility with the
applicable goals and policies contained within the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan. It was
determined the Project would not conflict with any of the specific objectives, polices, or actions in the
General Plan’s Elements that were adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect (Attachment G).
Environmental Conclusion. As required by CEQA, the EIR includes appropriate review, analysis, and
mitigation measures for the environmental impacts of the proposed project. If certified, the EIR could be
utilized by other permitting agencies in their capacity as Responsible and Trustee agencies under CEQA.
As required by Departmental procedures for processing an EIR, the applicant has executed an
indemnification agreement.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
Public notice for the environmental determination for the proposed Project was advertised in The
Bakersfield Californian and posted on the bulletin board in the City of Bakersfield Development Services
Building, 1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California. All property owners within 300 feet of the project
site were notified by United States Postal Service mail regarding this public hearing in accordance with
city ordinance and state law.
Comments Received. As of this writing, no written comments have been received in response to the Public
Hearing Notice.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 12
CONCLUSIONS:
The project has been found to be consistent with General Plan goals and policies, and City Zoning
Ordinance requirements. For these reasons, City staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt
Resolution adopting CEQA Section 15091 Findings, CEQA Section 15093 Statement of Overriding
Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and certifying the Final Environmental
Impact Report to facilitate construction of an approximate 39,650 square foot Department of Veterans
Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Medical Clinic.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Map Set
• Aerial
• Zone Classification
• General Plan Designation
B. Draft Site Plan Review 21-0399
C. Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)
D. Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)
E. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
F. CEQA Section 15091 Findings and Section 15093 Statement of Overriding Considerations
G. Project Compatibility Matrix
H. Planning Commission Draft Resolutions
SARDINIA DRBERGAMODRVIA MARISOL ST
STATE RD
WILSON
AVE
LUCCA
CT
BROOKDALEAVE
CHERRY
GLENCT
PEMBROKE
AVE
WASHINGTON AVE
VIA FONTENELLE DRSARBONNE DR
VARESE
CT ELTEJONAVEVICTOR STARTHUR AVESHELDON DRPEMBROKE AVETALLMANAVE CASTAICAVEWOODROW AVE
MORAGA CT BRANDONWAYRU THERFORDCTLANDCO DRO LIVE TREE CT
CARTER AVE
SANDALWOOD STROSCOMAREST
VENETO ST
BASILICATA DR
EMILIADRPRYOR STAREZZOCT
S
T
A
T
E
R
D
BENEVENTO CTSICILY CT
ATLAS CT
LOMBARDY CT LOGAN STNOMI STHANK RD
LANDCO DRR
O
B
ERTSL
NKNUDSENDR
KNUDSEN DRST
A
T
E
RDVICTOR STOLIVE DR OLIVEDRMOHAWK STHAGEMAN RD 99SPHERE OF
INFLUENCE
BEARDSLEYCANA
L
D
I
T
C
H
B
E
AR
D
SLEYCANAL
San Lauren
Elementary
School
CITY LIMIT CITY LIMITCITY LIMIT
Copyright nearmap 2015
Document Name: 2020_11_10zc
0 300 600
Feet
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
AERIAL
SPR 21-0399
Project Location
SPR 21-0399
C-2EE
EER-SM-1
C-2E-.5AC-2A
M-2
E
E
R-SR-SR-SR-SR-SR-1E-.5A
R-
E
M-2C-2C-2AM-3
COLUMBINE ST
SARDINIA DRBERGAMODRVIA MARISOL ST
STATERD
WILSON
AVE
LUCCA
CT
BROOKDALEAVE
CHERRY
GLENCT
PEMBROKE
AVE
WASHINGTON AVE
VIA FONTENELLE DRSARBONNE DR
VARESE
CT ELTEJONAVEVICTOR STARTHUR AVESHELDON DRPEMBROKE AVETALLMAN CASTAICAVEWOODROW AVE
MORAGA CT BRANDONWAYRU THERFORDCTLANDCO DRO LIVE TREE CT
CARTER AVE
SANDALWOOD STROSCOMAREST
VENETO ST
BASILICATA DR
EMILIADRPRYOR STAREZZOCT
S
T
A
T
E
R
D
BENEVENTO CTSICILY CT
ATLAS CT
LOMBARDY CT LOGAN STNOMI STHANK RD
LANDCO DRR
O
B
ERTSL
NKNUDSENDR
KNUDSEN DRST
A
T
E
RD
VICTORSTOLIVE DR OLIVEDRMOHAWK STHAGEMAN RD 99SPHEREOFINFLUENCE
BEARDSLEYC
A
N
A
LDITCH
B
E
AR
D
SLEYCANAL
CITY LIMIT CITY LIMITCITY LIMIT
R-1
R-1
M-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-1
C-2/P.C.D.
R-1
M-2
M-2 M-3 M-3 M-3
Document Name: 2020_11_10zc
0 300 600
Feet
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Zoning
Commercial Zone Designations
C-2 Commercial
C-2/P.C.D. Combining
Industrial Zone Designations
M-1 Light Manufacturing
M-2 General Manufacturing
M-3 Heavy Industrial
Resource Zone Designations
A Agricultural
Residential Zone Designations
E Estate One Family Dwelling
E-.5A Estate One FamilyDwelling - .5 acre minimum
R-S Residential Suburban
R-1 One Family Dwelling
R-3 Limited Multiple FamilyDwelling Zone - 1 unit/1,250sq. ft.
Project Location
SPR 21-0399
SPR 21-0399
COLUMBINE
ST
SARDINIA DRBERGAMODRVIA MARISOL ST
STATE RD
WILSON
AVE
LUCCA
CT
BROOKDALEAVE
CHERRY
GLEN
CT
PEMBROKE
AVE
WASHINGTON AVE
VIA FONTENELLE DRSARBONNE DR
VARESE
CT ELTEJONAVEVICTOR STARTHUR AVESHELDON DRPEMBROKE AVETALLMANAVE CASTAICAVEWOODROW AVE
MORAGA CT BRANDONWAYRU THERFORDCTLANDCO DRO LIVE TREE CT
CARTER AVE
SANDALWOOD STROSCOMAREST
VENETO ST
BASILICATA DR
EMILIADRPRYOR STAREZZOCT
S
T
A
T
E
R
D
BENEVENTO CTSICILY CT
ATLAS CT
LOMBARDY CT LOGAN STNOMI STHANK RD
LANDCO DRR
O
B
ERTSL
NKNUDSENDR
KNUDSEN DRST
A
T
E
RDVICTOR STOLIVE DR OLIVEDRMOHAWK STHAGEMAN RD 99SPHERE OF
INFLUENCE
BEARDSLEYCANALDITCH
B
E
AR
D
SLEYCANAL
GC
SISISI
SI
GC
LR
LR
LR
LR
SR
LMR
GC
LI
LMR
LMR
LMR
LMR
LMR
PLMR
SRSR
PS
LR
LR
SR
SR
SR
SR
SRSR
SR
SR
SR
GC
SI
LMR
LMR
SI
LR
LR
GC
LMR
LMR
LR
LR
GC
SR
LMR
LMR
SI
P
GC
SI
HC HC
HI HISI
CITY LIMIT CITY LIMITCITY LIMIT
Document Name: 2020_11_10zc
0 300 600
Feet
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Land Use
RESIDENTIAL
SR -Suburban Residential:
≤ 4 dwelling units/net
acre
LMR - Low Medium DensityResidential: > 4 units but
≤ 10 dwelling units/net
acre
HMR - High MediumDensity Residential: >
7.26 units but ≤ 17.42
dwelling units/net acre
LR - Low DensityResidential: ≤ 7.26dwelling units/net acre
COMMERCIAL
GC - General Commercial
HC - Highway Commercial
INDUSTRIAL
LI - LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
SI - Service Industrial
HI - Heavy Industrial
PUBLIC FACILITIES
P - Public Facilities
PS - Public/Private Schools
SPR 21-0399
Project Location
SPR 21-0399
SPR 21-0399 Page | 1 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
csdocotor01@gmail.com
Applicant
SASD Development Group, LLC
Attention: Steven Doctor
4895 Pacific Highway
San Diego, CA 92110
Property Owner
Lundy Family Trust Carosella Trust
6607 Mt. Whitney Drive 8501 Pacheco Road #100
Bakersfield, CA 93309 Bakersfield, CA 93311
RE: Notice of Decision - Site Plan Review (Project No. 21-0399)
Dear Steve Doctor:
The plans for construction of 39,648 square foot Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient
medical clinic in M-2 (General Manufacturing) zone district located at 5512 Knudsen Drive have been reviewed by
the Site Plan Review Committee. The proposal meets the minimum required codes, policies and standards for
development as adopted by the Bakersfield City Council.
Your next step is to either apply for necessary building permits to construct your project or begin your business
activities depending on the request submitted. You must submit final building plans to the Building Division.
Conditions of Approval for the project are attached to this decision letter. Please read them carefully. Failure to
satisfy an item may delay your obtaining a building permit or commencing your project.
After construction of your project but before the City can allow occupancy, the Building Division must inspect the
development to find if it complies with the approved plans, and any other relevant permits and codes. If you have
satisfied all the requirements, the Building Director will issue a certificate of occupancy; if not, the area inspector
will give you a correction notice. Once you have made all the corrections, the Building Director can issue a
certificate of occupancy. You may not occupy a development until the Building Director has issued a certificate of
occupancy.
SPR 21-0399 Page | 2 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
In Accordance with the provisions of CEQA, an initial study was conducted for this project and it was determined
that preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required for the project to adequately analyze the
potential impacts of the project to the existing environment. A public hearing was held on September 7, 2023
accepting public testimony on the project and its environmental effects, and an Environmental Impact Report was
approved by the Planning Commission at the conclusion of the hearing . Public hearing notices were posted,
mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the project area and published in a local newspaper of general
circulation at least 10 days before the hearing.
APPEAL
Any person may appeal this decision. An appeal is limited to whether or not an adopted development standard,
zoning regulation, mitigation, or policy applied or not applied to the project, was done consistent with the
authority granted by city ordinances or the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The appeal must be in
writing stating the precise basis or issue as noted, must include the appropriate filing fee, and must be filed within
10 days of the decision date to the City of Bakersfield Planning Commission (c/o Bakersfield Planning Director,
1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, CA 93301). The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the appeal
and their decision will be final unless their decision is appealed to the City Council.
Site plan approval is based on the statements made in the application and the plans you submitted. Any errors or
omissions on these plans could alter the compliance list and/or void this decision. If you have questions about any
of the items noted in the Site Plan Compliance List, you must speak to the contact person representing the
department requiring that item.
Correspondence will continue to be sent to the applicant on record. Should the applicant change, it is the property
owner’s responsibility to update the contact information with the Planning Division. If you have other questions
regarding general information about the site plan review process, please contact the Planning Division at (661)
326-3733.
The official decision date for Site Plan Review 21-0399 is stated in the top right corner of this document.
Sincerely,
Christopher Boyle
Development Service Director
City of Bakersfield
SPR 21-0399 Page | 3 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
SPR 21-0399
IMPORTANT: PLEASE READ CAREFULLY
The project is subject to a variety of conditions of approval. These include conditions based on adopted City plans
and policies, those determined through site plan review, those determined through environmental review
essential to mitigate adverse effects on the environment including the health, safety, and welfare of the
community, and recommended conditions for development that are not essential to health, safety, and welfare,
but would on the whole enhance the project and its relationship to the neighborhood and environment. The
following conditions include specific items that you need to resolve before you can obtain a building permit or be
allowed occupancy. In addition, there are informational items included to alert you to specific fees and/or
requirements moving through the development permitting process.
REVISIONS TO THE APPROVED PLAN
Any time after site plan approval but before the approval expires, you may submit revisions to the plan. We will
treat these revisions as a new site plan application subject to a new review and required fees. The Planning
Director can only approve minor changes to the original plan without a new application if they are necessary to
meet a condition, mitigation, or result from physical obstacles or other comparable constraints (See Section
17.08.080.C.3 of the Zoning Ordinance).
Site plan approval is based on the statements made in the application and the plans you submitted. Any errors or
omissions on these plans could alter the compliance list and/or void this decision. If you have questions about
any of the items noted in the Conditions of Approval, you must speak to the contact person representing the
department requiring that item.
For conditions that require compliance prior to a building permit, or other permit issuance, provide the
appropriate documentation as evidence of compliance with your building permit submittal.
SPR 21-0399 Page | 4 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. In consideration by the City of Bakersfield for land use entitlements, including but not limited to
related environmental approvals related to or arising from this project, the applicant, and/or
property owner and/or subdivider ("Applicant" herein) agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold
harmless the City of Bakersfield, its officers, agents, employees, departments, commissioners and
boards ("City" herein) against any and all liability, claims, actions, causes of action or demands
whatsoever against them, or any of them, before administrative or judicial tribunals of any kind
whatsoever, in any way arising from, the terms and provisions of this application, including
without limitation any CEQA approval or any related development approvals or conditions
whether imposed by the City, or not, except for CITY’s sole active negligence or willful misconduct.
This indemnification condition does not prevent the Applicant from challenging any decision by
the City related to this project and the obligations of this condition apply regardless of whether
any other permits or entitlements are issued.
The City will promptly notify Applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding, falling under this
condition within thirty (30) days of actually receiving such claim. The City, in its sole discretion,
shall be allowed to choose the attorney or outside law firm to defend the City at the sole cost and
expense of the Applicant and the City is not obligated to use any law firm or attorney chosen by
another entity or party.
2. Project approval is conditioned upon acceptance of the conditions of approval contained herein,
as evidenced by the applicant’s signature on the Acknowledgement and Acceptance portion of
the Conditions of Approval.
3. This site plan expires 2 years from the decision date, unless building permits have been issued, or
where the use has commenced on projects not requiring a building permit. The project must be
completed within 5 years from the decision date. If the property is rezoned, site plan approval
will expire upon the effective date for the rezoning unless the use is permitted in the new zone.
The Planning Director may extend the expiration date up to one (1) year if you resubmit new plans
for check against the code requirements in effect at that time and include a written request for
the extension. We must receive this request before expiration of the project approval. We will
not require a fee for this extension request; however, changes to the plans originally approved for
purposes other than code requirements shall be subject to a new site plan review, including
payment of all required fees (See Section 17.08.080.D of the Zoning Ordinance).
SPR 21-0399 Page | 5 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
4. It shall be the responsibility of the property owner, operator, and/or management to ensure that
any required permits, inspections, and approvals from any regulatory agency be obtained from
the applicable agency prior to issuance of a building permit and/or the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
A. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - BUILDING (1715 Chester Avenue)
(661-326-3720 or DEVBld@bakersfieldcity.us)
1. Impact fees shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance.
2. Building permits are required for all construction on site. Submit plans for review and approval
prior to obtaining all required permits for construction of the project.
B. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - BUILDING (1715 Chester Avenue)
(Staff Contact – Mark Fick; 661-326-3790 or mfick@bakersfieldcity.us)
1. Prior to review of improvement plans by the City, the developer shall submit a grading plan for
the proposed site to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and Building Official
(Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 16.44.010). With the grading plan, if the project is subject to
the provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), a Notice of Intent
(NOI) to comply with the terms of the General Permit to Discharge Storm Water Associated with
Construction Activity (WQ Order No. 99-08-DWQ) must be filed with the State Water Resources
Control Board in Sacramento before the beginning of any construction activity. Compliance with
the general permit requires that a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) be prepared,
continuously carried out, and always be available for public inspection during normal construction
hours.
2. A grading permit is required prior to final plan approval. The developer shall submit four (4) copies
of grading plans and two (2) copies of the preliminary soils report to the Building Division. A final
soils report shall also be submitted to the Building Division before they can issue a building permit.
Please note that grading plans must be consistent with the final building site plans and landscaping
plans. Building permits will not be issued until the grading permit is approved by the Building
Division, Planning Division (HCP), and Public Works Department.
3. Show on the final building plan pedestrian access from the public way and accessible parking.
Private streets are not the public way.
4. The developer shall include fire resistive wall construction details with the final building plans for
all exterior walls of any building that is within the distance as set forth in Table 602 of the California
Building Code.
SPR 21-0399 Page | 6 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
5. Include with or show on the final building plans information necessary to verify that the project
complies with all accessibility requirements of Title 24 of the California Building Code.
6. The developer shall obtain all required approvals from the Kern County Environmental Health
Services Department (2700 “M” Street, Bakersfield, CA., 93301; PH 661-862-8700) for any food
handling facility (i.e.: market, delicatessen, café, concession, restaurant) before building permits
can be issued.
7. Buildings or structures shall require installation of an automatic fire sprinkler system where
required by current California Building Code and City ordinance.
8. The Building Division will calculate and collect the appropriate school district impact fee at the
time they issue a building permit.
9. Final Building plans shall show pedestrian access pathways or easements for persons with
disabilities from public rights-of-ways that connect to all accessible buildings, facilities, elements,
and spaces in accordance with the California Building Code. These pedestrian access ways shall
not be parallel to vehicular lanes unless separated by curbs or railings.
10. Prior to granting occupancy, the Building Division will verify that a water meter serving the
development is in place. Therefore, it is recommended that the developer contact the applicable
water purveyor to inquire about their process for obtaining water service for the development as
soon as possible. To determine who the water purveyor for the development is, you may contact
the City of Bakersfield Water Resources Department (1000 Buena Vista Road, Bakersfield, CA,
phone: 661-326-3715).
11. Show on the final building plan, electric vehicle supply equipment to facilitate future installation
as required by the California Green Code.
12. An acoustical consultant, approved by the Building Division, shall be contacted to prepare and
include with the final building plans measure that mitigate noise exposures for all buildings on the
project site that are subject to noise levels of 65 db or greater as delineated by the CNEL contour
maps of the city. These implementation measures shall comply with the requirements of Title 24
of the California Building Code.
SPR 21-0399 Page | 7 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
C. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES – PLANNING (1715 Chester Avenue)
(Staff contact – Louis Ramirez; 661-326-3023 or lramirez@bakersfieldcity.us)
1. The minimum parking required for this project has been computed based on use and shall be as
follows:
Proposed Square Parking Required
Use Footage Ratio Parking
Medical clinic 39,648 SF 1 space/200 SF 198 spaces
Required Parking: 198 spaces
(Note: There are 214 parking spaces on the proposed site plan. By ordinance, compact and
tandem spaces cannot be counted towards meeting minimum parking requirements. For
commercial development containing a multi-tenant pad, any change in use where 50 percent or
more of the pad requires additional parking pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Section 17.58.110,
the Planning Director may require parking commensurate with the new use.)
2. Minimum parking stall dimensions shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long and shall be designed
according to standards established by the Traffic Engineer. Vehicles may hang over landscape
areas no more than 2-1/2 feet provided required setbacks along street frontages are maintained,
and trees and shrubs are protected from vehicles.
3. All parking lots, driveways, drive aisles, loading areas, and other vehicular access ways, shall be
paved with concrete, asphaltic concrete, or other paved street surfacing material in accordance
with the Bakersfield Municipal Code (Sections 15.76.020 and 17.58.060.A.).
4. Lighting is required for all parking lots, except residential lots with four units or less (Section
17.58.060.A.). Illumination shall be evenly distributed across the parking area with light fixtures
designed and arranged so that light is directed downward and is reflected away from adjacent
properties and streets. Use of glare shields or baffles may be required for glare reduction or
control of back light. No light poles, standards and fixtures, including bases or pedestals, shall
exceed a height of 40 feet above grade. However, light standards placed less than 50 feet from
residentially zoned or designated property, or from existing residential development, shall not
exceed a height of 15 feet. The final building plans shall include a picture or diagram of the light
fixtures being used and show how light will be directed onto the parking area.
(Note: Staff can require additional adjustments to installed lighting after occupancy to resolve
glare or other lighting problems if they negatively affect adjacent properties.)
SPR 21-0399 Page | 8 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
5. The developer shall include a copy of a final landscape plan with each set of the final building plans
submitted to the Building Division. Building permits will not be issued until the Planning Division
has approved the final landscape plan for consistency with approved site plans and minimum
ordinance standards. Please refer to the landscaping requirements in Chapter 17.61. Landscape
plans shall include, but are not limited to, data on: gallon/box size, spacing, species (reference
approved parking lot tree list), ratio of deciduous vs. evergreen, shade calculations, ground cover
calculations, etc.
(Note 1: At the time a final site inspection is conducted, it is expected that plants will match the
species identified and be installed in the locations consistent with the approved landscape plan.
Changes made without prior approval of the Planning staff may result in the removal and/or
relocation of installed plant materials and delays in obtaining building occupancy.)
(Note 2: No mature landscaping shall be removed without prior approval by the Planning
Director.)
6. Business identification signs are neither considered nor approved under this review (e.g. wall,
monument, pylon, etc.). A separate sign permit reviewed by the Planning and Building Divisions
and issued by the Building Division, is required for all new signs, including future use and
construction signs.
(Note: Signs must comply with the Sign Ordinance; Chapter 17.60 of the Bakersfield Municipal
Code. Review this Chapter as part of due diligence.)
7. Refuse collection bin enclosures and container areas are subject to all required structural setback
from street frontages, and shall not reduce any parking, loading or landscaping areas as required
by the Zoning Ordinance.
8. In the event a previously undocumented oil/gas well is uncovered or discovered on the project,
the developer is responsible to contact the California Geologic Energy Management Division
(CalGEM). The developer is responsible for any remedial operations on the well required by
CalGEM. The developer shall also be subject to provisions of BMC Section 15.66.080.B.
(Note: A capped well is near Street “A”. Prior to the approval of Public Works plans, the applicant
shall provide the location of the capped well to the Public Works Department and resolve any
adverse impacts to the public and site improvements.)
9. The developer shall meet all regulations of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
(Regulation VIII) concerning dust suppression during construction of the project. Methods
include, but are not limited to; use of water or chemical stabilizer/suppressants to control dust
emission from disturbed area, stock piles, and access ways; covering or wetting materials that are
transported off-site; limit construction-related speed to 15 mph on all unpaved areas/washing of
construction vehicles before they enter public streets to minimize carryout/track out; and cease
grading and earth moving during periods of high winds (20 mph or more).
SPR 21-0399 Page | 9 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
10. Prior to receiving final building or site occupancy, you must contact the Planning Division (staff
contact noted above) for final inspection and approval of the landscaping, parking lot, lighting and
other related site improvements. Inspections will not be conducted until all required items have
been installed. Any deviations from the approved plans without prior approval from the Planning
Division may result in reconstruction and delays in obtaining a building or site occupancy.
11. All professional biologists conducting survey work for the project shall be qualified to conduct the
type of survey work they will be performing.
12. All mitigation measures included in the adopted Environmental Impact Report for SPR No. 21-
0399 are hereby incorporated.
D. FIRE DEPARTMENT (2101 H Street)
(Staff Contact - Ernie Medina; 661-326-3682 or emedina@bakersfieldcity.us)
1. Show on the final building plans the following items:
a. All fire lanes. Any modifications shall be approved by the Fire Department. Fire lane
identification signs shall be installed every 100 feet with red curbing when curbing is
required. All work shall be completed before occupancy of any building or portion of any
building is allowed. Identify the fire lane and include the fire lane width, also show the
width of secondary entrance on each side of the island and include the turning radius on
the site plan sheet plan.
b. All fire hydrants, both offsite (nearest to site) and on-site. Include flow data on all
hydrants. Hydrants shall be in good working condition and are subject to testing for
verification. Fire flow requirements must be met prior to construction commencing on
the project site. Please provide two (2) sets of the water plans stamped by a licensed
Registered Civil Engineer to the Fire Department and two (2) sets to the Water Resources
Department (1000 Buena Vista Road, Bakersfield, CA. 93311; 661-326-3715).
(Note: Show: 1) distance to the nearest hydrant; and 2) distance from that hydrant to the
farthest point of the project site.)
c. All fire sprinkler and/or stand pipe systems, fire alarms and commercial hood systems.
These suppression systems require review and permits by the Fire Department. The Fire
Department will issue guidelines for these various items as they may apply to this project.
d. Project address, including suite number if applicable. If the project is within a shopping
or business center, note the name and address of the center.
e. Name and phone number of the appropriate contact person.
SPR 21-0399 Page | 10 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
2. The developer must pay required fees to and request an inspection from the Water Resources
Department (1000 Buena Vista Road, Bakersfield, CA, phone: 661-326-3715) for any underground
sprinkler feeds at least 2 full business days before they are buried. The Prevention Services
Division (2101 H Street, Bakersfield CA, Ph. 661/326-3979) must complete all on-site inspections
of fire sprinkler systems and fire alarm systems before any building is occupied.
3. Where fire apparatus access roads or a water supply for fire protection are required to be
installed, such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of
construction.
4. Facilities, buildings or portions of buildings hereafter constructed shall be accessible to fire
department apparatus by way of an approved fire apparatus access road with an asphalt, concrete
or other driving surface approved by the fire chief. Must be capable of supporting the imposed
load of fire apparatus weighing at least 75,000 pounds and shall be surfaced with the first lift of
asphalt as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. All access (Permanent and temporary) to
and around any building under construction must be a least 20 feet wide (26 feet wide where
building height exceeds 30 feet), with an overhead clearance of 13 feet 6 inches, and contain no
obstruction. The fire apparatus access road shall extend to within 150 feet of all portions of the
facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an
approved route around the exterior of the building or facility.
5. Turning Radius: The minimum turning radius shall be thirty-seven feet.
6. The developer shall submit two (2) sets of plans for permits and approvals from the Fire
Department for fuel tanks or related facilities before they are installed on the site. Please contact
the Prevention Services Division at 661-326-3979 for further information.
7. If you handle hazardous materials or hazardous waste on the site, the Prevention Services Division
may require a hazardous material management and/or risk management plan before you can
begin operations. Please contact them at 661-326-3979 for further information.
8. If you store hazardous materials on the site in either an underground or a permanent
aboveground storage tank, a permit from the Prevention Services Division is required to install
and operate these tanks. The Prevention Services Division may also require a Spill Prevention
Control and Countermeasure Plan for storage of petroleum products above ground in quantities
of 1,320 gallons or more. Please contact them at 661-326-3979 for further information.
9. All projects must comply with the current California Fire Code and current City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code.
SPR 21-0399 Page | 11 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
E. WATER RESOURCES (1000 Buena Vista Road)
(Staff contact - Tylor Hester; 661-326-3715 or THester@bakersfieldcity.us)
1. Property is located outside of the City of Bakersfield domestic water service area, therefore, only
pipelines and appurtenances related to fire water are subject to review.
2. Developer shall submit two (2) sets of utility plans signed by a California Registered Civil Engineer
to the Water Resources Department showing all offsite and onsite improvements, including
connections to the existing water main and underground fire waterlines and related apparatuses.
Include any existing nearby on or off-site hydrants on the plans. Plans shall be submitted along
with applicable plan check fees and any other associated fees per the current fee schedule. Plans
shall comply with current City Standards and Specifications, California Fire Code, and City of
Bakersfield Municipal Code. City Standards and Specifications and the current Fee Schedule are
available for download from the City’s website at
www.bakersfieldcity.us/gov/depts/water_resources/fees.htm
3. Developer shall pay the required Water Resources Fire Service Inspection Fees and submit an
Inspection Request Form for any underground fire waterlines and their apparatuses at least two
(2) full business days before permanent construction. The form is available for download from
the City’s website at www.bakersfieldcity.us/gov/depts/water_resources/fees.htm
F. PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING (1501 Truxtun Avenue)
(Staff contact - Susanna Kormendi; 661-326-3997 or SKormendi@bakersfieldcity.us)
1. The developer shall construct curbs, gutters, cross gutters, sidewalks, and street/alley paving
along Landco Drive, Street “A”, and portions of Knudsen Drive per Recorded Agreement 04-274,
according to adopted city standards. These improvements shall be shown on the final building
plans submitted to the Building Division before any building permits will be issued.
2. The developer shall install streetlights along Knudsen Drive, Landco Drive, and Street ”A” as per
Standard ST-23.6. The developer shall be responsible for providing the labor and materials
necessary to energize all newly installed streetlights before occupancy of the building or site.
Submit street light location and contact the Public Works Department at (661) 326-3584 for street
light number.
3. The developer shall construct standard accessible ramps at the northeast corner of Knudsen Drive
and Street “A” and at the northwest corner of Landco Drive, and Street “A” according to adopted
city standards. These improvements shall be shown on the final building plans submitted to the
Building Division before any building permits will be issued.
SPR 21-0399 Page | 12 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
4. The developer shall install new connection(s) to the public sewer system. This connection shall
be shown on the final building plans submitted to the Building Division before any building permits
will be issued.
5. All on-site areas required to be paved (i.e. parking lots, access drives, loading areas, etc.) shall
consist of concrete, asphaltic concrete (Type B. A. C.) or other paved street material approved by
the City Engineer. Pavement shall be a minimum thickness of 2 inches over 3 inches of approved
base material (i.e. Class II A. B.) if concrete is used, it shall be a minimum thickness of 4 inches per
Municipal Code Section 17.58.060.A. This paving standard shall be noted on the final building
plans submitted to the Building Division before any building permits will be issued.
6. If a grading plan is required by the Building Division, building permits will not be issued until the
grading plan is approved by both the Public Works Department and the Building Division.
7. All storm water generated on the project site, including the street frontage shall be retained onsite
unless otherwise allowed by the Public Works Department (please contact the Public Works
Department – Subdivisions at 661-326-3576). Construction of permanent drainage facility shall be
in accordance with Recorded Agreement 04-274 or as otherwise approved by both the applicant
and Public Works Director.
8. If the project generates industrial waste, it shall be subject to the requirements of the Industrial
Waste Ordinance. An industrial waste permit must be obtained from the Public Works
Department before issuance of the building permit. To find out what type of waste is considered
industrial, please contact the Wastewater Treatment Superintendent at 661-326-3249.
9. Before any building or site can be occupied, the developer must reconstruct or repair substandard
off-site street improvements that front the site to adopted city standards as directed by the City
Engineer. Please call the Construction Desk at 661-326-3049 to schedule a site inspection to find
out what improvements may be required prior to submitting a grading plan. Any off-site/frontage
improvements or repairs required during the site inspection shall be shown on the grading plan.
10. A street permit from the Public Works Department shall be obtained before any work can be done
within the public right-of-way (streets, alleys, easements). Please include a copy of this site plan
review decision to the department at the time you apply for this permit.
11. A sewer connection fee shall be paid at the time a building permit is issued. We will base this fee
at the rate in effect at the time a building permit is issued.
12. If the project is subject to the provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES), a “Notice of Intent” (NOI) to comply with the terms of the General Permit to Discharge
Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (SWRCB Order No. 2009-009-DWQ as
SPR 21-0399 Page | 13 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
amended by Order No. 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ) must be filed with the State Water
Resources Control Board in Sacramento before the beginning of any construction activity.
Compliance with the general permit required that a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) be prepared, continuously carried out, and always be available for public inspection
during normal construction hours.
13. Prior to the issuance of each building permit, or if no building permit is required, the first required
City approval prior to construction, the developer/owner shall pay a Transportation Impact Fee
(TIF) for regional facilities. This fee will be based on the rate in effect at the time the applicable
approval is issued or in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act, as applicable. The Public Works
Department will calculate an estimate of the total fee upon submittal of construction plans for
the project.
14. The developer shall form a new Maintenance District. Undeveloped parcels within an existing
Maintenance District are required to update Maintenance District documents. Updated
documents, including Proposition 218 Ballot and Covenant, shall be signed and notarized. If there
are questions, contact Stephan Trujillo at 661-326-3576.
(Note: If already within a maintenance district, may need to update the maintenance district
form.)
16. The developer shall install a full-sized manhole in each sewer line except residential development
before it connects to the sewer main. This manhole is to be located within the property being
developed and must be easily accessible by City workers.
G. PUBLIC WORKS - TRAFFIC (1501 Truxtun Avenue)
(Staff contact - Susanna Kormendi; 661-326-3997 or SKormendi@bakersfieldcity.us)
1. Street return type approaches, if used, shall have 20-foot minimum radius returns with a 19-ft to
36-foot throat width. All dimensions shall be shown on the final building plans.
2. Two-way drive aisles shall be a minimum width of 24 feet. If perpendicular (90º) parking spaces
are proposed where a vehicle must back into these aisles, the minimum aisle width shall be 25
feet. All drive aisle dimension shall be shown on the final building plans.
3. Show the typical parking stall dimension on the final building plans (minimum stall size is 9 feet x
18 feet and shall be designed according to standards established by the Traffic Engineer).
4. Walls, fences, or trash enclosures within 10 feet of a sidewalk at an alley or driveway shall not
exceed 3 feet in height above the curb flow line. You must either revise the circulation design or
show on the final building plans that the maximum fence/wall height will not exceed three feet.
SPR 21-0399 Page | 14 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
5. The developer shall dedicate additional road right-of-way to the City of Bakersfield along Landco
Drive and Street ”A” to full local street width according to adopted city standards with the grading
plan submittal. Street ”A” shall be dedicated by an easement or other acceptable instrument as a
public local street built to City standards, as approved by the City Engineer.
6. The developer shall dedicate any sidewalk extending out of the right of way to the City of
Bakersfield for the pedestrian way along all arterial streets. This must be conducted with a
separate instrument or final map.
7. On Knudsen Drive, striping for left turn channelization shall be provided for any access leading to
a development which, at build out, generates more than 50 peak hour trips.
H. PUBLIC WORKS - SOLID WASTE (4101 Truxtun Avenue)
(Staff Contact - Jesus Carrera; 661-326-3114 or jcarrera@bakersfieldcity.us)
1. You must contact the staff person noted above before building permits can be issued or work
begins on the property to establish the level and type of service necessary for the collection of
refuse and/or recycled materials. Collection locations must provide enough containment area for
the refuse that is generated without violating required zoning or setback restrictions (see Planning
Division conditions). Levels of service are based on how often collection occurs as follows:
Cart service -- 1 cubic yard/week or less 1 time per week
Front loader bin services -- 1 cubic yard/week - 12 cubic yards/day
Roll-off compactor service -- More than 12 cubic yards/day
2. Show on the final building plans refuse/recycle bin enclosures. Each enclosure shall be designed
according to adopted city standard (Detail # ST-27 and ST-28), at the size checked below .
Before occupancy of the building or site is allowed, 2, 3-cubic yard front loading type
refuse/recycle bin(s) shall be placed within the required enclosure(s).
__________6' deep x 8' wide (1 bin) _________8' deep x 15' wide (3 bins)
_________8' deep x 10' wide (2 bins) _________8' deep x 20' wide (4 bins)
One, 8' deep x 10' wide (inside dimension); on skids for direct stab only (1-6 yard
recycling bin)
(Note: All measurements above are curb-to-curb dimensions inside the enclosure. If both refuse
and recycling containers are to be combined in the same enclosure area, this area must be
expanded in size to accommodate multiple containers/bins - contact the staff person above for
the appropriate enclosure size.)
SPR 21-0399 Page | 15 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
3. Examples of enclosure styles can be found on (Detail # ST-32).
4. Show on the final building plans one compactor roll-off bin location(s), designed according to
adopted City standards (Detail # ST-30 and ST-31). Please contact staff for additional information
on compactor requirements and placement.
5. Facilities that require infectious waste services shall obtain approval for separate infectious waste
storage areas from the Kern County Health Department. In no instances shall the refuse bin area
be used for infectious waste containment purposes.
6. Facilities that require grease containment must provide a storage location that is separate from
the refuse bin location. This shall be shown on the final building plans. If a grease interceptor is
to be used instead of a grease containment bin, the plans must still show the location of an
adequately sized enclosure should a grease containment bin be required at a future date. The
grease containment bin shall not share the same enclosure as the refuse/recyclable/organic bin
enclosure.
7. Facilities with existing refuse service must improve the service location area(s) according to
adopted City standards (Detail # ST-27 and ST-28). These improvements shall be clearly shown on
the final building plans.
8. If utilities are incorporated into the enclosure design, they shall not interfere with space provided
for refuse bins and must provide sufficient protection measures to guard the utilities from
damage.
9. Enclosures shall not be located in an area that would cause refuse trucks to interfere with drive
thru traffic flow entering or exiting the site, drive thru lanes, etc.
10. Businesses are required to have sufficient capacity of refuse/recycling/organic material storage to
go without service for 1 day (Sunday). At any time refuse/recycling/organic services become an
issue, businesses shall construct a second refuse enclosure to meet the demand. The second
enclosure shall be approved by the City prior to construction.
11. Revise the site plan to make the trash enclosure accessible to the refuse truck. City trucks may
not drive down dead-end corridors, nor back-up long distances; therefore, a turn-around area
shall be provided.
Attachment
Recorded Agreement 04-274
SPR 21-0399 Page | 16 of 16
OFFICE
USE
ONLY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT BY PROJECT APPLICANT:
I agree to the project’s conditions of approval and acknowledge that failure to comply with any and all
conditions shall constitute grounds for potential revocation of the permit approval.
Signature Date
Print Name
AGREEME.T.O. 0 4- 2 ? 4
ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
SEP 2 2 2004THISAGREEMENTismadeandenteredintoon , by and
between the CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, a municipal corporation, ("CITY" herein) and TOM
AND LISA CAROSELLA, husband and wife, and GENE D. BOREL AND JERRY L. BOREL,
Co-Trustees ("OWNERS" herein).
RECITALS
WHEREAS, OWNERS desire to annex OWNERSS' real property, which is described
as APN 365-020-30 (Carosella) and APN 365-020-28 (Borel) (hereafter, the "Subject
Properties"); and
WHEREAS, This agreement is a product of negotiations and is in lieu of potential
eminent domain proceedings and includes any and all claims by SELLER for compensation
arising from this transaction including, but not limited to relocation assistance benefits.
WHEREAS, OWNERS will not protest the annexation of the Subject Property into the
CITY, based on certain assurances as stated below made by the CITY; and
WHEREAS, Proposition 218 may require that before CITY can annex the subject
property, the OWNERS must approve the imposition or extension of any assessment or tax
which is imposed on similarly situated properties within the CITY.
NOW, THEREFORE, incorporating the foregoing recitals herein, CITY and OWNERS
mutually agree as follows:
1. ANNEXATION TO CITY. OWNERS hereby consent to and waive any protest
rights to the annexation of the subject property to the CITY as shown by the attached "Official
Assessment Ballot" signed by OWNERS.
2. PURCHASE OF KNUDSEN DRIVE RIGHT OF WAY. CITY agrees to purchase
the necessary right of way for the full width of future Knudsen Drive along the westerly
boundary of APN 365-020-28, described in Exhibit "A", at a cost of $4.00 per square foot, for a
total purchase price of TWO HUNDRED SIXTY FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED FORTY
EIGHT DOLLARS ($264,148). This price is a product of negotiations and includes any and all
claims by SELLER for compensation arising from this transaction. Prior to the close of escrow
BUYER shall deposit the purchase price and closing costs into an escrow account with
Chicago Title Insurance Company, herein "Escrow Holder", located at Maria Bernat.
3. BUYER'S CONTINGENCIES. The closing of this transaction is contingent upon
the satisfaction or waiver of the following contingencies. Each of these contingencies must be
satisfied prior to any obligation of the BUYER to become effective. The failure to complete
these contingencies within the time stated, or within any mutually-agreed extended time, shall
terminate this Agreement with no liability of BUYER for any direct or consequential damages:
G:\GROU PDAT~ADMINRPT~.004\08-18~Annexation Agmt.doc Page I of 7
3.1 Marketable fee simple title. SELLER specifically recognizes that
BUYER=s agreement to purchase The Property is contingent upon SELLER=s ability to
provide clear marketable fee simple title as defined in this Agreement. It shall be the
BUYER=s decision whether or not this contingency has been satisfied. BUYER shall issuewrittenapprovalofacurrentPreliminaryTitleReportCPTR") concerning The PropertyissuedbytheEscrowHolder, as well as all documents referred to in the PTR or this
Agreement (the "underlying documents"), and the issuance by the Escrow Holder of a title
policy. SELLER shall cause the PTR and all underlying documents to be delivered toBUYERpromptlyafterthedateofagreement. BUYER's approval is to be given within ten
10) days after receipt of said PTR and legible copies of all underlying documents. The
disapproval by BUYER of any monetary encumbrance, which by the terms of the
Agreement is not to remain against The Property after the closing, shall not be considered
a failure of this condition, as SELLER shall have the obligation, at SELLER's expense, to
satisfy and remove such disapproved monetary encumbrance at or before the closing;
3.2 Documents. The delivery of all documents and the due performance bySELLERofeachandeveryundertakingandagreementtobeperformedbySELLERunderthisAgreement;
3.3Material Change. No material change, as hereinafter defined, shall have
occurred with respect to The Property which has not been approved in writing by BUYER.For purposes of this Agreement, a "material change" shall be a change in the status of the
use, occupancy, tenants or condition of The Property as reasonably expected by the
BUYER, that occurs after the date of this Agreement and prior to the close of escrow.
BUYER shall have twenty (20) days following receipt of written notice from any source of
any such material change within which to approve or disapprove same. Unless otherwise
notified in writing by either party, Escrow Holder shall assume that no material change has
occurred prior to the close of escrow;
3.4No Existing Leases and Tenancy Statements. SELLER represents that
there are no leases, subleases or rental arrangements (herein the "existing leases");
3.5Other Agreements. SELLER shall within fifteen (15) working days of thedateofthisAgreementprovideBUYERwithlegiblecopiesofallotheragreementsknown
to SELLER that will affect The Property after the closing;
3.6Unrecorded Title Matters. SELLER has no actual knowledge of anyencumbrances, covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements, licenses, liens, charges or
other matters which affect the title of The Property that are not recorded in the Official
Records of the Kern County Recorder;
3.7Possessory Rights. SELLER has no knowledge that anyone or any entitywill, at the time of the closing, have any right to possession of The Property, except asdisclosedbytheSELLERinwritingtoBUYER.
All of the above contingencies are for the benefit of, and may be waived in
writing by, BUYER and may be elsewhere herein referred to as "BUYER's contingencies."
G:\GROUPDATxADM INR PTX2004\08-18~Annexation Agmt.doc Page 2 of 7
4. SELLER'S WARRANTIES. SELLER hereby makes the following warranties and
representations to BUYER which shall survive the closing and delivery of the grant deed for a
period of five (5) years:
4.'1 Authority of SELLER. SELLER warrants and represents that they are the
sole owners, in fee simple, of and have the right and legal ability to transfer said Property totheBUYERassetforthinthisAgreement;
4.2 Hazardous Substances. SELLER has no knowledge, except as otherwisedisclosedtoBUYERinwriting, of the existence or prior existence on The Property of anyhazardoussubstance, nor of the existence or prior existence of any above or below-groundstoragetank(s);
4.3Legal Proceedings. SELLER has no knowledge of any actions, lawsuits
or proceedings pending or threatened before any commission, board, bureau, agency,arbitrator, court or tribunal that would affect The Property or the right to occupy or utilize
same;
4.4Bankruptcy Proceedings. SELLER is not the subject of a bankruptcy,insolvency or probate proceeding and has no notice or knowledge that any tenant, lessee
or other person/entity possessing an interest in The Property is the subject of a bankruptcyorinsolvencyproceeding.
5. CONVEYANCE OF TITLE, SELLER agrees to convey to BUYER marketable
fee simple title to The Property free and clear of all recorded and unrecorded liens,encumbrances, assessments, easements, licenses, leases and taxes, excepting those agreedtoinwritingbyBUYER. The amount of any bond or assessment which is a lien shall be paidbySELLER, subject to approval of title report. SELLER shall execute a Grant Deed which
conveys clear title to The Property to BUYER and deliver same to Escrow Holder within fifteen
15) days of the opening of escrow. Any and all water and mineral rights accruing to The
Property shall also be transferred to BUYER without reservation.
6. CLOSING COSTS. BUYER shall be responsible for all normal and reasonable
escrow fees, including the costs of title insurance. SELLER shall be responsible for the costs
to clear title and all real property taxes and assessments accruing up to the close of escrow.
SELLER shall fully pay the amount of any bond or assessment which is a lien upon The
Property prior to the close of escrow.
7. ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS, Within fifteen (15) working days of execution of this
Agreement by all parties, each shall deliver to the Escrow Holder any appropriately executed
escrow instructions or file a written protest detailing what instructions are not acceptable. This
Agreement shall serve as the parties' instructions to the Escrow Holder and shall become partoftheescrowinstructionsforconsummationofthepurchaseandsaleofTheProperty.BUYER and SELLER agree to execute such additional and supplementary instructions as maybeappropriateorrequiredbyEscrowHoldertocomplywiththetermsofthisAgreement;provided, however, that in the event of any conflict between this Agreement and any additional
or supplementary escrow instructions, the terms of this Agreement shall control, unless the
parties jointly agree to the contrary. Said escrow instructions are incorporated herein by this
reference.
G:\OROIJPDA'I~ADNIINRPT~OO4~OS-18~Ani3cxation Agmt.doc Page 3 o~' 7 ;i ''
8. CLOSING DATE. Escrow shall close no later than ten (10) days after the
satisfaction of all contingencies set forth herein, unless extended by mutual written agreement
of both parties. In no event shall the escrow close less than ninety (90) days from execution of
this Agreement by all parties, unless by mutual agreement of all parties.
9. POSSESSION OF SELLER=S PARCEL. SELLER agrees to give possession of
The Property to BUYER at the close of escrow.
10. DEDICATION OF KUNDSEN DRIVE RIGHT OF WAY. OWNERS agree to
dedicate to CiTY necessary right of way for future Knudsen Drive along the westerly boundary
of APN 365-020-30 as described in Exhibit "B".
11. KNUDSEN DRIVE CONSTRUCTION. CITY agrees to construct Knudsen Drive
as shown in Exhibit "C". OWNER agrees to allow Knudsen Drive drainage to be disposed of
on OWNER'S property in a temporary sump which will be maintained by CITY. Prior to any
development on OWNER'S property, CITY will construct permanent drainage facilities, remove
temporary drainage basin and construct permanent disposal facilities outside of OWNER'S of
property, at CITY'S expense.
12. WAIVER OF DEFAULT. The failure of any party to enforce against another a
provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of that party's right to enforce such a
provision at a later time, and shall not serve to vary the terms of this Agreement.
13. MERGER AND MODIFICATION. This contract sets forth the entire Agreement
between the parties and supersedes alt other oral or written representations. This contract
may be modified only in a writing approved by the City Council and signed by all the parties.
14. TERMINATION. This Agreement may be terminated by any party prior to the
initiation of any of the work detailed above, and prior to the initiation of annexation
proceedings, upon ten days written notice, served by mail or personal service, to all other
parties.
15. EXECUTION. This Agreement is effective upon execution of the Agreement
and Ballot Measure attached hereto as Exhibit "A." This Agreement is the product of
negotiation and therefore shall not be construed against any party.
16. NOTICES. All notices relative to this Agreement shall be given in wdting and
shall be personally served or sent by certified or registered mail and be effective upon actual
personal service or depositing in the United States mail. The parties shall be addressed as
follows, or at any other address designated by notice:
CITY:CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
CITY HALL
1501 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93301
OWNERS:TOM AND LISA CAROSELLA
1412 17TH STREET
Bakersfield, California 93301
G:\GROUPDAT~ADMINRPT~004~08-18~Annexafion Agmt.dcc Page 4 of 7
GENE D. BOREL
6502 YOSEMITE PLACE
BAKERSFIELD CA 93309
JERRY L. BOREL
8918 ETCHART ROAD
BAKERSFIELD CA 93312
17. GOVERNING LAW. Any lawsuit pertaining to any matter arising under, or
growing out of, this contract shall be instituted in Kern County, California.
18. ASSIGNMENT. This contract shall not be assigned by any party, or any partysubstituted, without prior written consent of all the parties.
19. BINDING EFFECT. The rights and obligations of this Agreement shall inure tothebenefitof, and be binding upon, the parties to the contract and their heirs, administrators,executors, personal representatives, successors and assigns.
20. CORPORATE AUTHORITY. Each individual executing this AgreementrepresentsandwarrantstheyaredulyauthorizedtoexecuteanddeliverthisAgreementonbehalfofthecorporationororganization, if any, named herein and this Agreement is bindinguponsaidcorporationororganizationinaccordancewithitsterms.
21. TAX EFFECT. This transaction is in lieu of eminent domain action. However,none of the parties (nor such parties' counsel or accountants) has made or is making in this
Agreement any representation to any other party (or such party's counsel or accountants)concerning any of the tax effects or consequences on the other party of the transactionsprovidedforinthisAgreement. Each party represents that it has obtained, or may obtain,independent tax advice with respect thereto and upon which it, if so obtained, has solely relied.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed, the day and year first-above written.
CITY"
By:
Mayor
G:\GROUPDAT~ADM INR1'1%2004~08-18~Anncxafion Agmt.doc
TOM CAROSELLA _. _...--.,
G/ENE D. BOREL
Page 5 of 7 ~
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
VIRGINIA GENARRO
City Attorney
ERRY ~f~BC~REI
ALAI~I-I~AI~
Deputy City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
By:~_ ,~---/~/.~.
Development Servic/A~rector
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
By:
RAUL M. ROJAS
Public Works Director
COUNTERSIGNED:
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
By:
GREGORY J. KLIMKO
Finance Director
G:\GROUPDAT~ADMINRPTX2004~08-18kAnnexation Agmt.doc Page 6 of 7
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY
IMPORTANT - OFFICIAL PROPERTY OWNERS ASSESSMENT BALLOT
This assessment ballot is for the use of property OWNERS of the parcel(s) identified below, which parcel(s) is
proposed to be annexed into the City of Bakersfield.
This assessment ballot may be used to express either support for or opposition to inclusion within the proposed
annexation and the extension or imposition of any tax or assessment currently being levied by the City of
Bakersfield. In order to be counted, this assessment ballot must be signed below by an OWNER or, if the
OWNERS are not individuals, by an authorized representative of the OWNERS.
TO CAST THIS BALLOT, PLEASE RETURN THIS ENTIRE PAGE
OFFICIAL ASSESSMENT BALLOT
OWNERS: TOM AND LISA CAROSELLA AND
GENE D. BOREL AND JERRY L. BOREL
Property Description: APN 365-020- AND APN 30 365-020-28
Individual taxes or assessments shall not exceed those taxes or assessments levied on
similarly situated properties within the City of Bakersfield as of the date of the
execution of this ballot.
ASSESSMENT BALLOT MEASURE
Shall the City Council of the City of Bakersfield
include the above described property within the
proposed annexation and levy individual taxes and
assessments not to exceed those taxes or assessments
levied on similarly situated properties with the City
of Bakersfield as of the date of execution of this ballot?
Yes X
No
Date: ,200
OWNERS' Signatures "~~r~~ ~r~-~- ~.
G:\GROUPDAT~ADMINRPT~2004~08-18~Anncxation Agmt.doc Page 7 of 7
Exhibit "A"
A parcel of land being a portion of Lot 1 in the Northeast ~.4 of Section 15, Township 29
South, Range 27 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, as shown on the sales map of
lands of the Kern County Land Company filed April 8, 1892, in the Office of the Kern
County Recorder, more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Section 15; thence North 89° 10' 32" West,
along the North line of said Section 15, 663.86 feet to the Northerly prolongation of the
West line of said Lot 1; thence South 0~ 13' 29" West, along said West line of Lot 1,
592.19 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
Thence (1), South 89' 10' 32" East, a distance of 90.01 feet;
Thence (2), South 0° 13' 29" East a distance of 733.52 feet to a point on the South line
of said Lot 1;
Thence (3), N 89° 10' 32' West, along ,said South line a distance of 90.01 feet to the
Southwest corner of said Lot 1;
Thence (4), North 0° 13' 29" East, along said West line of Lot 1, a distance of 733.52 feet
to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 1.516 acres, more or less.
End of Description
TRUE POINT
OF BEGINNING
S 89'IO'J2"E
OLIVE DFIIVE
S 89~i0'32"£ 663.86'
S 89~O'J2"E 90.00'
CORNER
SECIION 15 29/27
0 50
EXHIBIT 'A '
Exhibit "B"
A pamel of land being a portion of Lot 1 in the Northeast ~,4 of Section 15, Township 29
South, Range 27 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, as shown on the sales map of
lands of the Kern County Land Company filed April 8, 1892, in the Office of the Kern
County Recorder, more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Section 15; thence North 89' 10' 32" West,
along the North line of said Section 15, 663.86 feet to the Northerly prolongation of the
West line of said Lot 1; thence South 0° 13' 29" West, along said West line of Lot 1,
292.17 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
Thence (1), South 89° 10' 32' East, a distance of 106.01 feet;
Thence (2), South 3° 16' 45" West, a distance of 300.28 feet;
Thence (3), N 89° 10' 32" West, a distance of 90.01 feet to a point on said West line of
Lot 1;
Thence (4), North 0° 13' 29" East, along said West line, a distance of 300.02 feet to the
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 0.675 acres, more or less.
End of Description
TRUE POINT
OF BEGINNING
OLIVE DRIVE
S 89'10'32" E663.86'
89'10'32'*E
106.01'
t
oo
APN 36~5-020-30
89'10'32"E
90. O0 '
CORNER
SEC710N 15 29/27
0 50
EXHIBIT 'B'
R/W FL ~ R/~
A
34'VARIES VARIES
CURB ~D ~~UTTER
CT. TION A-A ~
A
AND GUT~R
R,/W FL ~ R/W
11', , 34' ,
CURB ~
20' EP 2.5'
PAt,ED SlREET
SECTION B-B
J J
FEET
0 5O
EXHIBIT ~-~,~ ~
OFiSiNAL
VANVANV
A
NVANVANCLE AN
AIR
CLE AN
AIR
CLE AN
AIR
C LEA N
AI R
CL EAN
A IR
N O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N GONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERN O P A R K I N G205205
2 0 5205205205205205205 GROUND-MOUNTED MONUMENT SIGN - SEE 16 / A061
VEHICLE BARRIER - CONCRETE FILLED STEEL PIPE
BOLLARDS - SEE
LOADING DOCK AND FREIGHT PARKING
EXTERIOR TRASH AND RECYCLING WITH 6 FT. HIGH CMU
ENCLOSURE WITH METAL GATES
HEALING GARDEN, SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
SHEET NOTES
COVERED OUTDOOR PATIO
9
DROP-OFF CANOPY
10
11
AMBULANCE CANOPY / PATIENT PICK-UP
12
FLAGPOLES - (2) 30 FT EACH SIDE OF CENTERED (1) 35
FT HEIGHT ABOVE GROUND WITH EXTERIOR LIGHTING,
SEE AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS
PUBLIC WAY - ADJACENT PUBLIC ROADWAY
BICYCLE RACK
LED ILLUMINATED BOLLARD, SEE AND ELECTRICAL
DRAWINGS
13 BENCH SEATING, SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS
14 NOT USED
15 FABRIC SUNSHADE CANOPIES AND SUPPORTS
16 AREA OF TRUNCATED DOMES - SEE DETAIL AND
17 STANDARD ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL - SEE DETAIL
18 VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL - SEE DETAIL
19 PAVED DRIVE AISLE
20 MOTORCYCLE PARKING, SEE DETAIL
21 KNOX BOX KEY BOX MOUNTED AT 5'-6" ABOVE FINISH GRADE,
RECESS INTO WALL SO KNOX BOX FACE IS FLUSH WITH WALL
FINISH. COORDINATE KEYING WITH FIRE DEPARTMENT
22 POLE-MOUNTED SITE LIGHTING - SEE ELECTRICAL SITE
DRAWINGS, SEE DETAIL 5/E300
23 CONCRETE CURB, GUTTER WHERE OCCURS, SEE CIVIL
DRAWINGS AND DETAILS &
24 CLEAN-AIR VEHICLE PARKING SPACE, SEE
25 FUTURE EVCS PARKING SPACE
26 FUTURE VAN ACCESSIBLE EVCS PARKING SPACE
27 FUTURE STANDARD ACCESSIBLE EVCS PARKING SPACE
28 FUTURE EV PARKING SPACE
29 CONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER, SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS
30 SIGNAGE: "STAFF AND SERVICE ENTRY ONLY", SEE DETAIL
31 SIGNAGE: "ONE WAY - DO NOT ENTER", SEE DETAIL
32 PAINTED DIRECTIONAL ARROW(S) / STRIPING / SIGNAGE,
TYPICAL WHERE SHOWN, SEE DETAIL
33 EMERGENCY GENERATOR IN WALLED ENCLOSURE
34 RETENTION BASIN, SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS
35 FIRE LANE SIGNAGE, SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS, SEE DETAIL
36 ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER ON CONCRETE EQUIPMENT PAD,
SEE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS
37 CONCRETE APRON, SEE DETAIL
38 6" WIDE CONCRETE MOW CURB, SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS
39 FIRE HYDRANT, SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS
40 STOP SIGN, SEE DETAIL
41 BICYCLE LOCKERS, 10 TOTAL
42 CONCRETE SIDEWALK, SEE DETAIL
43 DASHED LINES INDICATE APPROXIMATE TRAVEL OF FIRE
DEPARTMENT TRUCK ROUTE
/13 A060
/2 A061
/5 A061
/19 A060
/18 A060
/11 A061
/17 A060
/1 A061
/1 A061
/3 A061
/4 A062
44 UNAUTHORIZED VEHICLE ACCESS SIGNAGE, SEE DETAIL
45 PRE-FABRICATED RAISED LANDSCAPE PLANTER (PLUMB FOR
IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE). B.O.D. QUICK CRETE CALIFORNIA
PLANTER QS-249624P
/14 A060
/17 A061
/15 A060 /16 A060
/8 A061
/8 A061
/8 A061
/7 A061
25'-0" STAND-OFF SETBACK
PROPERTY LINE
SETBACK OR EASEMENT PER CITY
STANDARDS & REGULATIONS
SITE PLAN LEGENDKNUDSEN DRIVEMAIN
ENTRANCE
PATIENT &
PUBLIC PARKING
STAFF & SERVICE
ENTRANCE
EMERGENCY /
STAFF & SERVICE
ENTRANCE
SECONDARY
ENTRANCE / EXIT
LANDCO DRIVESTREET 'A'
1
9
12
4
6
7 8
10
42
1313
VA COMMMUNITY-BASED
OUTPATIENT CLINIC
30,100 MAX NUSF
38,638 GSF7.04 ACRESSTAFF
PARKING
20
18
20
18
26
27
1
A012
2
A012
4
A011
1
A011
3
5
13
13
13
13
5
3
A011
22
22
22
22
22 22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
21
28
8 STALLS
.
30
30
25
31
31
31
32
32
32
32
32
33
24
8 4
1
32
2
4
1
2
5
5
19
8
2
4
6
6
2
5
7
5
7
10
10
8
8
10
10
12
12
6
2
2
36
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16 16
16
16
16
16
15
16
37
19
19
6
A011
SETBACK10'-0"4 S T A L L S.1 7
7 S T A L L S.25
7 ST A L L S.2 5
5 S T A L L S
.2 4
2 S T A L L S
.1 8
6 S T A L L S.1 7
7 STALLS.17SETBACK
10'-0"
S ETBA CK10'-0"
38
2
40
11
11
E M E R G E N C Y
GEN E R A TO R
22
22
40
40
16
11 40
32
19
28
28
40
32
32
32
TYP OF 8
TYP OF 2
TYP OF 4
40
32
32
31
TYP
31 40
TYP OF 16
32
22
TYP OF 4
TYP OF 4
TYP OF 4
23
23
23
23
23
29
23
23
23
23
23
23
29
34
34
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
35
41
42
43
43
22
16
164216
42
35
42
42
42
42
UTILITY TRENCH (VERIFY LOCATION
AND EXTENT OF UTILITIES WITH ALL
DISCIPLINES) SEE DETAIL 9 / A060
44
44
44
44
NOTE:
ALL VEHICULAR AND PARKING SIGNAGE SHALL BE LOCATED
WITHIN LANDSCAPED AREAS AND SHALL NOT PROJECT INTO
ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION ROUTES
45
37
1. TOTAL NUMBER OF PARKING INCLUDES ALL TYPES OF PARKING SPACES PROPOSED (AUTO ONLY; NOT MOTORCYCLE,
BICYCLE OR FREIGHT
2. VA STANDARD SPACE IS 9'-0" WITH 63'-0" BAY WIDTH
3. VA REQUIRES MINIMUM OF 203 SPACES TOTAL, INCLUDING STANDARD AND VAN ACCESSIBLE SPACES AND MOTORCYCLE
SPACES.
4. VA REQUIRES 10% OF TOTAL PARKING STALLS TO BE ACCESSIBLE; 21 TOTAL, MINIMUM OF 4 SHALL BE VAN ACCESSIBLE
5. VA REQUIRES NO MORE THAN 1 MOTORCYCLE SPACE FOR EVERY 60 STANDARD SPACES
6. DROP-OFF SPACES DO NOT COUNT TOWARD TOTAL
7. VA ACCESSIBLE SPACE REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 8'-0" x 20'-0" WITH 5'-0" ACCESS AISLE ON BOTH SIDES
8. VA VAN ACCESSIBLE SPACE REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 8'-0" x 20'-0" WITH 8'-0" ACCESS AISLE ON BOTH SIDES
9. VA DOES NOT SPECIFY THE RATIO OF PUBLIC TO STAFF PARKING
CLEAN-AIR VEHICLES:
PER 2019 CGBSC TABLE 5.106.5.2, OVER 201 PARKING SPACES PROVIDED REQUIRES 12% PARKING SPACES BE DESIGNATED FOR
CLEAN AIR VEHICLES.
• 12% OF 203 = 24 SPACES REQUIRED / 29 FUTURE EVSC+S & CLEAN AIR STALLS PROVIDED
FUTURE ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATION (EVCS):
PER 2019 CGBSC TABLE 5.106.5.3.3, OVER 201 PARKING SPACES PROVIDED REQUIRES 10% PARKING SPACES BE DESIGNATED AS
EV CHARGING SPACES.
• 10% OF 203 = 21 SPACES REQUIRED / 24 FUTURE EVCS STALLS PROVIDED
PER 2019 CGBSC 5.106.5.3.5, FUTURE ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING SPACES QUALIFY AS DESIGNATED PARKING FOR CLEAN-AIR
VEHICLES.
PER 2019 CBC TABLE IIB-228.3.2.1, 1 TO 25 EVCS REQUIRES (24 FUTURE EVCS STALLS PROVIDED):
• 1 VAN ACCESSIBLE EVCS
• 1 STANDARD ACCESSIBLE EVCS
• 0 AMBULATORY EVCS
REMARKS
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE
• 17.58.030 MINIMUM DIMENSIONS FOR
REQUIRED PARKING AND FREIGHT LOADING
SPACES.
1. PARKING SPACES. EACH OFF-STREET
PARKING SPACE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF
NINE FEET WIDE BY EIGHTEEN FEET DEEP
AND SHALL BE DESIGNED ACCORDING TO
STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THE TRAFFIC
ENGINEER.
2. FREIGHT LOADING SPACES. EACH OFF-
STREET LOADING SPACE SHALL HAVE A
MINIMUM LENGTH OF THIRTY-FIVE FEET, A
MINIMUM WIDTH OF TEN FEET, AND A
MINIMUM VERTICAL CLEARANCE, INCLUDING
ENTRY AND EXIT, OF FOURTEEN FEET,
EXCEPT THE MINIMUM LENGTH FOR THE
FIRST SUCH SPACE REQUIRED FOR ANY
STRUCTURE OR USE SHALL BE TWENTY-FIVE
FEET AND THE MINIMUM VERTICAL
CLEARANCE, INCLUDING ENTRY AND EXIT,
SHALL BE TWELVE FEET. THESE DIMENSIONS
SHALL BE EXCLUSIVE OF PLATFORM,
DRIVEWAYS, DRIVE AISLES, AND
MANEUVERING AREAS.
3. MOTORCYCLE SPACES. EACH OFF-STREET
PARKING SPACE DEDICATED FOR
MOTORCYCLE PARKING SHALL BE A MINIMUM
OF FOUR FEET WIDE BY EIGHT FEET DEEP
AND SHALL BE DESIGNED ACCORDING TO
STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THE TRAFFIC
ENGINEER.
• 17.58.110.7 MEDICAL AND DENTAL OFFICE,
INCLUDING CHIROPRACTIC OFFICE, SPECIALIZED
MEDICAL OFFICES AND OTHER SIMILAR USES
• 17.58.110(C): MOTORCYCLE PARKING THAT IS
PROVIDED AND CLEARLY IDENTIFIED FOR SUCH
USE, MAY BE COUNTED AS PART OF THE TOTAL
NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED FOR A
NON-RESIDENTIAL USE OR BUILDING. HOWEVER,
THIS CREDIT SHALL NOT EXCEED 25 SPACES OR
5% OF THE TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED,
WHICHEVER IS LESS.
1 SPACE PER 200 SQUARE
FLOOR OF GROSS FLOOR
AREA
38,720 SF / 200 SF = 193.6
(194 PARKING SPACES
REQUIRED)
194 x 5% = 9.7 (10)
MOTORCYCLE SPACES
ALLOWED
PARKING CALCULATIONS
PARKING SPACE
TYPE
DIMENSIONS CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
PARKING SPACES
VETERANS ADMIN
PARKING SPACES(BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPLE CODE
17.58.030, DIMENSIONS IN "()" )
LENGTH WIDTH # REQ'D # PROVIDED # REQ'D # PROVIDED
STANDARD (STD)
SPACE -TYPE A
ACCESSIBLE -STD
SPACE -TYPE B
(TABLE 11B-208.2)
ACCESSIBLE -VAN
SPACE -TYPE C
(TABLE 11B-208.2)
CLEAN-AIR / VANPOOL /
ELEC VEHICLE SPACES
(CGBSC 5.106.5.2)
MOTORCYCLE
BICYCLE -SHORT TERM
BICYCLE -LONG TERM
FREIGHT
TOTAL PARKING SPACES
18'-0"
(18'-0")
9'-0"
(9'-0")
20'-0"
(18'-0")
9'-0"
(9'-0")
20'-0"
(18'-0")
9'-0"
(9'-0")
18'-0"
(18'-0")
9'-0"
(9'-0")
8'-0"
(8'-0")
4'-6"
(4'-0")
RACK STORAGE
LOCKER STORAGE
25'-0"
(---)
12'-0"
(---)
194
(38720 SF / 200)
6
SEE ABOVE
29
25 Max
10
(5% OF TOTAL)
(5% OF TOTAL)
10
0
194
(8% C-AIR +
6% EV)
184
18
5
29
6
10
10
1
207
(17 C-AIR +
12 EV)
(38720 SF / 200)
(TYPE A+B+C)(TYPE A+B+C)
203
(PER SFO)
17
4
N/A
4
N/A
N/A
1
203
(1 PER 60)
184
18
5
N/A
6
N/A
N/A
1
207
(207 TOTAL = 184 + 23)
(TYPE A+B+C)(TYPE A+B+C)
(23 TOTAL =
18 STD + 5 VAN)
(5 TOTAL)
(21 TOTAL =
17 STD + 4 VAN)
(4 VAN)
100'-0"
LEVEL 1
B N
131'-0"
MAXIMUM BUILDING
HEIGHT
F G H KCED MJA
3
A416
_______1
A400
_______3
A400
_______4
A400
_______
124'-3 1/2"
TOP OF SCREEN
119'-6"
TOP OF WALL
13'-0"119'-7 1/2"
TOP OF WALL
H.5
112'-0"
BOTTOM OF ENTRANCE
CANOPY
S1S2S2C4C2
C2A
9
14
1181817355
148
3
S10 S10 S11
4
10
4
8
1
11
514 4 5 4 4 4 4
2
A400
_______
S2S2S2S2S2
4 4
C4A
CN01.2
CO01.2
128161616LIGHT9'-8"PS05.2 PMR02.2
3
3
15
13
BEYOND
BEYOND
8
1
4
12'-6"100'-0"
LEVEL 1
100'-0"
LEVEL 1
1 2 3 4 5 6
114'-0"
ROOF
112'-0"
BOTTOM OF CANOPY
7
3
A415
_______1
A401
_______2
A401
_______1
A415
_______
124'-3 1/2"
TOP OF SCREEN120'-0"
TOP OF WALL
119'-0"
TOP OF WALL
122'-0"
TOP OF WALL
127'-8 1/2"
TOP OF WALL
11'-6"12
1 1/2
12
1 1/2
1
119'-7 1/2"
TOP OF WALL
17 318
C3
C3A
S9
S8S8
12
11
8
335114544
10
14
9
20
19
10
20
131'-3"
MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT
1A
A300
SEE ELEVATION OF
WALL BEYOND
CN01.1
16
3
A401
_______
13
PS01.1
C1
10 3
21'-2"
WH01.2
C1A
100'-0"
LEVEL 1
100'-0"
LEVEL 1
BN 131'-0"
MAXIMUM BUILDING
HEIGHT
FGHK CEDMJ A
3
A416
_______1
A400
_______3
A400
_______4
A400
_______11'-6"11'-6"122'-0"
TOP OF WALL
119'-0"
TOP OF WALL
125'-8" LOW PT
TOP OF WALL
117'-0"
TOP OF WALL
13'-0"124'-3 1/2"
TOP OF SCREEN
LOADING
DOCK
H.5
S4S4
S5
S4 S6 S7 1
20
441354104464
541
1 1
1494
S17S16S15S14S13
44720
1089
6
2
A400
_______
4
S4 S6 S6 S6
4
118'-6"
TOP OF WALL
CO24.2EL09.1 CO24.1
127'-8 1/4" HIGH PT
DE12.1
16
9
LIGHT9'-8"4
EL08.1
15
LIGHT9'-8"6
100'-0"
LEVEL 1
100'-0"
LEVEL 1
123456
114'-0"
ROOF
112'-6"
WALL-HUNG CANOPY
7 1
A414
_______4
A414
_______1
A401
_______2
A401
_______
125'-8"
TOP OF WALL 124'-3 1/2"
TOP OF SCREEN
118'-6"
TOP OF WALL
117'-0"
TOP OF WALL
119'-6"
TOP OF WALL
12
1 1/2
S3S3S3C5S2
S12
12 1 5 4
11
14 9
14
10
4 4 4 4 1613135
9
8
15
4
S2
120'-0"
TOP OF WALL
13'-0"1
12'-6"CO03.1 CO21.1
16
16
16
3
A401
_______
S2
7
4
ME01.1
LG02.2
21
CONCRETE TILT-UP
EXTERIOR FINISH LEGEND
TILT-UP CONCRETE -
HORIZONTAL PATTERN
TILT-UP CONCRETE -
VERTICAL PATTERN
TILT-UP CONCRETE -
RANDOM STRIATED
PATTERN
SHEET NOTES
1
2
CONCRETE TILT-UP PANEL - SEE CONCRETE TILT-UP LEGEND
BELOW FOR PANEL PATTERN
CONCRETE PANEL JOINT
3 ALUMINUM CURTAIN WALL SYSTEM
4 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT SYSTEM
5 ALUMINUM ENTRANCE DOOR
6 HOLLOW METAL DOOR AND FRAME
7 AMBULANCE PICK-UP CANOPY - SEE 3 & 4 / A261
8 ALUMINUM COMPOSITE MATERIAL (ACM) PANEL SYSTEM
9 VERTICAL RIBBED METAL PANEL MECHANICAL SCREEN,
PREFINISHED, COLOR TO BE DETERMINED
10 HORIZONTAL RIBBED PREFINISHED METAL WALL PANEL
11 FABRIC SUNSHADE SAILS AND SUPPORTS
12 CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT
13 PREFABRICATED ALUMINUM SUNSHADE
14 FULLY-ADHERED SINGLE-PLY TPO ROOF WITH PREFINISHED
METAL FASCIA
15 LOADING DOCK CANOPY - SEE 1 & 2 / A261
16 PAINTED STRUCTURAL STEEL COLUMN, SEE STRUCTURAL
DRAWINGS
17 ACETYLATED WOOD FENCE, SEE DETAIL
18 ACETYLATED WOOD GATE
19 BUILDING SIGNAGE
SYMBOL LENGEND
1t
DE14.1 DENOTES DOOR CALLOUT (SEE A710)
DENOTES WINDOW CALLOUT (SEE A720)
20 PREFABRICATED ALUMINUM CANOPY, SEE DETAIL /8 A800
21 OVERHEAD INSULATED COILING STEEL DOOR, SEE DOOR
SCHEDULE
/11 A060
100'-0"
LEVEL 1
S4
114'-0"
ROOF
S3S2
118'-6"
TOP OF PARAPET
1
8
12
11
BEYOND
BEYOND
tel (909) 598-5045 fax (909) 598-858520505 E Valley Blvd. Ste. 110, Walnut, CA 91789 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENTENGINEERING PLANNINGE&A ENGINEERSCALIFORNIA GUAM SAIPAN METRO MANILA300 Knollcrest Drive Redding, CA96002 (530) 222-3300 (530)222-3538 Faxhttp://www.nmrdesign.comAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DeltaREVISIONSDescriptionDateDate IssuedProject No.ScaleSHEET No.Drawn ByCopyrightCAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DRAWING STATUSSHEET TITLELICENSE STAMPSKEY PLAN2021NORTHPROJECT NAMEFORSFO Number36C10F19R0067VA BAKERSFIELDCOMMUNITY-BASEDOUTPATIENT CLINICOFFICE OFCONSTRUCTION ANDFACILITIESMANAGEMENTKNUDSEN DRIVE & OLIVE DRIVEDEVELOPERIf drawing is not 30" x 42" it is a reduced printCONSULTANT09/22/202218-1190-08Dwg. of11C-22PRECISE GRADINGPLANMATCHLINE SEE SHEET C-3MATCHLINE SEE SHEET C-3C-2C-3430428428429429430428429427428428ΔVANVANC
LE
AN
AIR
C
LE
ANAI
R
CL
EA
N
AIR
CL
EA
N
AIR
C
L
E
A
N
AIRONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERONE WAY - DO NOT ENTER6053/687 O.R.PM NO. 10137PMB 4/60016BUILDING DEPARTMENTSUBMITTAL
tel (909) 598-5045 fax (909) 598-858520505 E Valley Blvd. Ste. 110, Walnut, CA 91789 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENTENGINEERING PLANNINGE&A ENGINEERSCALIFORNIA GUAM SAIPAN METRO MANILA300 Knollcrest Drive Redding, CA96002 (530) 222-3300 (530)222-3538 Faxhttp://www.nmrdesign.comAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DeltaREVISIONSDescriptionDateDate IssuedProject No.ScaleSHEET No.Drawn ByCopyrightCAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DRAWING STATUSSHEET TITLELICENSE STAMPSKEY PLAN2021NORTHPROJECT NAMEFORSFO Number36C10F19R0067VA BAKERSFIELDCOMMUNITY-BASEDOUTPATIENT CLINICOFFICE OFCONSTRUCTION ANDFACILITIESMANAGEMENTKNUDSEN DRIVE & OLIVE DRIVEDEVELOPERIf drawing is not 30" x 42" it is a reduced printCONSULTANT09/22/202218-1190-08Dwg. ofC-33PRECISE GRADINGPLANMATCHLINE SEE SHEET C-2MATCHLINE SEE SHEET C-2C-2C-3428420420425419419422422424424426426427427427428428VANVANVAN
N O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N G017BUILDING DEPARTMENTSUBMITTAL
tel (909) 598-5045 fax (909) 598-858520505 E Valley Blvd. Ste. 110, Walnut, CA 91789 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENTENGINEERING PLANNINGE&A ENGINEERSCALIFORNIA GUAM SAIPAN METRO MANILA300 Knollcrest Drive Redding, CA96002 (530) 222-3300 (530)222-3538 Faxhttp://www.nmrdesign.comAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DeltaREVISIONSDescriptionDateDate IssuedProject No.ScaleSHEET No.Drawn ByCopyrightCAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DRAWING STATUSSHEET TITLELICENSE STAMPSKEY PLAN2021NORTHPROJECT NAMEFORSFO Number36C10F19R0067VA BAKERSFIELDCOMMUNITY-BASEDOUTPATIENT CLINICOFFICE OFCONSTRUCTION ANDFACILITIESMANAGEMENTKNUDSEN DRIVE & OLIVE DRIVEDEVELOPERIf drawing is not 30" x 42" it is a reduced printCONSULTANT09/22/202218-1190-08Dwg. of11C-88ONSITE SEWERAND WATER PLAN(FOR REFERENCE ONLY)C-8430428429420420425419419422422424424426426427427427427428428VANVANEVCHARGINGONLYVANEVCHARGINGONLYEVCHARGINGONLYEVCHARGINGONLY CSCSEVCHARGINGONLYEVCHARGINGONLYEVCHARGINGONLY
EVCHARGINGONLYEVCHARGINGONLYN O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N GEVCHARGINGONLYONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERN O P A R K I N G022BUILDING DEPARTMENTSUBMITTAL
J
J
VANVANV
ANVAN VANCLEAN
AIR
CLEAN
AIR
CLE AN
AIR
CLE AN
AIR
C LEA N
A IR
N O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N GONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERN O P A R K I N GJ
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J J J J
UTILITY XFMR
FROM UTILITY
S3S3
S1
S3
S3
S3
S3
S1
S3
S1
S1
S1 S1
S3
S3
5
5
S3
S1
S1
S2
S2
S1
G-1
S4S4S4S4
S4
S4
S4
S4
S4
S4
S4
S4
S4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5 5 5 5
S5
S5
S5
S5
S5
S5
S6
S6
S6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3 3
3
3 3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
TYP.
2
2
2
21
21
16
(8) 1"C-EMPTY
(2) 1"C-2#10,1#12G
1"C-2#10,1#12G
1"C-2#10,1#12G
(2) 1"C-2#10,1#12G
(8) 1"C-EMPTY
1"C-2#10,1#12G
1"C-2#10,1#12G (4) 1"C-EMPTY
1"C-2#10,1#12G
(4) 1"C-EMPTY
1"C-2#10,1#12G
1"C-2#10,1#12G
(2) 1"C-2#10,1#12G
(4) 1"C-EMPTY
(1) 1"C-2#10,1#12G
(4) 1"C-EMPTY
1"C-2#10,1#12G
(2) 1"C-EMPTY
L1L-21
L1L-21
4
4
FROM L4B
FROM MSB1
FROM L4B
FROM L2B
FROM MSB1
FROM MSB1
7
7
8
8
1"C-2#10,1#12G
1"C-2#10,1#12G
(2) 1"C-2#10,1#12G
1"C-2#10,1#12G
1"C-2#10,1#12G
1"C-2#10,1#12G
L2B-16
L4B-18
L4B-18
L4B-18
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.9 1.4 1.8 1.7 1.2 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.9 1.1 1.1 0.9 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.1 2.1 2.8 2.7 2.0 1.1 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.9 1.5 2.3 2.3 1.4 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.3 2.8 4.0 3.8 2.6 1.4 0.9 0.6 0.6 0.7 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.6 1.0 1.5 1.8 2.4 3.1 3.0 2.3 1.7 1.3 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.4 3.3 5.4 5.1 3.5 2.3 1.7 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.8 2.7 2.5 1.5 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.7 1.0 1.6 2.4 3.1 4.1 4.0 4.1 3.9 2.9 2.2 1.3 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.5 1.4 3.6 6.2 5.6 3.4 3.2 2.5 1.7 1.9 2.3 2.9 3.1 3.1 2.7 2.1 1.6 1.2 1.1 1.4 2.1 3.0 4.1 5.6 6.7 6.5 5.2 3.7 2.6 1.6 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.6 1.5 3.5 5.9 5.5 3.7 3.0 2.6 2.2 2.8 3.5 4.5 4.7 4.8 4.2 3.1 2.4 1.7 1.4 1.6 2.2 3.0 3.9 4.8 5.3 5.2 4.4 3.4 2.4 1.6 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.9 1.6 3.3 4.8 4.5 3.3 2.1 1.9 2.3 3.0 4.1 5.5 6.6 6.5 5.1 3.7 2.7 1.9 1.6 1.7 2.0 2.4 2.7 2.9 2.9 2.8 2.6 2.2 1.8 1.4 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.9 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.7 2.8 3.7 3.5 2.7 1.8 1.4 1.8 2.5 3.3 4.0 4.4 4.3 3.8 3.1 2.3 1.8 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.9 2.4 2.8 2.7 2.1 1.4 1.1 1.2 1.5 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.2 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.1 1.5 2.1 2.4 2.1 1.4 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.9 2.1 2.0 1.8 1.8 1.9 2.2 2.3 2.0 1.5 1.1 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.6 1.9 1.8 1.4 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.2 1.9 3.1 3.6 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.0 1.3 1.9 2.6 3.0 2.8 2.3 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.7 1.3 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.3 1.7 2.4 2.5 1.9 1.6 1.3 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.3 2.3 4.0 4.9 3.8 2.4 1.1 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.9 1.2 1.6 2.2 3.4 4.5 4.0 3.2 2.9 2.5 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.4 1.9 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.3 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.9 1.4 2.7 5.0 6.4 4.5 2.8 1.7 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.1 1.3 1.9 2.6 3.9 5.4 5.2 4.7 4.0 3.0 2.2 1.7 1.5 1.1 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.2 1.7 2.5 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.4 1.7 1.2 0.9 1.0 1.5 3.0 5.5 6.5 3.7 3.1 2.4 1.1 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.6 2.3 3.4 4.8 5.1 5.1 5.5 4.4 3.0 2.1 1.5 1.2 0.9 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.2 1.7 2.3 2.6 2.7 2.6 1.9 1.3 1.0 0.8 1.0 1.6 3.1 5.1 5.5 3.9 2.7 2.1 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.1 1.4 1.8 2.5 3.8 5.2 5.3 5.3 4.7 3.5 2.4 1.7 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.8 2.4 2.4 1.6 1.1 0.9 0.8 1.0 1.6 2.8 4.0 3.9 2.9 1.6 1.1 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.3 1.5 1.8 2.3 3.0 3.7 4.3 5.2 4.4 2.8 2.0 1.4 1.1 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.7 1.8 1.6 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.9 1.4 2.2 2.9 2.8 2.1 1.1 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.1 2.4 3.0 3.7 3.4 2.4 1.7 1.2 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 0.8 0.8 1.1 1.6 1.9 1.8 1.3 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.8 2.1 2.5 2.4 1.9 1.4 1.1 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.1 1.2 1.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.8 0.9 1.2 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.2 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.9 1.3 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.6 0.7 1.1 1.7 2.3 2.3 1.9 1.2 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.1 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.9 1.4 1.7 2.6 3.3 3.3 2.5 1.4 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.1 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.7 1.2 2.4 2.8 3.9 4.8 4.3 2.8 1.3 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.7 1.0 1.4 2.1 2.3 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.8 1.7 2.7 3.1 4.3 6.5 4.7 2.5 1.1 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.1 1.6 2.5 2.7 2.5 2.2 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.2 2.2 3.7 5.6 6.4 4.0 1.8 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.7 1.0 1.4 2.2 2.6 2.6 2.7 2.5 1.7 1.2 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.5 1.0 2.1 3.6 5.2 4.9 2.9 1.2 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.1 1.6 2.3 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.0 1.4 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 1.1 2.2 3.2 3.9 3.4 1.9 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.3 1.7 1.9 2.4 2.5 1.7 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.1 1.9 2.5 2.7 2.2 1.3 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.7 1.8 1.4 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.8 1.2 1.7 2.0 1.9 1.5 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.1 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.1 1.9 1.3 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 1.2 2.0 2.8 3.2 2.8 2.0 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 1.4 2.4 3.6 4.6 4.7 3.8 2.6 1.6 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.2 2.3 3.5 5.2 6.7 6.0 4.4 2.9 1.8 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.1 1.7 2.2 2.6 2.8 2.9 2.8 2.6 2.1 1.7 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.9 1.7 2.7 4.1 4.8 6.0 5.1 3.6 2.3 1.4 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.9 1.5 2.4 3.6 4.6 5.4 5.4 4.8 3.8 2.9 2.1 1.6 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.9 1.9 3.0 3.2 4.0 3.7 3.1 2.2 1.3 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.6 2.6 3.7 5.2 6.3 6.3 5.4 4.0 3.1 2.3 1.6 1.2 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.8 1.7 2.5 2.6 2.2 2.3 2.2 1.6 1.0 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 1.2 2.1 2.8 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.1 2.6 2.0 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.9 1.4 1.5 1.1 1.2 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.2 3.0 3.1 2.3 2.0 1.8 1.5 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.3 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.8 1.4 2.2 2.3 1.5 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.4 1.9 2.4 2.3 2.3 2.2 1.6 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 1.0 1.3 1.9 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.5 1.6 1.1 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.3 1.9 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.4 1.6 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.5 2.1 2.9 2.9 2.8 2.7 1.8 1.2 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.3 2.3 2.2 1.8 1.4 1.1 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.8 1.7 1.4 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.1 1.6 2.1 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.1 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.8 2.3 2.9 2.9 3.6 2.4 1.5 1.3 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.9 1.5 2.4 3.5 4.5 5.1 5.1 4.5 3.7 2.8 2.2 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.7 2.0 2.8 3.7 4.4 4.7 4.2 3.8 3.4 2.1 1.4 0.8 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.9 1.7 2.7 3.9 5.5 6.5 6.4 5.3 4.0 3.0 2.2 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.3 3.2 4.3 5.1 5.2 5.0 4.2 2.9 2.3 1.4 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.7 1.3 2.2 3.0 4.0 3.9 4.1 4.0 3.1 2.4 1.7 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.8 2.2 3.0 4.0 4.7 4.4 3.7 2.7 1.9 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.2 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.9 1.4 1.8 2.4 3.1 3.1 2.4 1.9 1.5 1.1 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.4 2.0 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.3 1.8 1.4 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.6 2.3 2.9 2.9 2.4 2.1 2.1 2.4 2.6 2.4 2.3 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.9 1.6 2.5 2.4 1.5 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.3 2.0 2.8 2.8 2.9 2.6 1.8 1.2 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.6 1.8 1.8 1.8 2.2 3.0 3.7 3.9 4.0 2.5 1.4 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.4 2.0 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.3 1.6 1.1 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.8 2.6 3.9 5.0 5.1 4.3 3.8 2.6 1.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.6 2.3 2.9 2.7 2.9 2.4 1.6 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.2 1.7 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.6 1.8 2.5 4.0 5.2 5.4 4.7 3.2 2.2 1.4 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.7 2.1 2.3 2.1 2.2 2.0 1.5 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.9 2.7 2.5 2.1 1.9 1.6 1.4 1.9 3.2 4.5 4.7 3.7 2.7 1.7 0.9 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.6 2.2 2.7 2.6 2.8 2.3 1.6 1.3 1.2 1.5 2.4 3.2 3.2 2.5 1.7 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.4 2.1 2.8 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.0 1.4 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.8 2.0 1.9 1.5 1.1 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.2 1.7 2.0 1.8 1.9 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.9 2.4 2.6 3.0 2.4 1.6 1.2 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.3 2.0 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.5 1.9 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.8 2.2 2.5 2.2 1.5 1.1 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.5 1.8 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.3 2.0 2.7 2.6 2.8 2.4 1.7 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 1.8 1.4 1.1 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.2 1.8 2.4 2.4 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.4 2.2 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.2 1.6 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.4 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.2 1.8 2.6 2.7 2.7 2.6 1.7 1.1 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 1.0 1.4 2.1 2.4 2.4 2.6 2.1 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 1.8 1.5 1.2 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.9 2.6 2.5 2.5 2.2 1.5 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.8 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.5 2.0 2.7 3.4 3.7 3.5 2.8 2.2 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.5 2.2 2.8 2.6 2.8 2.3 1.4 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.5 2.2 3.1 4.2 5.5 6.0 5.3 4.1 3.0 2.2 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.7 2.1 2.3 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.9 2.0 1.9 2.2 2.0 1.3 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.3 1.9 2.6 3.6 5.0 5.8 6.1 4.9 3.6 2.6 1.9 1.5 1.5 1.8 2.5 2.9 2.3 2.1 1.8 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.3 1.8 2.5 3.3 3.4 4.3 3.8 3.2 2.5 1.9 1.6 1.6 2.0 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.7 2.1 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.7 2.7 3.0 2.6 2.4 2.4 2.0 1.6 1.5 1.8 2.5 2.8 2.6 2.7 2.5 1.9 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.7 1.3 1.9 2.1 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.3 1.6 2.1 2.4 2.7 2.7 2.0 1.4 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.7 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 2.2 2.3 1.6 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.5 1.5 1.3 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
VANVANV
ANVAN VANCLEAN
AIR
CLEAN
AIR
CLE AN
AIR
CLE AN
AIR
C LEA N
A IR
N O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N GONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERN O P A R K I N GS1
S3
S1
S3
S3
S3
S2
S2
S3
S3
S1
S1
S3
S3S3
S1
S1
S3 S1
S1
S1
S4S4S4S4
S4
S4
S4
S4
S4
S4
S4
S4
S4
S5
S5
S5
S5
S5
S5
S6
S6
S6
CALCULATION SUMMARY
AREA IES STANDARD
PAVED HARDSCAPE
TYPE
ILLUMINANCE (fc)
DESIGN IES STANDARD TYPE
HORIZONTAL UNIFORMITY RATIOS
DESIGN
0.2 MIN 20.0 MAX/MIN0.5 13.4
CODEQTYBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZEREMARKSAG34Abelia grandiflora 'Kaleidoscope'Glossy Abelia5 galBR8Berberis thunbergia 'Rose Glow'Red Leaf Japanese Barberry5 galBD 7Buddleja davidii nanho purpleButterfly Bush5 galBJ 51Buxus japonica 'Green Beauty'Japanese Boxwood5 galCC 15Ceanothus 'Concha'California Wild Lilac5 galCO 7Cercis canadensis texensis 'Oklahoma' Oklahoma Texas Redbud15 gallow brancheddouble stakeCS 76Cistus skanbergiiRockrose5 galCP 7Coleonema pulchrum 'Sunset Gold'Pink Breath of Heaven5 galDI 77Dietes iridioidesFortnight Lily5 galEP43Elaeagnus pungens 'Fruitlandii'Silverberry5 galFI6Forsythia intermedia 'Lynwood'Forsythia5 galGP 9Geijera parvifloraAustralian Willow15 galdouble stakeHS 42Hemerocallis 'Yellow'Yellow Daylily1 galJC92Juniperus chinensis `Armstrongii`Armstrong Juniper5 galJS 165Juniperus sabina 'Buffalo'Buffalo Juniper1 galKU 6Kniphofia uvariaRed Hot Poker1 galKP 6Koelreuteria paniculataGolden Rain Tree15 galdouble stakeLN 8Lagerstroemia x `Natchez`Crape Myrtle15 galMR120Muhlenbergia rigensDeer Grass1 galNC15Nerium oleander 'Mrs. Roeding'Oleander5 galNO 6Nerium oleander 'White'Oleander15 galstandard, double stakeOE39Olea europaea 'Little Ollie'Little Ollie Olive5 galPO48Pennisetum orientaleOriental Fountain Grass1 galPC 10Pinus canariensisCanary Island Pine15 galdouble stakePP19Pinus pineaItalian Stone Pine24" boxdouble stakePK 30Pistacia chinensis 'Keith Davey'Chinese Pistache24"boxdouble stakePA 9Platanus x acerifolia 'Bloodgood'Bloodgood London Plane Tree15 galdouble stakePB5Prunus x blireianaFlowering Plum15 galdouble stakeQL9Quercus lobataValley Oak24" boxdouble stakeQS18Quercus suberCork Oak24" boxdouble stakeRI200Rhaphiolepis indica `Dancer'Indian Hawthorne5 galRR 28Rosa 'Flower Carpet Red'Groundcover Rose5 galRY19Rosa 'Flower Carpet Yellow'Groundcover Rose5 galRO165Rosemarinus officinalis 'Huntington Carpet'Rosemary1 galSL 63Spiraea japonica 'Little Princess'Spirea5 galTJ 129Trachelospermum jasminoidesStar Jasmine1 galVT 23Viburnum tinus 'Spring Bouquet'Laurastinus5 galWF 14Washingtonia filiferaCalifornia Fan PalmB & BXC26Xylosma congestumShiny Xylosma5 galQTYMISCELLANEOUS35,090 sfBark (Fir Walk on Bark) - 3" deep over pre-emergent herbicide720 sfDecomposed granite (Rock dust) with stabilizer - see 4/L275,580 sfGravel (3/4" clean crushed granite) - see 3/L2, 3" deep over filter fabric (4 oz/yd)6,760 sf5,940 sfPLANT SCHEDULETREE WIDTHTan gravel (3/4" California Gold) - see 3/L2, 3" deep over filter fabric (4 oz/yd)sod(15 YEARS)19'12'14'28'10'25'42'42'28'56'35'10'EVERGREEN (E)DECIDUOUS (D)EDEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDDDDDDDDDDDAA 9Agapanthus africanus 'White'Lily of the Nile1 galE20'LL 47Lomandra longifolia 'LM300'Breeze Dwarf Mat Rush1 galEsee 2/L2, 10' clear trunk282 lfMow strip (concrete, 6" wide) - see 5/L2CL16Chilopsis linearisDesert Willow15 gal565 lfSteel edging (3/16" x 4" H, steel stakes, Sure-Loc or equal) - install as shown on Drawings and per manufacturer instructionsCA 14Calamagrostis x acutiflora 'Karl Foerster'Feather Reed Grass1 galDLM30Lantana montevidensisLantana1 galETurf (Latitude 36 (or) Tifway 419 Hybrid Bermuda Grass)60 cfRaised planter soil mix: 2 parts clean sandy loam, 1 part peat moss, and 1 part perlitestandard, double stake16'9Landscape boulders (granite, minimum diameter: 2'-0", minimum installed height: 2'-0" above finish grade, bury 1/3 of boulder in the groundVANVANVANVANVAN CLEA
NAIR
CLEA
NAIR
CLEA
NAIR
CLE
ANAIR
CLE
A
NAIR
N O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N GONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERN O P A R
K I
N
G ProposedBuildingStreet "A"Landco DriveMatchlineKnudsen Drive
Sheets L2 / L5Sheets L3 / L6VANVAN ONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERBCAAAAAAAAAADProposedBuilding4'-0"D opening inconcrete pavingABCABCBCQTYMAKE / MODELCOLOR14sand4SITE AMENITIESDESCRIPTION6' bench with back (steel rod)Trash receptacle with liner (steel)FINISHpowder coatKEYREMARKSsurface mount, see 1/L11powder coatWabash Valley, Model CO1114CWabash Valley, Model TM3B41C4Recycle receptacle (steel)powder coatWabash Valley, Model TM3S46CKinetic garden artABCDsurface mount, see 2/L1surface mount, see 2/L1see 3/L1BlackBlackBlue Lotus Spinner or approved equalpowder coatVANVANVANVANVAN
CLEA
NAIR
CLE
A
NAIR
CLEA
NAIR
CLEA
NAIR
CLE
ANAIR
N O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N GONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERN O P A R
K I
N GProposedBuildingParking Area: 106,900 SFTree Shading Area: 42,830 SFTREE SHADING CALCULATIONPercentage of Tree Shading: 42,830 / 106,900 = 40%Frontage Areas: 37% of trees are evergreenParking Areas: 36% of trees are evergreenEVERGREEN TREE CALCULATION5'-6"approx1'-6"4"2"1'-0"diameterTop of pavingDrain rockPVC pipe (size to allow forsculpture post insertion)Flange cover (powder coat black)Sculpture postConcrete (ease exposed edges)Plumb post with plastic shimsAs indicatedL1SITE AMENITIESPLANT SCHEDULE18-487009-22-2022MLRedding, California 96002(530) 223-2488 mlander@shasta.com20270 Lupine Drive RLA 2399Landscape ArchitectureMichael Lander ASLALandscape Location PlanSite Amenities Plan1" = 20'1" = 80'Parking Shading Plan1" = 80'300 Knollcrest Drive Redding, CA96002 (530) 222-3300 (530)222-3538 Faxhttp://www.nmrdesign.comAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DeltaREVISIONSDescriptionDateDate IssuedProject No.ScaleSHEET No.Drawn ByCopyrightCAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DRAWING STATUSSHEET TITLELICENSE STAMPSKEY PLAN2021NORTH........PROJECT NAMEFORS)2 1XPEHU.............9$ %$.E5S)IEL'&20081IT<%$SE'28T3$TIE1T &LI1I&OFFICE OFCONSTRUCTION ANDFACILITIESMANAGEMENT.18'SE1 '5I9E 2LI9E '5I9EDEVELOPERIf drawing is not 30" x 42" it is a reduced printCONSULTANTBench (as specified)5/16" Hex-Pin tamper proof concrete anchor, zincplated, 2" minimum embedment, 4 per benchConcrete pavingWhere no slab occurs, provide a 8" W x 6" D x 30" L concretefooting at each bench end, radius all exposed edgesTrash receptacle(as specified)Concrete pavingHeavy duty screw anchor (stainless steel,3/8" x 3") with stainless steel washerLevel receptacle withleveling feetBench Attachment1Not to ScaleL1Trash / Recycle Attachment2Not to ScaleL1Kinetic Garden Art3Not to ScaleL1027BUILDING DEPARTMENTSUBMITTAL
VANVANVANVANVAN CL
EAN
AIR
C
L
E
AN
AIR
CLE
A
N
AI
R
CL
E
A
N
AI
R
CL
E
A
N
AI
RONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERProposed BuildingVT(15)BD(3)VT(3)JC(23)RI(10)MR(5)QL(3)NC(15)OE(4)OE(15)QS(2)JC(4)QS(1)Landco DriveKnudsen Drive
QS(2)QS(2)QS(4)MR(20)QL(2)CS(8)RO(18).......BR(1)......PA(1)PK(4)...JC(4)JC(4).........RR(1)RI(34)TJ(22)AG(17)SL(5).GravelTurfTan gravelTan gravelGravelGravelGravelGravelGravelGravelGravelGravelPK(4)PK(3)GravelGravelGravelGravelGravelGravelGravel.PK(3)Decomposed granite(4'-6" x 10'-0" pad, typical)TurfTurfTurfTan gravelTan gravelBark ..BarkBarkBarkBarkBarkBarkBarkBarkBarkBarkBarkBark.............CP(4)KP(3)CP(3)XC(10)FI(3)SL(8)AG(13)AG(4)RY(12)TurfHS(10)KU(6)Bark.SL(20).MatchlineMatchlineGravelRR(8)Mow stripJS(36)Mow stripMow stripMow stripHS(21).HS(11)Erosion control seed mix(see Erosion Control Plan)NO(3)JC(4)RO(10)RO(29)KP(3)PA(8)TJ(8)RY(7)BD(3)PO(48)TJ(2)LL(23)JS(13)PC(10)MR(7)Steel edge (typical)Tan gravelMR(12).RO(16)CS(12)QL(4)QS(3)QS(1)OE(10)CC(7)..MR(29)RO(24)BarkWF(4)DI(16)WF(10)DI(40)Bark...SL(2).DI(11)MR(12).RO(7)FI(3)BD(1).AA(9)CA(3)XC(16)CO(2)TJ(12)TJ(12)BJ(13)BarkSteel edge(typical)LL(12)LL(12)NO(2)Steel edge (typical)BarkSteel edgeDI(10)LM(30)JS(5)CO(1)TJ(31)BJ(16)BJ(5)TJ(2)BJ(3)..CO(3)TJ(7)TJ(12)Decomposed graniteSteel edgeTJ(6)BJ(6)TJ(12)RR(4)RI(13)GravelPP(5)GravelGravelGP(9).EP(6)GravelCA(4)RI(6)EP(13)LN(1)LN(1)Decomposed graniteCA(3)TurfLandscape boulders (5'-0" maximum distance apart)Bark8'-0" square (typical)8'-0" spacing (typical)CO(1)1" = 20'L2PLANTING PLANLANDSCAPE DETAILS18-487009-22-2022MLRedding, California 96002(530) 223-2488 mlander@shasta.com20270 Lupine Drive RLA 2399Landscape ArchitectureMichael Lander ASLAPlanting Plan1" = 20'100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTSTurf grassConcrete mow strip - 2500 PSI concrete, provide controljoints @ 8'-0" on center and at all changes in direction,1/2" radius for all exposed edges, broom finish#4 bar (continuous, lap joints 8")Compacted subgrade free of organic debrisShredded bark1"2"4"6"Concrete Mow Strip5Not to ScaleL2300 Knollcrest Drive Redding, CA96002 (530) 222-3300 (530)222-3538 Faxhttp://www.nmrdesign.comAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DeltaREVISIONSDescriptionDateDate IssuedProject No.ScaleSHEET No.Drawn ByCopyrightCAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DRAWING STATUSSHEET TITLELICENSE STAMPSKEY PLAN2021NORTH........PROJECT NAMEFORS)2 1XPEHU.............9$ %$.E5S)IEL'&20081IT<%$SE'28T3$TIE1T &LI1I&OFFICE OFCONSTRUCTION ANDFACILITIESMANAGEMENT.18'SE1 '5I9E 2LI9E '5I9EDEVELOPERIf drawing is not 30" x 42" it is a reduced printCONSULTANTImport sandy loam or site soil that meets specifications.Remove existing soil and material that does not meet specs.Top of curb or walk6"12"2" lip (shrub area), 1" lip (turf area)Amend top 6" of fill per specificationsLoosen existing soil; remove and disposeof any aggregate base, paving, or debrisGravel (as specified)Compacted subgradeFilter fabric: 4 oz/yd, lap joints 8", cut out12" diameter hole at plant locations3" lip at pavingTop of curb, walk, or paving2'-0" @ 3% maximum slope3:1 slopeWhere no edging occurs,bury 4" of fabric in trenchPalm (as specified)Install trunk plumbOriginal soil level to match finish gradeWatering basin (remove after initial watering)RootballBackfill: 100% washed plaster sand(water jet during planting)12"Finish grade6"2'-0"8" dia.Clear trunk measurement(as specified)Filter fabricClean drain rockBefore planting, tie fronds together with organic twine.Remove frond ties after establishment.Typical Planter Section1Not to ScaleL2Palm Planting2Not to ScaleL2Typical Gravel Section3Not to ScaleL2Decomposed Granite Section4Not to ScaleL2Decomposed granite with stabilizer (as specified)Conform to existing paving1% - 2% slopeExisting walk or paving1.5" compacted depth3" compacted depthCompacted 3/4" Class 2 aggregate baseUndisturbed soil or compacted subgradeSteel edging (as specified, top to be flush with adjacent paving)028BUILDING DEPARTMENTSUBMITTAL
VANVANVAN
N O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N GProposed BuildingPK(1)PK(2)PK(1)MR(12)RI(12)NO(1)VT(3)Street "A"Knudsen Drive
Landco DriveTan gravel. .................BR(3)....BR(1)GravelTurfGravelGravelGravelGravelGravelGravelGravelGravelGravelGravelGravelTan gravelGravelGravelGravelGravelDecomposed granite(4'-6" x 10'-0" pad, typical)BarkBarkBarkBark BarkBarkBark Bark ..BarkBarkBarkBark....KP(3)FI(3)SL(8)AG(13)AG(4)TurfMatchlineMatchlineGravel.TJ(4)GravelPB(2)SL(7)BarkRI(26)PB(3)BarkErosion control seed mix(see Erosion Control Plan)MR(4)RI(11)..CC(8)Gravel.RR(4)RR(8)Mow stripHS(21)RY(7)BD(3)TJ(2)JS(13)MR(7)Steel edge (typical)Proposed BuildingTan gravelRI(44).MR(29)WF(10)DI(40)BarkPK(4)CS(3)PK(2)....SL(2)Decomposed graniteRR(6)SL(13)Decomposed graniteRI(14)BR(3)Gravel.DI(11)PK(2)GravelCS(26)CL(10)..RO(45)CL(6).QS(4)EP(12)PP(6)PP(2)EP(6)JC(38).JC(11)MR(19)EP(6)JC(4)MR(12)Decomposed graniteGravel..OE(10)PP(6)Gravel.RR(5).RO(7)CO(2)TJ(12)TJ(12)BJ(13)BJ(8)BarkRI(8)BarkCS(15)RI(22)BR(1)SL(4)..RO(16)CS(12)JS(5)JS(15)JS(31)JS(16)JS(27)CO(1)TJ(2)BJ(3)BJ(6)TJ(12)SL(4)JS(17)JS(5)RI(13)VT(5)CA(4)CA(4)Place raised planter soil mix (typical)RI(6)LN(1)LN(3)LN(3)CA(3)TurfLandscape boulders (5'-0" maximum distance apart)GravelCO(1)1" = 20'L3PLANTING PLAN18-487009-22-2022MLRedding, California 96002(530) 223-2488 mlander@shasta.com20270 Lupine Drive RLA 2399Landscape ArchitectureMichael Lander ASLAPlanting Plan1" = 20'100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS300 Knollcrest Drive Redding, CA96002 (530) 222-3300 (530)222-3538 Faxhttp://www.nmrdesign.comAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DeltaREVISIONSDescriptionDateDate IssuedProject No.ScaleSHEET No.Drawn ByCopyrightCAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DRAWING STATUSSHEET TITLELICENSE STAMPSKEY PLAN2021NORTH........PROJECT NAMEFORS)2 1XPEHU.............9$ %$.E5S)IEL'&20081IT<%$SE'28T3$TIE1T &LI1I&OFFICE OFCONSTRUCTION ANDFACILITIESMANAGEMENT.18'SE1 '5I9E 2LI9E '5I9EDEVELOPERIf drawing is not 30" x 42" it is a reduced printCONSULTANT029BUILDING DEPARTMENTSUBMITTAL
VANVANVANVANVAN CLE
ANAIR
CL
E
AN
AI
R
C
L
E
ANAIR
C
L
EA
N
AI
R
C
L
E
AN
AI
RONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERONE WAY - DO NOT ENTERProposed BuildingLandco DriveKnudsen Drive
MatchlineMatchline.................E201"8AR 0.5.....B101"15AR 0.6..(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4" (2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1-1/4"1-1/4"AR 0.6D181"5AR 0.5C111"14AR 0.6C121"6AR 0.5AR 0.5C131"3AR 0.5B41"7AR 0.6B8AR 0.671"AR 0.41"221"21AR 0.4B71"18AR 0.61"1"A11"7AR 0.41"1-1/4" 1-1/4"(2) 4"2"2"2"2"2"2"2"1"1"2"(2) 4"(2) 4"A3A2B91"17E191"6Station1235678101112131415161718192049ProgramBGPM72122201618715146312945687178Application rate(inches/hour).6SprinklertypedriplineBBBBAAACE.4.4.4.6.6.6.6.6.6.6.5rotaryrotaryrotarydriplinedriplinedriplinedriplinedriplinedrip emitterValve ScheduleValvesize1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1.5"BBdriplinedriplineCCCCDdrip emitterdrip emitterdrip emitterdrip emitterdrip emitter.5.5.5.5.5DDdrip emitter.5.5.5Edrip emitterdrip emitter1" = 20'L5IRRIGATION PLANWATER CALCS18-487009-22-2022MLIrrigation Plan1" = 20'Redding, California 96002(530) 223-2488 mlander@shasta.com20270 Lupine Drive RLA 2399Landscape ArchitectureMichael Lander ASLA100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS300 Knollcrest Drive Redding, CA96002 (530) 222-3300 (530)222-3538 Faxhttp://www.nmrdesign.comAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DeltaREVISIONSDescriptionDateDate IssuedProject No.ScaleSHEET No.Drawn ByCopyrightCAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DRAWING STATUSSHEET TITLELICENSE STAMPSKEY PLAN2021NORTH........PROJECT NAMEFORS)2 1XPEHU.............9$ %$.E5S)IEL'&20081IT<%$SE'28T3$TIE1T &LI1I&OFFICE OFCONSTRUCTION ANDFACILITIESMANAGEMENT.18'SE1 '5I9E 2LI9E '5I9EDEVELOPERIf drawing is not 30" x 42" it is a reduced printCONSULTANT031BUILDING DEPARTMENTSUBMITTAL
VANVANVAN
N O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N GProposed BuildingStreet "A"Knudsen Drive
Landco DriveMatchlineMatchlinePoint of connection............*CIrrigation controller(verify location)Weather sensor(verify location).MVProposed Building.(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"MFB61"16AR 0.6C141"12AR 0.5C151"8AR 0.5D161"9AR 0.5D171"4AR 0.5B51"19AR 0.6B8AR 0.671"A11"7AR 0.42"2"2"2"2"1"(2) 4"(2) 4"(2) 4"2"1"1"(2) 4"1" = 20'L6IRRIGATION PLAN18-487009-22-2022MLIrrigation Plan1" = 20'Redding, California 96002(530) 223-2488 mlander@shasta.com20270 Lupine Drive RLA 2399Landscape ArchitectureMichael Lander ASLA100% CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS300 Knollcrest Drive Redding, CA96002 (530) 222-3300 (530)222-3538 Faxhttp://www.nmrdesign.comAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DeltaREVISIONSDescriptionDateDate IssuedProject No.ScaleSHEET No.Drawn ByCopyrightCAll ideas, designs, arrangements and plans indicated or represented bythis drawing are owned by, and the property of, NICHOLS, MELBURG andROSSETTO and were created, evolved and developed for use on, and inconjunction with, the specified project. None of such ideas, designs,arrangements or plans shall be used by, or disclosed to any person, firmor corporation for any purpose whatsoever without the written permissionof NICHOLS, MELBURG and ROSSETTO.DRAWING STATUSSHEET TITLELICENSE STAMPSKEY PLAN2021NORTH........PROJECT NAMEFORS)2 1XPEHU.............9$ %$.E5S)IEL'&20081IT<%$SE'28T3$TIE1T &LI1I&OFFICE OFCONSTRUCTION ANDFACILITIESMANAGEMENT.18'SE1 '5I9E 2LI9E '5I9EDEVELOPERIf drawing is not 30" x 42" it is a reduced printCONSULTANT032BUILDING DEPARTMENTSUBMITTAL
430428429420420425419419422422424424426426427427427427428428VANVANVAN
N O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N GN O P A R K I N GENGINEERINGDEPARTMENTREVISIONS:DISTRIBUTIONMAPMAPSHEETSYSTEMSCHEMATICSTATIONSCHEMATICDATE: INIT.PLAT SHEET NO.:PLAT SHEET NO.:PLAT SHEET NO.:PLAT SHEET NO.:PLAT SHEET NO.:PLAT SHEET NO.:TITLE:DISTRICT:DATE:PROJECT ID:DRAWING NO.:SHT OFW111 SCALE 1"=30'DEVELOPERCONSULTANTtel (909) 598-5045 fax (909) 598-858520505 E Valley Blvd. Ste. 110, Walnut, CA 91789 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENTENGINEERING PLANNINGE&A ENGINEERSCALIFORNIA GUAM SAIPAN METRO MANILAVA BAKERSFIELDCOMMUNITY BASEDOUTPATIENT CLINICPROJECT NUMBERU.S. Departmentof Veterans AffairsVA-101F-12-J0010KNUDSEN & OLIVE DRIVEBAKERSFIELD, CA 9330809.22.22026BUILDING DEPARTMENTSUBMITTAL
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 1
Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
4.1 Aesthetics
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: The Project site does not
comprise all or part of a scenic vista and
does not contain any visually prominent
scenic features. No unique views to scenic
vistas are visible from the property. The
Project would not substantially change a
scenic view or substantially block or
obscure a scenic vista; therefore, impacts to
scenic vistas would be less than significant.
No mitigation is required.
The City of Bakersfield is required to assure that
implementing development complies with the
assumptions relied upon herein and applicable
regulatory requirements pertaining to the topic of
Aesthetics, which include the following:
AES DF-1: Prior to the approval of building
permits and other permits and approvals that
authorize construction, the City of Bakersfield shall
review the construction documents and plans to
assure the following:
a. All lighting fixtures shall comply with
applicable City of Bakersfield Municipal Code
requirements pertaining to lighting and
illumination of buildings, parking areas, and
signs.
b. All landscaping shall be installed to comply
with all applicable City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code standards pertaining to
perimeter landscaping and minimum shade
cover.
City of Bakersfield
City of Bakersfield
Prior to approval of
building permits.
Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold b: The Project site is not located
within the viewshed of a scenic highway
and, therefore, the Project site does not
contain any scenic resources visible from a
scenic highway.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold c: The Project site is located
within an urbanized area and would not
conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality during
construction or operation.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 2
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Threshold d: Project-related development
would not create substantial light or glare.
Compliance with Bakersfield Municipal
Code requirements for lighting would
ensure less than significant impacts
associated with light and glare affecting day
or nighttime views in the area from on-site
lighting elements.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
4.2 Air Quality
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: Project emissions would not
exceed SJVAPCD thresholds for criteria
pollutants, and as such the Project would be
consistent with the AQMP.
The City of Bakersfield is required to assure that
implementing development complies with the
assumptions relied upon herein and applicable
regulatory requirements pertaining to the topic of Air
Quality, which include the following:
AIR RR-1: In compliance with SJVAPCD Rule
9510 (Indirect Source Review (ISR)), the Project
Applicant or its successor in interest shall submit an
Air Impact Assessment (AIA) application to the
SJVAPCD, which will identify emission reduction
measures for emissions of NOX and PM10. The
performance measures listed below can be met
through any combination of on-site emission
reduction measures or off-site fees.
a. Related to construction-related emissions, the
exhaust emissions for construction equipment
greater than fifty (50) horsepower used or
associated with the project shall be reduced by
the following amounts from the statewide
average as estimated by the ARB: 20% of the
total NOX emissions, and 45% of the total PM10
exhausts emissions. Construction emissions
can be reduced by using less polluting
construction equipment, which can be achieved
by utilizing addon controls, cleaner fuels, or
newer lower emitting equipment.
City of Bakersfield
City of Bakersfield
Prior to construction.
Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 3
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
b. Related to operational emissions, NOX
emissions shall be reduced by 33.3% of the
project’s operational baseline NOX emissions
over a period of ten years as quantified in the
approved AIA. PM10 emissions shall be
reduced by 50% of the project’s operational
baseline PM10 emissions over a period of ten
years as quantified in the approved AIA.
AIR RR-2: The Project is required to be constructed
and operated in compliance with all applicable
SJVAPCD Rules, including but not limited to the
following:
a. SJVAPCD Rule 4601, Architectural Coatings,
which limits VOC emissions from architectural
coatings.
b. SVAPCD Rule 4102, Nuisance, which
prohibits the discharge of air contaminants and
other materials which cause injury, detriment,
nuisance or annoyance to any considerable
number of persons or to the public or which
endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety
of any such person or the public or which cause
or have a natural tendency to cause injury or
damage to business or property.
c. SJVAPCD Rule 4641, Cutback, Slow Cure and
Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance
Operations, which limits VOC emissions by
restricting the application and manufacturing
of certain types of asphalt for paving and
maintenance operations.
Threshold b: Project emissions would not
exceed any of the SJVAPCD significance
thresholds.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold c: The Project would not result
in air quality emissions that would result in
carcinogenic risk or non-cancer risk
exceeding the identified thresholds of
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 4
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
significance of one in 20 million and 1.0,
respectively, and Project cancer and non-
cancer risks would therefore be less than
significant. The Project also would result in
less than significant impacts due to
visibility to nearby areas.
Threshold d: The Project is not considered
a source of objectionable odors or odorous
compounds.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
4.3 Biological Resources
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: The Project contains suitable
habitat for Crotch bumble bee, burrowing
owl, San Joaquin Kit Fox (SJKF), and
American badger. In the event that any of
these species are present on the Project site
at the time Project construction activities
commence, implementation of the Project
would have the potential to significantly
impact the species. The Project also has the
potential to impact nesting migratory birds
protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA) and the CDFW.
BIO MM-1: Surveys to detect burrowing owls shall
be conducted by a professional biologist in
consultation with CDFW no more than 30 days prior
to any ground disturbance activities on the Project
site and can be conducted concurrently with the pre-
activity surveys required per BIO MM-2, BIO MM-
3 and BIO MM-4. Occupied burrows shall not be
disturbed during the nesting season (February 1
through August 31September 15) unless a
professional biologist verifies through non-invasive
methods that either: (1) the birds have not begun egg-
laying and incubation; or (2) that juveniles from the
occupied burrows are foraging independently and are
capable of independent survival. If burrowing owls
are observed using burrows during the surveys, owls
shall be excluded from all active burrows through the
use of exclusion devices placed in occupied burrows
in accordance with CDFW protocols, Staff Report on
Burrowing Owl Mitigation, shall be implemented. In
such case, exclusion devices shall not be placed until
the young have fledged and are no longer dependent
upon the burrow, as determined by a professional
biologist. Specifically, exclusion devices, utilizing
one-way doors, shall be installed in the entrance of
all active burrows. The devices shall be left in the
burrows for at least 48 hours to ensure that all owls
have been excluded from the burrows. Each of the
Professional Biologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
30 days prior to ground
disturbance
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Incorporated
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 5
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
burrows shall then be excavated by hand and refilled
to prevent reoccupation. Exclusion shall continue
until the owls have been successfully excluded from
the site, as determined by a professional biologist.
BIO MM-2: If vegetation clearing or initial ground-
disturbing construction activity occurs during the
migratory bird nesting season (February 1 to August
31September 15) a professional avian biologist shall
conduct a nesting bird survey to identify any active
nests present within the proposed work area. If active
nests are found, initial ground disturbance shall be
postponed or halted within a buffer area, established
by the professional avian biologist, that is suitable to
the particular bird species and location of the nest,
until juveniles have fledged or the nest has been
abandoned, as determined by the biologist. The
construction avoidance area shall be clearly
demarcated in the field with highly visible
construction fencing or flagging, and construction
personnel shall be instructed on the sensitivity of nest
areas. Specific to Swainson’s hawk, if the Project’s
vegetation clearing or initial ground-disturbance
construction activity will commence during the
migratory bird nesting season, the pre-construction
nesting bird survey shall follow survey methodology
developed by the species’ SWHA Technical
Advisory Committee (SWHA TAC 2000). If
Swainson’s hawk is nesting within one-half mile of
the Project site, construction activities shall not
commence unless an ITP is obtained from the CDFW
or until the breeding season has ended or until a
qualified biologist has determined that the birds have
fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or
parental care for survival.
Professional Biologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to ground disturbance
if such disturbance will
occur between February 1
and August 31
BIO MM-3: Prior to vegetation clearing or initial
ground-disturbing construction activities, a
professional biologist shall conduct a survey to
Professional Biologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to ground disturbing
activities
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 6
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
determine the presence of suitable foraging, nesting,
or over-wintering habitat for the Crotch bumblebee
(CBB) within or immediately adjacent to the work
limits. If suitable habitat is present, at least 2 visual
surveys shall be conducted by a professional
biologist between April 1 and May 30 to detect CBB
on or within 100 feet of the work limits prior to
vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance. The
surveys shall target the peak flowering period of
CBB preferred nectar plants and shall be conducted
by a professional biologist who is familiar with CBB
behavior and life history to determine
presence/absence of CBB within one year of
vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance. CBB
individuals shall only be handled for identification if
appropriate authorizations are issued. Surveys shall
be conducted under suitable conditions for
observation of bumble bees. Methods shall be in
accordance agency protocols if issued. If no agency
protocols have been issued at the time of the surveys,
the following survey parameters will be applied: the
professional biologist will walk slow (≤2 mph)
meandering transects covering all portions suitable
habitat within and immediately adjacent to the work
limits containing suitable habitat; surveys will be
conducted no earlier than 2 hours after sunrise and 3
hours before sunset, on mostly sunny days with
temperature between 65° and 90°F; surveys will not
be conducted on cloudy days (≥90% cloud cover) or
under wet or windy conditions (≥8 mph). Surveyors
will search for bumble bees in flight and potential
nest sites.
All potential CBB nests found in small mammal
burrows, under thatched grasses, brush piles or other
suitable ground locations shall be further examined
based on observations of entering or exiting CBB.
Observations of potential CBB nest sites shall be
conducted for no less than 15 minutes per location
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 7
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
where CBB are possibly entering/exiting, or a longer
period as determined by the professional biologist. If
no CBB or their nests are detected, no further
measures will be necessary provided that vegetation
removal/initial ground disturbance occurs prior to
March 1 of the year following the negative survey. If
vegetation/initial ground disturbance does not occur
before March 1 of the year following the negative
survey, the survey shall be repeated following the
above procedure. If CBB is found to be present, BIO
MM-5 shall apply.
BIO MM-4: No more than 30 days prior to
vegetation clearing or initial ground-disturbing
construction activities, pre-construction surveys for
San Joaquin kit fox and American badger shall be
conducted by a professional biologist. The purpose
of the preconstruction survey is to provide current
biological information in order to implement all
avoidance and minimization measures that are
required based on any previous observations of
special-status species and to update observations
shall any new site occupation by special-status
species occur. If any known San Joaquin kit fox dens
are detected, implementation of the most recent
USFWS protocols (Standardized Recommendations
for Protection of the Endangered San Joaquin Kit
Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance (2011))
is required per BIO MM-5 unless protocols are issued
by either CDFW or USFWS that supersede these
protocols. If American badger is present, BIO MM-5
shall apply.
Professional Biologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
30 days prior to ground
disturbance
BIO MM-5: If California or Federal listed threatened
or endangered species are found occupying burrows,
dens, or nests on the Project site or any such species
could be injured or killed due to Project-related
activities, the CDFW and/or USFWS (as appropriate)
shall be contacted for further guidance. Should either
Professional Biologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
If threatened or endangered
species are found
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 8
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
agency determine that incidental take authorization is
required prior to construction, the appropriate
CESA/FESA authorization shall be obtained by the
Project Applicant. CESA and FESA authorizations
shall include measures addressing the respective state
and/or federal listed species and shall include the
following at a minimum:
a) Implementation of standardized biological
resource protective measures included in BIO
MM-4;
b) Biological preconstruction surveys conducted
by qualified biologists approved by each
applicable agency no more than 30 days prior to
conducting work on the Project site;
c) If any known San Joaquin kit fox dens are
detected, implementation of the most recent
USFWS protocols (Standardized
Recommendations for Protection of the
Endangered San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or
During Ground Disturbance (2011)) unless
protocols are issued by either CDFW or
USFWS that supersede these protocols.
d) Destruction of San Joaquin kit fox dens shall
follow the monitoring and excavation
procedures in USFWS (2011).
e) If CBB individuals or nests are detected during
any surveys conducted per BIO MM-3, and the
CBB remains a state candidate species or is
listed under CESA, the Project Applicant shall
obtain take authorization from CDFW prior to
vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance.
A CBB Mortality Reduction Plan shall be
submitted for CDFW approval no less than 30
days prior to initial vegetation removal or
ground disturbance and the Plan shall contain
the following information at a minimum:
o Active CBB nests shall be avoided by 50
feet. If CBB nests cannot be avoided, the
Plan shall include seasonal restrictions for
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 9
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
disturbance within 50 feet of any nest and
procedures for determining when nest
impacts will be minimized.
o Vegetation removal/initial ground
disturbance shall be limited to the period
when impacts to individual CBB that may
be underground will be minimized (e.g.,
after nests have become inactive).
o Prior to vegetation removal/initial ground
disturbance, small mammal burrows that
may harbor overwintering CBB queens
shall be excavated by hand. The Plan shall
include timing and excavation methods. In
addition, the Plan shall include procedures
for handling and disposition of CBB if
encountered during burrow excavations.
o The Plan shall include procedures for
handling and disposition of individual
CBB if they are encountered in the work
limits or on construction equipment
during construction activities.
f) Biological monitoring of initial ground
disturbance during each phase of grading;
g) Provision for compliance reporting to be
provided to each agency as required in respective
take authorizations;
h) Compensation for habitat disturbance acceptable
to CDFW (state listed species) and/or USFWS
(federal listed species) at a ratio of no less than
3:1 for permanent impacts and 1.1:1 for
temporary impacts to listed species habitat. The
only existing approved conservation bank for
impacts to San Joaquin kit fox habitat in Kern
County is the Kern Water Bank Authority
Conservation Bank. Lands used to mitigate for
San Joaquin kit fox must be contiguous with
other potentially occupied lands, provide
suitable foraging and denning habitat for San
Joaquin kit fox, and be located in the southern
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 10
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
San Joaquin Valley portion of Kern County
below 1,500’ in elevation;
i) Compensation land shall be funded for
maintenance, protection, and management
through establishment of a long-term funding
mechanism such as an endowment. The
endowment must be a non-wasting account that
is acceptable to both CDFW and USFWS.
BIO MM-6: All biological monitors working on the
Project site shall be required by their contract to
notify the USFWS and CDFW of the discovery of
any protected species identified on the site other that
nesting birds, Crotch bumblebee, San Joaquin kit fox
and American badger which are addressed by BIO
MM-1, BIO MM-2, BIO MM-3, BIO MM-4, and
BIO MM-5. Any take of protected wildlife shall be
reported immediately to USFWS and CDFW.
Professional Biologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
If threatened or endangered
species are found
BIO MM-7: The Project Applicant shall ensure that
the Project’s construction contractors adhere to the
following best management practices. Construction
contractors shall be required by their contracts to
comply with these best practices and permit periodic
inspection of the construction site by City of
Bakersfield staff or its designee to confirm
compliance. A note that requires compliance is
required on all grading and building plans approved
by the City of Bakersfield.
a. Traffic restraints and signs shall be established
to minimize temporary disturbances during
construction beyond the construction site
boundaries. All construction traffic shall be
restricted to designated access roads and routes,
Project site, storage areas, and staging and
parking areas. Off-road traffic outside
designated Project boundaries shall be
prohibited. A 15 mile-per-hour (24 kilometer-
Professional Biologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
During construction
activities
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 11
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
per-hour) speed limit shall be observed in all
Project construction areas, except as otherwise
posted on county roads and state and federal
highways.
b. All construction personnel involved in ground-
disturbing construction activities shall attend a
worker orientation program. The worker
orientation program shall present measures
required to avoid, minimize, and mitigate
impacts to biological resources and shall
include, at a minimum, the following subjects:
A summary of the Federal Endangered Species
Act (FESA), California Endangered Species
Act (CESA), and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA); biological survey results for the
current construction area; life history
information for the species of concern;
biological resource avoidance, minimization,
and mitigation requirements; consequences for
failure to successfully implement requirements;
and procedures to be followed if dead or injured
wildlife are located during Project activities.
Upon completion of the orientation, employees
shall sign a form stating that they attended the
program and understand all biological resource
mitigation measures. Forms verifying worker
attendance shall be filed at the Project
Applicant’s office and be accessible to the City
of Bakersfield, USFWS and CDFW staff. No
untrained personnel shall be allowed to work
onsite with the exception of delivery trucks that
are only onsite for 1 day or less and are under
the supervision of a trained employee.
c. All equipment storage and parking during
construction activities shall be confined to the
designated construction area or to previously
disturbed offsite areas that are not habitat for
listed species.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 12
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
d. All Project construction activities involving
initial surface disturbance shall occur during
daylight hours.
e. Trenches shall be inspected for entrapped
wildlife each morning prior to the onset of
construction. Before such holes or trenches are
filled, they shall be thoroughly inspected for
entrapped animals. Any wildlife so discovered
shall be allowed to escape voluntarily, without
harassment, before construction activities
resume. A professional biologist may remove
wildlife from a trench, hole or other entrapment
out of harm’s way if the immediate welfare of
the individual is in jeopardy. State or federal
listed species may not be handled. Should any
state or federal listed species become
entrapped, CDFW and USFWS shall be
contacted as appropriate.
f. All food-related trash items such as wrappers,
cans, bottles and food scraps generated by
Project construction activities shall be disposed
of in closed containers and removed at least
once each week from the site. Deliberate
feeding of wildlife shall be prohibited.
g. To prevent harassment of special-status
species, construction personnel shall not be
allowed to have firearms or pets on the Project
site.
h. All equipment and work-related materials shall
be contained in closed containers either in the
work area or on vehicles. Loose items (e.g.
rags, hose, etc.) shall be stored within closed
containers or enclosed in vehicles when on the
work site.
i. All liquids shall be in closed, covered
containers. Any spills of hazardous liquids shall
not be left unattended until clean-up has been
completed.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 13
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
j. Use of rodenticides and herbicides on the
Project shall be prohibited unless approved by
the USFWS and the CDFW. This is necessary
to prevent primary or secondary poisoning of
special-status species using adjacent habitats,
and to avoid the depletion of prey upon which
they depend. If rodent control must be
conducted, zinc phosphide shall be used
because of its proven lower risk to SJKF.
k. Any employee who inadvertently kills or
injures a listed species, or who finds any such
wildlife dead, injured, or entrapped on the
Project site, shall be required to report the
incident immediately to a designated site
representative (e.g., foreman, project manager,
environmental inspector, etc.).
l. In the case of entrapped wildlife that are listed
species, escape ramps or structures shall be
installed immediately, if possible, to allow the
subject wildlife to escape unimpeded.
m. In the case of injured special-status wildlife, the
CDFW shall be notified immediately. During
business hours Monday through Friday, the
phone number is (559) 243-4017. For non-
business hours, report to (800) 952-5400.
Notification shall include the date, time,
location, and circumstances of the incident.
Instructions provided by the CDFW for the care
of the injured animal shall be followed by the
contractor onsite.
n. In the case of dead wildlife that are listed as
threatened or endangered, the USFWS and the
CDFW shall be immediately (within 24 hours)
notified by phone or in person, and shall
document the initial notification in writing
within 2 working days of the findings of any
such wildlife. Notification shall include the
date, time, location, and circumstances of the
incident.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 14
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
o. Prior to commencement of construction, work
areas not adjacent to public streets shall be
clearly marked with fencing, stakes with rope
or cord, or other means of delineating the work
area boundaries.
p. If any suspected federally or State protected
plant or animal species is found to be present
during Project-related construction activities,
occupied areas shall be avoided and the
construction contractor shall be required by its
contract to call a CDFW-approved biologist to
the site to identify the species. If the species is
protected, the qualified biologist shall notify
the USFWS and CDFW of any previously
unreported protected species. Any take of
protected wildlife shall be reported
immediately to USFWS and CDFW.
Threshold b: There is no potential for the
Project to have a substantial adverse effect
on any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or by
the CDFG or USFWS because these
resources do not exist on the Project site.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold c: There is no potential for the
Project to have a substantial adverse effect
on State or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means because these resources do not exist
on the Project site.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold d: There is no potential for the
Project to interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites because the
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 15
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Project site does not function as part of a
wildlife movement corridor.
Threshold e: There is no potential for the
Project to conflict with any local policies or
ordinance protecting biological resources
because no such policies or ordinances are
in place that have applicability to the
Project site.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold f: The Project would not
conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan because not such plans
are in place that have applicability to the
Project site.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
4.4 Cultural Resources
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: The Project would not
impact any known historical resources and
would not cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of any known
historical resources pursuant to California
Code of Regulation, Section 15064.5.
However, there is a remote possibility that
subsurface historical resources may exist
and may be unearthed and impacted during
Project-related construction activities.
Therefore, the Project’s potential impact to
potentially present subsurface historical
resources would be significant prior to
mitigation.
CR MM-1: Prior to construction and as needed
throughout the construction period involving ground-
disturbing construction activities, a construction
worker cultural awareness training program shall be
provided to all new construction workers within one
week of employment at the project site. The training
shall be prepared and conducted by a qualified
cultural resources specialist that meets the U.S.
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification
Standards. Workers attending the training shall sign
a form that shall be kept by the Project Applicant and
made available to the City of Bakersfield upon
request.
Professional Cultural
Resource Specialist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to the issuance of a
grading permit or any
permit that authorizes
ground disturbance
Less-than Significant
Impact with mitigation
incorporated
CR MM-2: If suspected historical or archaeological
resources are encountered during ground disturbance
activities, the construction contractor(s) shall be
required by their contract to immediately cease work
within 100 feet of the resources and have the area
partitioned off until a qualified cultural resource
specialist that meets the U.S. Secretary of the
Construction Contractors
and Professional Cultural
Resource Specialist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
If suspected cultural
resources are encountered
Less-than Significant
Impact with mitigation
incorporated
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 16
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards can
evaluate the resources found and make
recommendations. If the specialist determines that
the discovery represents a potentially significant
cultural resource, additional investigations may be
required. If cultural resources are discovered that
may have relevance to Native Americans, the
specialist or Project Applicant must provide written
notice to the City of Bakersfield, Tejon Indian Tribe,
Native American Heritage Commission, and any
other appropriate individuals, agencies, and/or
groups as determined by the specialist in consultation
with the City of Bakersfield to receive input
regarding treatment and disposition of the resource,
which may include avoidance, testing, and/or
excavation to prevent destruction of the resource
and/or to allow documentation of the resource for
research potential. All reports, correspondence, and
determinations regarding the discovery shall be
submitted to the California Historical Resources
Information System’s Southern San Joaquin Valley
Information Center at California State University
Bakersfield.
Threshold b: The Project would not impact
any known archaeological sites and would
not cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of any known
archaeological resources pursuant to
California Code of Regulation, Section
15064.5. However, there is a possibility
that subsurface archaeological resources
may exist and may be unearthed and
impacted during Project-related
construction activities. Therefore, the
Project’s potential impact to potentially
present subsurface archaeological
resources would be significant prior to
mitigation.
See CR MM-1 above. Professional Archaeologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to the issuance of a
grading permit or any
permit that authorizes
ground disturbance
Less-than Significant
Impact with mitigation
incorporated
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 17
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
See CR MM-2 above. Construction Contractors
and Professional
Archaeologist retained by
Project Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
If suspected cultural
resources are encountered
Less-than Significant
Impact with mitigation
incorporated
Threshold c: The Project site does not
contain a cemetery and no known
cemeteries are located within the
immediate site vicinity. Although the
Project Applicant would be required to
comply with the applicable provisions of
California Health and Safety Code § 7050.5
and California Public Resources Code §
5097 et. seq., the Project’s potential
impacts to buried human remain, if
discovered, s would be significant on a
direct and cumulatively-considerable basis
prior to mitigation.
CR MM-3: During construction, if human remains
are discovered, further ground disturbance shall be
prohibited pursuant to California Health and Safety
Code Section 7050.5. The specific protocol,
guidelines, and channels of communication outlined
by the Native American Heritage Commission, in
accordance with Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5, Public Resources Code 5097.97, and Senate
Bill 447 shall be followed. In the event of the
discovery of human remains, at the direction of the
county coroner, Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5(c) shall guide Native American consultation.
Unless otherwise required by law, the site of any
reburial of Native American human remains or
associated grave goods shall not be disclosed and
shall not be governed by public disclosure
requirements of the California Public Records Act.
The coroner, pursuant to the specific exemption set
forth in California Government Code Section 6254
(r), parties, and Lead Agencies, will be asked to
withhold public disclosure information related to
such reburial, pursuant to the specific exemption set
forth in California Government Code Section 6254
(r).
Construction Contractors County Coroner
If human remains are
discovered
Less-than Significant
Impact with mitigation
incorporated
4.5 Energy
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: The amount of energy and
fuel consumed by construction and
operation of the Project would not be
inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary.
Furthermore, the Project would not cause or
result in the need for additional energy
facilities or energy delivery systems.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 18
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Threshold b: The Project would not
conflict with or obstruct the achievement of
energy conservation goals within the State
of California identified in State and local
plans for renewable energy and energy
efficiency.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A
4.6 Geology and Soils
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: Implementation of the Project
would not expose people or structures to
substantial direct or indirect adverse effects
related to liquefaction or fault rupture. The
Project site is subject to seismic ground
shaking associated with earthquakes;
however, mandatory compliance with local
and State regulatory requirements and
building codes would ensure that the
Project minimizes potential hazards related
to seismic ground shaking to less than
significant levels.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold b: Implementation of the Project
would not result in substantial soil erosion
or loss of topsoil. The Project Applicant
would be required to obtain a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit for construction activities
minimizing impacts to less than significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold c: There is no potential for the
Project’s construction or operation to cause,
or be impacted by, on- or off-site landslides
or lateral spreading. Potential hazards
associated with unstable soils would be
precluded through mandatory adherence to
the recommendations contained in the site-
specific geotechnical report during Project
construction.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold d: The Project site contains soils
with very low susceptibility to expansion;
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 19
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
therefore, the Project would not create
substantial direct or indirect risks to life or
property associated with the presence of
expansive soils. Impacts would be less than
significant.
Threshold e: No septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems are proposed
to be installed on the Project site.
Accordingly, no impact would occur
associated with soil compatibility for
wastewater disposal systems.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold f: The Project would not impact
any known paleontological resource or
unique geological feature. However,
construction activities on the Project site
extending more than six (6) feet in depth
have the potential to unearth and adversely
impact a unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature that may be
buried beneath the ground surface.
GEO MM-1: Prior to construction and as needed
throughout the construction period involving ground-
disturbing construction activities, a construction
worker paleontological resource awareness training
program shall be provided to all new construction
workers within one week of employment at the
project site, if their work will involve ground-
disturbing construction activities greater than six feet
in depth in older alluvium soils. The training shall be
prepared and conducted by a professional
paleontologist. Workers attending the training shall
sign a form that shall be kept by the Project Applicant
and made available to the City of Bakersfield upon
request.
Professional paleontologist
retained by the Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to the issuance of a
grading permit
Less-than-Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated
GEO MM-2: If paleontological resources are
encountered, all work within 100 feet of the resources
shall halt until a qualified paleontologist can be
called to the site to evaluate the resources and make
recommendations. Paleontological resource
materials may include fossils, plant impressions, or
animal tracks that have been preserved in rock. If the
qualified paleontologist determines that the
discovery represents a potentially significant
paleontological resource, additional investigations
and fossil recovery may be required to mitigate
adverse impacts to less than significant levels.
Construction within 100 feet of the resources found
Construction contractors
and professional
paleontologist retained by
the Project Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
If paleontological resources
are discovered
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 20
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
shall not resume until the appropriate mitigation
measures are implemented or the materials are
determined to be to be less than significant by the
paleontologist.
GEO MM-3: Recovered specimens, if any, shall be
properly prepared to a point of identification and
permanent preservation, including screen washing
sediments to recover small invertebrates and
vertebrates, if necessary. Identification and curation
of specimens into a professional, accredited public
museum repository with a commitment to archival
conservation and permanent retrievable storages
shall be required for discoveries of significance as
determined by the paleontologist.
Professional paleontologist
retained by the Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
If paleontological resources
are discovered
GEO MM-4: A final monitoring and mitigation
report of findings and significance shall be prepared,
including lists of all fossils recovered, if any, and
necessary maps and graphics to accurately record the
original location of the specimens. The report shall
be submitted to the City of Bakersfield prior to final
building inspection.
Professional paleontologist
retained by the Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
If paleontological resources
are discovered and prior to
final building inspection
The City of Bakersfield is required to assure that
implementing development complies with the
assumptions relied upon herein and applicable
regulatory requirements pertaining to the topic of
Geology and Soils.
GEO RR-5: In compliance with City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code Chapter 15.05, California Building
Code, construction of the Project is required to
adhere to the California Building Standards Code and
its requirement to prepare and adhere to site-specific
recommendations contained in a geotechnical report
prepared for the Project site. As such, compliance
with the recommendations provided in the Project’s
geotechnical study prepared by Krazan & Associates,
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 21
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Inc. and dated May 6, 2019 (contained as Technical
Appendix E to this EIR) is required.
GEO RR-6: To address wind erosion, the Project
construction activities are required to comply with
the provisions of Chapter 15 Section 104.12 of the
Bakersfield Municipal Code to ensure that dust
abatement measures comply with the current
standards set for by the San Joaquin Valley Air
Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD).
GEO RR-7: The Project Applicant is required,
pursuant to the State Water Resources Control Board,
to obtain coverage under the State’s General
Construction Storm Water Permit for construction
activities (NPDES permit). Compliance with the
NPDES permit involves the preparation and
implementation of a SWPPP for construction-related
activities. The SWPPP will specify the Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that construction
contractors will be required to implement during
construction activities to ensure that waterborne
pollution – including erosion/sedimentation – is
prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise
appropriately treated prior to surface runoff being
discharged from the subject property. Examples of
BMPs that may be utilized during construction
include, but are not limited to, sandbag barriers,
geotextiles, storm drain inlet protection, sediment
traps, rip rap soil stabilizers, and hydro-seeding.
4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: The Project would generate
approximately 83.15 net new MT CO2e
annually of GHGs, which is significant on
a cumulatively-considerable basis.
GHG MM-1: Construction contractors shall assure
that construction equipment greater than 150
horsepower achieves or is equivalent to or better than
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/California
Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 4 emissions
Construction contractors
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to issuance of a
grading permit and prior to
issuance of a building
permit, and during
construction
Significant and
Unavoidable Cumulatively-
Considerable Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 22
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
standards, or Tier 3 standards if Tier 4 equipment is
not available at the time of construction. Prior to
grading and building permit issuance, the
construction contractor(s) shall submit an equipment
list to the City’s Development Services Director
confirming that the equipment used is compliant.
GHG MM-2: Construction contractors shall assure
that hand tools, forklifts, and pressure washers used
for construction are electric-powered and shall
designate an area of the construction site where
electric-powered construction vehicles and
equipment can charge. The City of Bakersfield shall
verify the location of the designated charging area in
association with grading and building permit
issuance.
Construction contractors
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to issuance of a
grading permit and prior to
issuance of a building
permit, and during
construction
GHG MM-3: Project construction contractors shall
tune and maintain all construction equipment in
accordance with the equipment manufacturer’s
recommended maintenance schedule and
specifications. Maintenance records for all pieces of
equipment shall be kept on-site for the duration of
construction activities and shall be made available for
periodic inspection by City of Bakersfield or its
designee.
GHG MM-4: The building roof shall, upon the
approval of a design modification by the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), be outfitted
with a solar photovoltaic system of the maximum
size feasible to provide power to the building and
given the constraints of applicable Building Code
requirements, clearance requirements around roof-
mounted equipment, PG&E interconnection
regulations, and other code compliance
requirements. Should the VA not approve a design
modification to add a rooftop PV system, the building
Construction contractors
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to issuance of a
grading permit and prior to
issuance of a building
permit, and during
construction
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 23
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
may be constructed and operated without a PV
system.
The City of Bakersfield is required to assure that
implementing development complies with the
assumptions relied upon herein and applicable
regulatory requirements pertaining to the topic of
Greenhouse Gas Emissions, which include the
following:
GHG RR-4: The building shall be constructed in
compliance with Title 24 of the Uniform Building
Code to minimize total consumption of energy. The
City of Bakersfield shall confirm Title 24 compliance
prior to the issuance of building permits.
Threshold b: The Project would be
consistent with the CARB 2020 Scoping
Plan Update, which was prepared to
address the GHG reduction requirements
set forth by SB 32. Because the Project
would be consistent with the Scoping Plan
Update, the Project also would not interfere
with the State’s ability to achieve the GHG
reduction requirements of SB 32. Thus, the
Project would not conflict with an
applicable plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases, and impacts
would be less than significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a and b: During Project
construction and operation, mandatory
compliance to federal, State, and local
regulations would ensure that the Project
would not create a significant hazard to the
environment due to routine transport, use,
disposal, or upset of hazardous materials.
No mitigation is required.
The City of Bakersfield is required to assure that
implementing development complies with the
assumptions relied upon herein and applicable
regulatory requirements pertaining to the topic of
Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 24
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
HAZ RR-1: Construction contractors shall be
required to comply with all applicable federal, State,
and local laws and regulations regarding the
transport, use, and storage of hazardous construction‐
related materials, including but not limited
requirements imposed by the EPA, DTSC, and the
Central Valley RWQCB.
HAZ RR-2: If the VA handles hazardous materials
as defined in Section 25500 of California Health and
Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.95, it shall be
required to comply with California’s Hazardous
Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory
Law, which requires immediate reporting to the Kern
County Fire Department and the State Office of
Emergency Services regarding any release or
threatened release of a hazardous material, regardless
of the amount handled by the business, and to prepare
a Hazardous Materials Business Emergency Plan
(HMBEP).
HAZ RR-3: Activities involving the collection and
disposal of medical wastes are required to comply
with California’s Medical Waste Management Act of
2017.
HAZ RR-4: All transporters of medical wastes
must be registered hazardous waste haulers with a
valid Hazardous Waste Transporter Registration
through the California Department of Toxic
Substances Control (DTSC).
HAZ RR-5: The proposed Project would be
required to comply with the Kern County Operational
Area Hazardous Materials Area Plan to ensure
compliance with established procedures, rules, and
regulations for emergency responses in the event of a
hazardous materials incident.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 25
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Threshold c: The Project Site is located
within one-quarter mile of four schools;
however, the Project would be required to
comply with applicable federal, State, and
local regulations related to the handling,
storage, use, and transport of hazardous
materials and biomedical wastes to ensure
that students are not exposed to substantial
hazardous emissions or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold d: The Project site is not located
on any list of hazardous materials sites
complied pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold e: The Project is consistent with
the requirements of the Meadow Field
ALUCP. As such, the Project would not
result in an airport safety hazard for people
residing or working in the Project area.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold f: The Project site does not
contain any emergency facilities nor does it
serve as an emergency evacuation route.
During construction and long-term
operation, adequate emergency vehicle
access is required to be provided.
Accordingly, implementation of the Project
would not impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold g: The Project site is not located
in close proximity to wildlands or areas
with high fire hazards. Thus, the Project
would not expose people or structures to a
significant wildfire risk.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Threshold a and e: The Project would be
required to comply with a Stormwater
The City of Bakersfield is required to assure that
implementing development complies with the
N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 26
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for
construction-related activities, including
grading. Best management practices
(BMPs) would be implemented as part of
the SWPPP to ensure that all potential
pollutants of concern are prevented,
minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately
treated. Under long-term conditions, the
Project’s proposed water quality/retention
basin would capture all first-flush flows
generated on the Project site and infiltrate
the captured water into the groundwater
basin. Furthermore, the Project site is not
tributary to any impaired water bodies
listed on the CWA Section 303(d) list. As
such, the Project has no potential to cause
or contribute to surface water quality
impacts downstream. Accordingly, the
Project would not violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements
or otherwise substantially degrade surface
or groundwater quality, and would not
conflict with or obstruct implementation of
a water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan. Impacts
would be less than significant.
assumptions relied upon herein and applicable
regulatory requirements pertaining to the topic of
Hydrology and Water Quality, which include the
following:
HYD RR-1: The Project Applicant and construction
contractor are required to comply with the
requirements of a NPDES permit, and SWPPP.
Compliance with the NPDES permit and the SWPPP
require an effective combination of erosion control
and sediment control measures (i.e., Best
Management Practices) to reduce or eliminate
discharges to surface water from storm water and
non-stormwater discharges during construction
activities.
HYD RR-2: During construction, Project
construction contractors are required to comply with
the requirements of the 2022 California Green
Building Standards Code (CalGreen, Part 11 of Title
24, California Code of Regulations) or any
subsequent version of the Title 24 in effect at the time
of building permit issuance, which requires among
other items the installation of low water-use features.
Threshold b: The Project would be
provided potable water by the Cal Water.
The Cal Water UWMP for the Bakersfield
District forecasts 70,314 acre‐feet of
reliable supply for a normal year, single‐
year drought, and multi‐year drought in 5‐
year increments through 2045. Similarly,
the Kern River Groundwater Sustainability
Plan estimates groundwater safe yield
combined with other sources of supply and
supplemental supply projects which
combined fully mitigate potential future
overdraft. With respect to groundwater
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 27
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
recharge, runoff generated on site would be
conveyed to the proposed on-site water
quality/retention basin, where the runoff
would infiltrate into the on-site soils.
Accordingly, the Project would not
substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the project
may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin, and impacts
would be less than significant.
Threshold c: For the reasons discussed
under the analysis of Thresholds a. and e.,
Project impacts to surface and groundwater
quality would be less than significant. The
Project has no potential to increase the rate
or amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or off-
site, and the Project would not create runoff
water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems. Additionally, the Project site and
surrounding areas are not subject to flood
hazards. Accordingly, the Project would
not substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area in a manner which
would result in flooding on or off site,
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
drainage systems, or impede or redirect
flood flows. Impacts would be less than
significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold d: The Project site is not located
within or near any flood hazard areas, is not
subject to tsunami hazards, and there are no
enclosed or semi-enclosed bodies of water
in proximity to the Project site capable of
producing seiches that could affect the
Project site. Accordingly, Project would not
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 28
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
result in any impacts related to the risk of
release of pollutants due to Project
inundation from floods, tsunamis, or
seiches.
4.10 Land Use and Planning
Threshold a: The Project has no potential
to physically divide an established
community.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold b: The Project is a compatible
land use within the Service Industrial (SI)
General Plan designation and is consistent
with the General Manufacturing (M-2)
zoning classification, which allows all uses
permitted in the CO zone, including
medical clinics. The Project does not
conflict with General Plan goals and
policies and the general intent of the
General Plan and has no potential to result
in significant land use and planning
conflicts in the context of compliance with
applicable environmental plans, policies,
and regulations beyond those identified in
other Subsections of this EIR.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
4.11 Noise
Threshold a: Noise levels generated by the
Project’s short-term construction would be
less than significant at the nearest sensitive
receptor. On-site operational noise levels
would be less than significant at the nearest
sensitive receptors. In addition, Project-
related traffic noise increases would be
below the identified thresholds of
significance under Existing and long-range
traffic conditions. Accordingly, the Project
would not generate substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the project in excess
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 29
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies, and impacts
would be less than significant.
Threshold b: The Project’s construction
and operational activities would not result
in a perceptible groundborne vibration or
noise that exceed thresholds of
significance.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold c: The Project site is located
within the Airport Influence Area of
Meadows Field Airport but is located well
outside of the 60 dBA CNEL noise level
contour boundary of the airport. The
Project medical outpatient commercial land
use is considered normally acceptable with
exterior noise levels of 55-60 dBA CNEL.
Therefore, the Project would not expose
people residing or working in the Project
area to excessive noise levels related to a
private airstrip, airport land use plan or
public airport our public use airport.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
4.12 Transportation
Threshold a: The Project is consistent with
the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan,
including the goals and policies of the
General Plan Circulation Element, and also
would be required to comply with all
applicable requirements of the City’s
Municipal Code. As there are no other
applicable programs, plans, ordinances, or
policies addressing the circulation system,
Project impacts due to a conflict with a
program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system would be
less than significant.
No mitigation is required.
The City of Bakersfield is required to assure that
implementing development complies with the
assumptions relied upon herein and applicable
regulatory requirements pertaining to the topic of
Transportation, which include the following
regulatory requirements.
TRN RR-1: Prior to issuance of building permits,
the Project Applicant shall pay appropriate Traffic
Impact Fee (TIF) fees at the rates then in effect in
accordance with Chapter 15.84 of the City’s
Municipal Code.
N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 30
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
TRN RR-2: All off-site roadway improvements
shall comply with applicable provisions of City of
Bakersfield Municipal Code Title 10 (Vehicles and
Traffic) and Chapter 13.12 (Development
Improvements Standards and Specifications).
Threshold b: The Project VMT is less than
the threshold of significance and impacts
would be less than significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold c: With mandatory compliance
with City design standards, including
standards contained within the City’s
Municipal Code, the Project would not
substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature. Additionally, due
to the short distance between the Project site
and the on- and off-ramps at SR 99, the
Project would not result in increased
hazards to transportation as a result of
incompatible uses, and impacts due to
incompatible uses would be less than
significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold d: The provision of adequate
emergency access is required during both
construction and long-term operation, in
accordance with City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code and Fire Department
requirements. Accordingly, the Project
would have adequate emergency access,
and impacts would be less than significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
4.13 Tribal Cultural Resources
Threshold a: The Project site does not
contain any known tribal cultural resources.
Nonetheless, Project construction activities
have the potential to unearth and adversely
impact tribal cultural resources that may be
buried or masked at the Project site.
Mitigation Measures CR MM-1 through CR MM-3
shall apply.
Less-than-Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Regarding the Environmental Effects of the Approval of the:
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient
Clinic
State Clearinghouse No. 2022080337
Lead Agency
City of Bakersfield
Development Services Department
1715 Chester Avenue, 2nd Floor
Bakersfield, CA 93301
CEQA Consultant
T&B Planning, Inc.
3200 El Camino Real, Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92602
Project Applicant
SASD Development Group, LLC
4895 Pacific Highway
San Diego, CA 92110
August 8, 2023
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
i
Table of Contents
Section Page
1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Summary ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 City of Bakersfield Actions Covered By the EIR .................................................................... 2
1.3 Environmental Review and Public Participation ..................................................................... 2
2.0 Environmental Impacts and Findings ................................................................................. 5
2.1 General Findings ...................................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Impacts Identified in the Initial Study (IS) or EIR as No Impact or Less than Significant Not
Requiring Mitigation ............................................................................................................... 6
2.3 Impacts Identified in the EIR as Potentially Significant that Have been Mitigated to a Level
of Less than Significant ......................................................................................................... 31
2.4 Impacts Identified in the EIR as being Significant and Unavoidable .................................... 44
2.5 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Which Would Be Caused by the Proposed
Project Should It Be Implemented ......................................................................................... 46
2.6 Growth-Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Project ................................................................ 47
2.7 Project Alternatives ............................................................................................................... 48
3.0 Statement of Overriding Considerations .......................................................................... 53
4.0 Additional Facts on Record .............................................................................................. 54
4.1 Adoption of a Monitoring Plan for Mitigation Measures ...................................................... 54
4.2 Custodian of Record .............................................................................................................. 55
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
1
1.0 Introduction
The Planning Commission of the City of Bakersfield (the “Planning Commission”) in approving the
Veterans Affairs (VA) Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project (the “Project”), makes the
Findings presented herein. The Findings are based upon the entire record before the City Council, as
described in Subsection 1.3 below, including the Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) prepared for
the Project on behalf of the City of Bakersfield (the “City”) acting as Lead Agency under the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).
Hereinafter, the Notice of Preparation, Notice of Availability, Draft EIR, Technical Studies, Final EIR
(containing responses to public comments on the Draft EIR and textual revisions to the Draft EIR),
and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program will be referred to collectively herein as the
“EIR” unless otherwise specified.
1.1 Project Summary
1.1.1 Site Location
The 10.05 gross-acre Project site is located within the northern portion of the City of Bakersfield in
Kern County, California. Kern County is bound by Kings, Tulare, and Inyo counties to the north; San
Bernardino County to the east; Los Angeles and Ventura counties to the south; and Santa Barbara and
San Luis Obispo counties to the west. At the local scale, the Project site is located west of State Route
99 (SR-99) and southeast of the intersection of Olive Drive and Knudsen Drive. The Project site
includes Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 365-020-28 and -30.
1.1.2 Project Description
The Project includes the development of 10.05 gross acres with a medical outpatient facility which
would be operated by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Features include a 39,648 s.f. single-
story building (net usable 30,100 safe), a covered drop-off area, bicycle racks, a covered ambulatory
pick-up area, an outdoor physical therapy area, an outdoor dining area, and an elevated loading dock.
Landscaping is proposed along the perimeter of the Project site, around the building, and throughout
the parking areas. In addition, a healing garden is proposed on the east side of the building, which
would include a garden path and benches.
The site development action for the Project entails a Site Plan Review No. 21-0399. Site Plan Review
No. 21-0399 would permit the development of a medical outpatient facility on 10.05 gross acres, which
would be operated by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs.
1.1.3 Project Objectives
The fundamental purpose and goal of the VA Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project is to develop
a modern, state-of-the-art community-based outpatient medical facility to serve U.S. military veterans
in the Bakersfield area. The Project would achieve its underlying purpose and goal through the
following objectives.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
2
A. Establish a new VA community-based outpatient medical clinic in Bakersfield on a site that
has been vetted by and selected by the U.S. Government within the following delineated area:
• North: East on Olive Drive, southeast on Roberts Lane, southeast on Manor Street and
then northeast on Panorama Drive to Fairfax Road.
• East: South on Fairfax Road to E. Brundage Lane.
• South: West on E. Brundage Lane, continuing on Brundage Lane to the intersection of
Brundage Lane and SR-99.
• West: The intersection of Gosford Road and White Lane, north to where Gosford Road
becomes Coffee Road, north to Olive Drive.
B. Establish a new VA community-based outpatient medical clinic that has a minimum size of
30,100 net usable square feet and meets the VA’s physical design requirements.
C. Provide high quality patient care for veterans in a safe, advanced-care medical facility
throughout the Bakersfield area and surrounding communities.
D. Enable veterans to receive health care at a medical facility that is easily accessible and nearby
a State highway system to reduce out of area health trips.
E. Develop a modern, state of the art VA medical clinic that is capable of providing a diverse
range of consolidated outpatient services, such as audiology, mental health, telehealth,
ambulatory care, an eye clinic, physical and occupational therapy, prosthetics, dental services,
a lab and pharmacy, and ancillary and diagnostic services, avoiding the need for veterans to
travel out of the Bakersfield area for these services.
F. Create a comprehensively planned, advanced-care VA medical clinic that provides community
vitality, economic growth, and employment opportunities in the City of Bakersfield.
G. Construct a VA medical clinic with maximum operational efficiency to optimize health care
outcomes and create a space for increased patient and staff satisfaction.
1.2 City of Bakersfield Actions Covered By the EIR
The City of Bakersfield has primary approval responsibility for the proposed Project. As such, the City
serves as the Lead Agency for the EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15050. The City’s
Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to consider the Final EIR and Site Plan No. 21-0399.
The Planning Commission will direct the Development Services Director whether to approve Site Plan
No. 21-0399. Other agencies also may use the EIR as part of their decision-making processes
concerning the proposed Project.
1.3 Environmental Review and Public Participation
The City conducted an extensive environmental review of the Project to ensure that the City’s decision
makers and the public are fully informed about potential significant environmental effects of the
Project; to identify ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced; to prevent
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
3
significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in the Project through the use
of mitigation measures and project design requirements which have been found to be feasible; and to
disclose to the public the reasons why the City has initiated the Project in the manner chosen in light
of the significant environmental effects which have been identified in the EIR. In order to do this, the
City, acting as lead agency under CEQA, undertook the following:
o Prepared an Initial Study and a Notice of Preparation, which were used as the basis for the
determination that an EIR should be prepared for the Project. The Notice of Preparation
identified the environmental issues to be analyzed in detail in the Project’s EIR as: Aesthetics,
Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology & Soils, Greenhouse
Gas Emissions, Hazards & Hazardous Materials, Hydrology & Water Quality, Land Use &
Planning, Noise, Transportation, and Tribal Cultural Resources;
o The Initial Study and Notice of Preparation were sent to the Governor’s Office of Planning and
Research (the “State Clearinghouse”), Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies, and other
interested parties on August 11, 2022, for a 30-day review period;
o Submitted a Notice of Completion, Notice of Availability, and Draft EIR to the State
Clearinghouse on May 5, 2023;
o Mailed a Notice of Availability to all Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies, County Clerk,
other interested parties, and organizations and individuals who had previously requested the
Notice on May 4, 2023 to inform recipients that the Draft EIR was available for a 45-day
review period beginning on May 5, 2023, and ending on June 19, 2023;
o Mailed the Notice of Availability to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the Project
Site on May 4, 2023;
o Made the Notice of Availability and Draft EIR available to the public on the City’s website;
o Published the Notice of Availability in the Bakersfield Californian, which is the newspaper of
general circulation in the area affected by the Project, on May 5, 2023;
o Published a Notice of Time Extension of Public Review and Comment Period to the State
Clearinghouse and on the City’s website on June 14, 2023, extending the public review and
comment period to June 20, 2023 as a courtesy to allow the public additional time to submit
public comments as June 19, 2023 was Juneteenth, although the City was open on June 19,
2023.
o Prepared responses to comments on the Draft EIR received during the 45-day comment period
on the Draft EIR, which have been included in the Final EIR;
o Published a notice on August 28, 2023, in the Bakersfield Californian, the newspaper of general
circulation in the area affected by the Project, that the Planning Commission would hold a
public hearing on September 7, 2023, to consider the Project and EIR for recommendation to
the City Council;
o Sent notice of the Planning Commission’s hearing to all organizations and individuals who had
previously requested notification of anything having to do with the Project on August 28, 2023;
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
4
o Sent written responses to comments to all public agencies, organizations, and individuals who
submitted comments the Draft EIR on August 28, 2023 (four comment letters were received);
All of the documents identified above and all of the documents which are required to be part of the
administrative record pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e), which includes all of the
documents relating to the previous review and approval of the Project in 2020 and 2021, when a
mitigated negative declaration (“MND”) was prepared, are on file with the City of Bakersfield
Development Services Department, 1715 Chester Avenue, 2nd Floor, Bakersfield, CA 93301.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
5
2.0 Environmental Impacts and Findings
2.1 General Findings
2.1.1 Independent Judgment Finding
Finding: The EIR for the Project reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The EIR was prepared by T&B Planning, Inc., an independent,
professional consulting firm hired by the City and working under the supervision and direction of the
City’s Planning Division’s staff. The Planning Commission, as the City’s final decision-making body
for the Project, received and reviewed the EIR and the comments, written and oral, provided by public
agencies and members of the public prior to certifying that the EIR complied with CEQA. The
professional qualifications and reputation of the EIR Consultant, the supervision and direction of the
EIR Consultant by City staff and its consultants, the thorough and independent review of the Draft EIR
and Final EIR, including comments and responses, by City staff, and the review and careful
consideration of the Final EIR by the Planning Commission, including comments and responses, all
conclusively show that the Final EIR is the product of and reflects the independent judgment and
analysis of the City as the Lead Agency, and of the Planning Commission as the decision-making body
for the Project.
2.1.2 Finding of the Absence of any Need to Recirculate the EIR
Finding: The Final EIR does not add significant new information to the Draft EIR that would
require recirculation of the Draft EIR.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The Planning Commission recognizes that the Final EIR
incorporates information obtained and produced after the Draft EIR was completed and that the Final
EIR contains additions, clarifications, and minor modifications to the Draft EIR. The Planning
Commission has reviewed and considered the Final EIR and all of the information contained in it and
has determined that the new information added to the Final EIR does not involve a new significant
environmental impact, a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact, nor a feasible
mitigation measure or an alternative considerably different from others previously analyzed that the
Project Applicant declined to adopt and that would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts
of the Project. No information provided to the Planning Commission indicates that the Draft EIR was
inadequate or conclusory or that the public was deprived of a meaningful opportunity to review and
comment on the Draft EIR.
2.1.3 General Finding on Mitigation Measures
It is the City’s intent to adopt and implement all mitigation measures identified in the EIR which are
applicable to the Project, which the City finds to consist of all feasible measures that reduce the
Project’s significant impacts. If a measure has, through error, been omitted from the Conditions of
Approval or from these Findings, and that measure is not specifically reflected in these Findings, that
measure shall be deemed to be adopted pursuant to this paragraph. In addition, unless specifically
stated to the contrary in these Findings, all Conditions of Approval repeating or rewording mitigation
measures recommended in the EIR are intended to be substantially similar to the mitigation measures
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
6
recommended in the EIR and are found to be equally effective in avoiding or lessening the identified
environmental impact. In each instance, the Conditions of Approval contain the final wording for the
mitigation measures.
2.2 Impacts Identified in the Initial Study (IS) or EIR as No Impact or Less than Significant
Not Requiring Mitigation
Consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21002.1 and Section 15128 of the CEQA Guidelines,
the EIR focused its analysis on potentially significant impacts, and limited discussion of other impacts
for which it can be seen with certainty there is no potential for significant adverse environmental
impacts. CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 does not require specific findings to address environmental
effects that an EIR identifies as “no impact” or a “less than significant” impact. Nevertheless, the City
Council hereby finds that the Project would have either no impact or a less than significant impact
under the following resource areas:
2.2.1 Aesthetics
A. Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (Threshold “a”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site is not located in an area designated as scenic in
the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, is not within the City’s Hillside Development Combining
Zone (Bakersfield Municipal Code Chapter 17.66), and is not within a City-designated Class I or II
Visual Resource Area, Viewshed, or Slope Protection Area. In the far distance on clear days, views are
possible from the Project site and its surrounding area to the Tehachapi Mountains to the south, the
Coast Range to the west, and the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the northeast. Because the existing visual
setting of the Project site does not contain significant visual resources, the construction process has no
potential to obscure a scenic view. At a maximum height of ±31 feet, the proposed building would not
be so tall as to obstruct public views or otherwise substantially detract from public views of the
surrounding topographic features and landforms. In some instances, the landscaping and building
constructed on the Project site may intermittently obstruct mountain views in the distance a from the
far northeast corner of the San Lauren Elementary School yard and from roads as drivers travel
immediately adjacent to the Project site along Knudsen Drive. Single views toward the mountains in
the distance across the Project site from these roads typically are of short duration due to travel speeds,
and viewer sensitivity is considered low-to-moderate because as the passing landscape becomes
familiar, vehicle occupants, pedestrians, and bicyclists using roadway corridors typically focus their
attention on the roadway, roadway signs, and surrounding traffic. As the site exists currently, views
are not available to a front-facing viewer on these roads, and the only potential for the Project to
intermittently obscure a long-distance view would be if a viewer were to look to their side across the
Project site. From the school yard, only viewers in the northeastern-most corner of the yard would
experience partial view obstruction to distant landforms when looking across Knudsen Drive and
across the Project site to the northeast on clear days when distant views are possible; this does not
constitute a substantial adverse effect since distant views would not be obscured by the Project from
any other part of the school site or school yard. As such, the Project would not have a substantial
adverse effect on scenic mountain views. (DEIR, pp. 4.1-11 to 4.1-12)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
7
Although the Project would result in less than significant impacts relating to aesthetics, the
Project will be required to implement the following design feature to further minimize the Project’s
less than significant effect.
AES DF-1. Prior to the approval of building permits and other permits and approvals that
authorize construction, the City of Bakersfield shall review the construction documents and
plans to assure the following:
a. All lighting fixtures shall comply with applicable City of Bakersfield Municipal Code
Requirements pertaining to lighting and illumination of buildings, parking areas, and
signs.
b. All landscaping shall be installed to comply with all applicable City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code standards pertaining to perimeter landscaping and minimum shade cover.
B. Would the Project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees,
rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: There are no designated or eligible State scenic highways within
the Project site’s immediate vicinity. Additionally, there are no rock outcroppings or known historic
buildings in the vicinity of the Project site. Thus, implementation of the Project would result in no
impacts associated with views from a State scenic highway. (DEIR, p. 4.1-13)
C. In non-urbanized areas, would the Project substantially degrade the existing visual character
or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are
experienced from publicly accessible vantage point.) If the project is in an urbanized area,
would the Project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic
quality? (Threshold “c”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site is located within the boundaries of the Census-
defined Bakersfield urbanized area. Because the Project site is located in an area that meets the U.S.
Census Bureau’s definition of an “urbanized area” and is planned for urban uses by the City’s General
Plan, the evaluation in the DEIR focuses on the Project’s compatibility with or potential conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. (DEIR, p. 4.1-13)
The Project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic
quality during construction or operation. The Project has no reasonable possibility of conflicting with
the City’s lighting standards contained in Municipal Code Sections 17.71.010 through 17.71.080,
Outdoor Lighting, standards for the illumination of signs contained in Municipal Code Section
17.60.060, and standards for the illumination of parking lots contained in Municipal Code Section
17.58.060. The Project has no reasonable possibility of conflicting with the City’s Municipal Code
standards pertaining to visual blight, codified in Municipal Code Sections 8.27.010 (Property
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
8
Maintenance), 8.80.010 (Abatement of Public Nuisances), and 12.40.050 (Inspection and Removal [of
Trees]). In reviewing the application materials submitted by the Project Applicant for Site Plan Review
No. 21-0399, the materials appear to meet all applicable Municipal Code requirements including but
not limited to the following items pertaining to visual screening. As indicated on the Site Plan Review’s
Conceptual Landscape Plan (refer to Figure 3-4 in Section 3.0, Project Description), landscaping that
will obscure views is proposed along the perimeter of the Project site. Additionally, a low masonry
wall with green screen above is proposed around the loading dock and trash enclosure area on the
southeast facing side of the building. Also, parapets are proposed along the western side of the
building’s roofline to provide visual screening of rooftop equipment. The Project site is located west
of SR-99 and Landco Drive, south of Olive Drive, east of Knudsen Drive, north of Hageman Road,
and north of proposed Street ‘A’. The developer of the Project would install landscaping along the
entire perimeter of the Project site during construction of the Project including along the street
frontages with Knudsen Drive, Landco Drive, and proposed Street A. As part of construction of the
Project, Landco Drive would be extended along the east side of the Project site and Street A would be
constructed along the south side of the Project site to connect Knudsen Drive and Landco Drive. On
Knudsen Drive to the west, a left turn lane would be added to southbound Knudsen Drive to eastbound
Street A, an additional northbound thru lane would be added, and a deceleration/acceleration lane for
vehicles making a right turn in or right turn out of the main Project site entrance. The northbound
deceleration/acceleration lane would merge into the northbound thru lane at the north end of the Project
site. These proposed improvements are consistent with the MBGP Circulation Element. lighting
would be installed by the driveway entrances to the facility and throughout the interior parking area.
In addition, street lights would be installed along the Project site’s frontages with Knudsen Drive,
Landco Drive, and proposed Street A. (DEIR, p. 4.1-13 to 4.1-17)
D. Would the Project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Threshold “d”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Mandatory compliance with Municipal Code Sections 17.71.010
to 17.71.080, “Outdoor Lighting,” would ensure that the Project’s pole-mounted and building-mounted
light fixtures would not introduce any design features that would cause artificial light or glare to extents
that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. As part of City review and approval of
Site Plan Review No. 21-0399 and the review of implementing plans for construction in any area of
the Project site, City staff is obligated to assure that the lighting plans meet all applicable Municipal
Code standards. Based on the Project’s lighting plans and mandatory requirement to comply with the
Municipal Code, lighting impacts would be less than significant. With respect to glare, the Project’s
building materials would consist of a combination of vertical pattern metal panel system, fiber cement
siding system, and masonry walls. The paint colors proposed for the Project would comply with City
development standards including Title 15 (buildings and construction) as well as California Code of
Regulations Title 24 (building code). The building incorporates some glass elements in the form of
window systems with sun shade louvers or awnings and a glass curtain wall with a metal panel canopy.
While window glazing has a potential to result in minor glare effects, such effects would not adversely
affect daytime views experienced from surrounding properties, including motorists along adjacent
roadways, because the glass proposed for the Project would comply with City development standards
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
9
including Title 15 (buildings and construction) as well as California Code of Regulations Title 24
(building code). Also, the Project’s conceptual landscaping plan calls for the perimeter of the site to be
landscaped, inclusive of perimeter trees consisting of shade trees and screen trees which would filter
light from the surrounding street system and limit the ability for vehicle headlights on public streets to
directly shine onto any glass building elements. The glass elements in the building designs also would
be softened by landscaping proposed along the building perimeter, thereby precluding any substantial
sun glare. Last, the public and staff vehicle parking areas would be substantially shaded by tree
canopies, as shown on the Project’s conceptual landscaping plan. Thus, glare impacts from proposed
building elements and parking surfaces would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.1-17 to 4.1-18)
2.2.2 Air Quality
A. Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
(Threshold “a”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Air quality impacts from proposed projects within the City of
Bakersfield are controlled through policies and provisions of the SJVAPCD and the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan. In order to demonstrate that a proposed project would not cause further air
quality degradation in either the SJVAPCD’s plan to improve air quality within the air basin or the
federal requirements to meet certain air quality compliance goals, each project should also demonstrate
consistency with the SJVAPCD’s adopted AQAPs for O3 and PM10. The Project would not exceed
the SJVAPCD established SPAL limits and, therefore has no possibility of exceeding criteria pollutant
thresholds. Accordingly, the Project, would be consistent with the AQMP. Impacts would be less than
significant. (DEIR, p. 4.2-19)
Although the Project would result in less than significant impacts relating to air quality, the
Project will be required to implement the following regulatory requirements to further minimize the
Project’s less than significant effect.
AIR RR-1. In compliance with SJVAPCD Rule 9510 (Indirect Source Review (ISR)), the
Project Applicant or its successor in interest shall submit an Air Impact Assessment (AIA)
application to the SJVAPCD, which will identify emission reduction measures for emissions of
NOX and PM10. The performance measures listed below can be met through any combination
of on-site emission reduction measures or off-site fees.
a) Related to construction-related emissions, the exhaust emissions for construction
equipment greater than fifty (50) horsepower used or associated with the project shall
be reduced by the following amounts from the statewide average as estimated by the
ARB: 20% of the total NOX emissions, and 45% of the total PM10 exhausts emissions.
Construction emissions can be reduced by using less polluting construction equipment,
which can be achieved by utilizing addon controls, cleaner fuels, or newer lower
emitting equipment.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
10
b) Related to operational emissions, NOX emissions shall be reduced by 33.3% of the
project’s operational baseline NOX emissions over a period of ten years as quantified
in the approved AIA. PM10 emissions shall be reduced by 50% of the project’s
operational baseline PM10 emissions over a period of ten years as quantified in the
approved AIA. (DEIR, p. 4.2-26)
AIR-RR-2. The Project is required to be constructed and operated in compliance with all
applicable SJVAPCD Rules, including but not limited to the following:
a) SJVAPCD Rule 4601, Architectural Coatings, which limits VOC emissions from
architectural coatings.
b) SVAPCD Rule 4102, Nuisance, which prohibits the discharge of air contaminants and
other materials which cause injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any
considerable number of persons or to the public or which endanger the comfort,
repose, health or safety of any such person or the public or which cause or have a
natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property.
c) SJVAPCD Rule 4641, Cutback, Slow Cure and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and
Maintenance Operations, which limits VOC emissions by restricting the application
and manufacturing of certain types of asphalt for paving and maintenance operations.
B. Would the Project result in a cumulatively-considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant
for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient
air quality standard? (Threshold “b” for Construction Emissions)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Following SJVAPCD required mitigation measures for all
projects, the construction emission estimates included watering the exposed area three times per day
and reducing vehicle speed to less than 15 miles per hour. Based on these anticipated activity levels,
the Project construction activities would not exceed construction thresholds. As mentioned in the
DEIR, the below PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds of significance consider risks associated with Valley
Fever, specifically including the potential presence of spores within the soil on the Project site and the
Project’s disturbance thereof. Furthermore, Project construction activities do not exacerbate the risk of
Valley Fever any more than natural wind conditions, and it is a natural condition not caused by the
Project. Impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.2-20)
The long-term operational emissions associated with the proposed Project would be far less
than SJVAPCD significance threshold levels and would, therefore, not pose a significant impact to
criteria air pollutants. This finding is consistent with the SPAL screening thresholds. Impacts would
be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.2-21)
The analysis presented in the DEIR is conservative and does not take into account the fact that
once the Project begins operation, the existing VA clinic at 1801 Westwind Drive would permanently
close, and therefore, all of its operational air quality emissions would cease. Based on the fact that the
existing facility is similar in size to the proposed Project (31,400 s.f.), on a net basis, the Project’s
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
11
already very low air quality emissions would result in virtually no impact. Furthermore, as stated in
public testimony from veterans living in the City, unlike the proposed Project, the existing facility does
not offer the full range of services that veterans need, and thus, many veterans drive to the City to Los
Angeles for certain services. Once the Project is in operation, this long-distance driving for services
would no longer be necessary, and all the resulting air quality impacts from vehicle travel over 100
miles to Los Angeles would cease. Thus, the Project would arguably reduce total operational air
quality emissions on a net basis. (DEIR, p. 4.2-21)
The SJVAPCD has screening levels for requiring an Ambient Air Quality Analysis (AAQA)
and recommends that an AAQA be performed for all criteria pollutants when emissions of any criteria
pollutant resulting from project construction or operational activities exceed the 100 pounds per day
screening level, after compliance with Rule 9510 requirements and implementation of all enforceable
mitigation measures. Average daily emissions for Project construction and operational activities would
not exceed 100 pounds per day. An AAQA is, therefore, not required for the Project. (DEIR, pp. 4.2-
21 to 4.2-22)
C. Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
(Threshold “c”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The proposed Project has the potential to expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations due to emissions of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs)
and visibility. (DEIR, p. 4.2-22)
SJVAPCD has set the level of significance for carcinogenic risk at twenty in one million, which
is understood as the possibility of causing twenty additional cancer cases in a population of one million
people. The level of significance for chronic non-cancer risk is a hazard index of 1.0. at the maximum
exposed individual resident and worker (MEIR and MEIW, respectively) do not exceed the
significance levels of 20 in one million (20E-06) and 1.0, respectively for the Project. The maximum
predicted cancer risk for the proposed Project is 0.752 in a million (0.752E-07). The maximum chronic
non-cancer hazard index for the proposed Project is 0.00672. Since the MEIR and MEIW remained far
below the significance threshold for cancer and chronic risk, the Project would not have an adverse
effect to any of the surrounding communities. Potential risk to the population attributable to emissions
of HAPs from the proposed Project would be less than significant (DEIR, pp. 4.2-23 to 4.2-24)
It should be noted that visibility impact analyses are not usually conducted for area sources.
The recommended analysis methodology was initially intended for stationary sources of emissions
which were subject to the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements in 40 CFR Part
60. Since the Project’s emissions are predicted to be significantly less than the PSD threshold levels,
an impact at either the Dome Land Wilderness or the Sequoia National Park Areas (the two nearest
Class 1 areas to the Project) is extremely unlikely. Therefore, based on the Project’s predicted
emissions, the Project is not expected to have any adverse impact to visibility at any Class 1 Area.
Impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.2-24)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
12
D. Would the Project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting
a substantial number of people? (Threshold “d”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project entails a proposed VA community-based outpatient
medical clinic located near commercial, public facility and residential uses. Expected uses of the
Project are not known to be a source of nuisance odors, and are not identified in the SJVAPCD’s
GAMAQI as such. Accordingly, the Project is not anticipated to have substantial odor impacts. Impacts
would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.2-24)
2.2.3 Biological Resources
A. Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Because no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community
is present on the Project site, implementation of the proposed Project would not have a substantial
adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or by the CDFW or USFWS. (DEIR, p. 4.3-9)
B. Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means? (Threshold “c”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Because no wetlands or potential waters of the U.S., or potential
waters of the State are present on the Project site; the proposed Project has no potential to have a
substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means. (DEIR, p. 4.3-9)
C. Would the Project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impeded the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (Threshold “d”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The vicinity surrounding the Project site is highly disturbed by
urban development, and therefore, the Project site does not serve as part of a wildlife corridor. Because
the Project site is a relatively small parcel of disturbed non-native ruderal species habitat, the site is
not conducive to serve as, interfere substantially with or impede established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or native wildlife nursery sites. (DEIR, p. 4.3-9)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
13
D. Would the Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (Threshold “e”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: There are no biological resources on the Project site which are
separately protected by local policies. (DEIR, p. 4.3-9)
E. Would the Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan? (Threshold “f”)
Finding: No impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site is not located within the boundaries of any adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional,
or state habitat conservation plan. (DEIR, p. 4.3-9)
2.2.4 Energy
A. Would the Project result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or
operation? (Threshold “a”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Construction activities associated with the Project would require
electricity use to power the construction equipment. The electricity use during construction would vary
during different phases of construction: the majority of construction equipment during grading would
be gas-powered or diesel-powered, while later construction phases would require electricity-powered
equipment such as nail guns for interior construction and sprayers for architectural coatings. Overall,
the use of electricity would be temporary in nature and would fluctuate according to the phase of
construction. Additionally, it is anticipated that the majority of electric-powered construction
equipment would be hand tools (e.g., power drills, table saws, compressors) and lighting, which would
result in minimal electricity usage during construction activities. Therefore, Project-related
construction activities would not result in wasteful or unnecessary electricity demands and impacts
would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.5-6 to 4.5-7)
It is not anticipated that construction equipment used for the proposed Project would be
powered by natural gas and no natural gas demand is anticipated during construction. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant with respect to natural gas usage. (DEIR, p. 4.5-7)
The use of energy resources by vehicles and equipment would fluctuate according to the phase
of construction. To limit wasteful and unnecessary energy consumption, the construction contractors
are anticipated to minimize non-essential idling of construction equipment during construction in
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
14
accordance with Section 2449 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9.
In addition, electrical energy would be available for use during construction from existing power lines
and connection, which could minimize or avoid the use of generators that are less efficient than tying
into existing PG&E infrastructure. Furthermore, construction trips would not result in unnecessary use
of energy since the Project site is located close to SR-99 which would provide a direct route from
various areas of the region. Moreover, all construction-equipment would cease upon completion of
Project construction. Thus, impacts related to transportation energy use during construction would be
temporary and would not require expanded energy supplies or the construction of new infrastructure.
Overall, it is expected that construction fuel used during the proposed Project’s construction would not
be any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than similar development projects. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant with respect to transportation energy. (DEIR, p. 4.5-7)
Operation of the Project would create additional demands for electricity and natural gas
compared to existing conditions and would result also in transportation energy use. However, because
the opening of the Project would cause the existing VA clinic in Bakersfield on Westwind Drive to
close, any net increase usage of energy (if an increase at all) would be very small. Operational use of
energy would include heating, cooling, and ventilation of the buildings water heating; operation of
electrical systems, use of on-site equipment and appliances; and indoor, outdoor, perimeter, and
parking lot lighting. It is expected that, on a gross basis without netting out the energy being consumed
by the existing VA clinic, the Project would consume 371,171 kilowatt hours per year (kWh/yr) in
electricity and 462,137 kilo-British thermal units (kBTU/yr) in natural gas. Because the Project would
be built to meet the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, the Project would not result in wasteful or
unnecessary natural gas demands. (DEIR, pp. 4.5-7 to 4.5-8) It is likely that the Project would be more
efficient than the existing facility, given that it will be built subject to modern standards and
regulations, which are much more protective of the environment than those that existed when the
existing clinic was built over 30 years ago.
The Project also would consume transportation energy during operations from the use of motor
vehicles traveling to and from the site. However, because the opening of the Project would cause the
existing VA clinic in Bakersfield to close, any net increase usage of transportation energy (if an
increase at all) would be very small. Further, because the proposed outpatient client would offer
services that are not currently offered at the existing VA clinic in Bakersfield, and veterans are traveling
to Los Angeles and other further VA facilities to receive these medical services under existing
conditions, it is reasonable to expect that transportation energy consumption would substantially
decrease with implementation of the Project. The Project is also within an urbanized area with nearby
amenities and public transit options. Additionally, the Project would include bicycle racks and storage
for employee use. These features and aspects of the Project would contribute in minimizing VMT and
transportation-related fuel usage. Overall, it is expected that operation-related fuel usage associated
with the proposed project would not be any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than similar
development projects. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with respect to operation-
related fuel usage or transportation energy. (DEIR, p. 4.5-8)
B. Would the Project conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency? (Threshold “b”)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
15
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: At this time, the City has not adopted local programs or policies
that support energy efficiency and/or sustainability that would apply to the Project. The Project does
not have any additional ability to incorporate sources of renewable energy (e.g., solar panels) other
than what has already been included in the proposal, because pursuant to the relevant contract with the
U.S. federal government, the Project must be built to the detailed specifications approved in the already
completed federal procurement process and cannot be modified, unless approved by the VA. However,
the Project’s specifications approved by the VA require a number of energy efficiency measures to be
included in the Project. The Project’s mobile equipment and vehicles would comply with federal, state,
and regional requirements where applicable. As applicable, the Project would utilize the best available
equipment to improve diesel fuel efficiency, and equipment that uses energy would implement modern
design and technology to maximize efficiency improvements. The Project would not conflict with or
obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency and would ensure impacts
would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.5-8 to 4.5-9)
2.2.5 Geology and Soils
A. Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury or death involving (Threshold “a”):
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault?
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
iv. Landslides?
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: There are no known active or potentially active faults on or
trending toward the Project site and the Project site is not located within a mapped Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zone. Because there are no known faults located on or trending towards the Project
site, the Project would not directly or indirectly expose people or structures to substantial adverse
effects related to ground rupture. (DEIR, p. 4.6-7)
The Project site is located in a seismically active area of southern California and is expected to
experience moderate to severe ground shaking during the lifetime of the Project. This risk is not
considered substantially different than that of other similar properties in the southern California area.
As a mandatory condition of Project approval, the Project Applicant would be required to construct
the proposed VA community-based outpatient medical clinic building and other site features in
accordance with the California Building Code, which provides standards that must be met to safeguard
life or limb, health, property, and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction,
quality of materials, use and occupancy, location, and maintenance of all buildings and structures, and
have been specifically tailored for California earthquake conditions. In addition, the California
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
16
Building Code requires development projects to prepare geologic engineering reports to identify site-
specific geologic and seismic conditions and implement the site-specific recommendations contained
therein to preclude adverse effects involving unstable soils and strong seismic ground-shaking,
including, but not limited to, recommendations related to ground stabilization, selection of appropriate
foundation type and depths, and selection of appropriate structural systems. The Project Applicant
retained a professional geotechnical firm, Krazan & Associates, to prepare a geotechnical report for
the Project site. This geotechnical report complies with the requirements of the California Building
Code. With mandatory compliance with building code standards and site-specific design and
construction measures, implementation of the Project would not directly or indirectly expose people
or structures to substantial adverse effects, including loss, injury or death, involving seismic ground
shaking. (DEIR, pp. 4.6-7 to 4.6-8)
Due to the observed soil characteristics on the Project site and the lack of shallow groundwater
beneath the site, liquefaction potential is considered to be low. Regardless, the City of Bakersfield
would require the Project site be developed in accordance with the latest applicable seismic safety
guidelines, including the standard requirements of the California Building Code to minimize potential
liquefaction hazards. In addition, the Project would be required by the City of Bakersfield to comply
with the grading and construction recommendations contained within the geotechnical report for the
Project site to further reduce the risk of seismic-related ground failure due to liquefaction. Therefore,
implementation of the Project would not directly or indirectly expose people or structures to substantial
hazards associated with seismic-related ground failure and/or liquefaction hazards. (DEIR, p. 4.6-8)
The Project site is relatively flat, as is the immediately surrounding area. There are no hillsides
or steep slopes on the Project site or in the immediate vicinity of the site. Mandatory compliance with
the recommendations contained within the Project site’s geotechnical report would ensure that the
Project is engineered and constructed to maximize stability and preclude safety hazards to on-site and
abutting off-site areas. With mandatory compliance with the recommendations contained within the
geotechnical report, the Project would not be exposed to substantial landslide risks, and
implementation of the Project would not pose a substantial direct or indirect landslide risk to
surrounding properties. (DEIR, p. 4.6-8)
B. Would the Project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Pursuant to the requirements of the State Water Resources Control
Board, the Project Applicant would be required to obtain coverage under the State’s General
Construction Storm Water Permit for construction activities, a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The NPDES permit is required for all development projects that
include construction activities, such as clearing, grading, and/or excavation, that disturb at least one
(1) acre of total land area. Compliance with the NPDES permit involves the preparation and
implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction-related
activities. The SWPPP will specify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that the Project Applicant
will be required to implement during construction activities to ensure that waterborne pollution –
including erosion/sedimentation – is prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately treated
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
17
prior to surface runoff being discharged from the subject property. Examples of BMPs that may be
utilized during construction include, but are not limited to, sandbag barriers, geotextiles, storm drain
inlet protection, sediment traps, rip rap soil stabilizers, and hydro-seeding. Mandatory compliance with
the SWPPP would ensure that the Project’s implementation does not violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements during construction activities. (DEIR, pp. 4.6-8 to 4.6-9)
Upon Project build-out, the Project site would be covered by buildings, landscaping, and
impervious surfaces. Stormwater runoff from the Project site would be captured, treated to reduce
waterborne pollutants (including sediment), and be filtered into the ground by the proposed on-site
retention basins. Accordingly, the amount of erosion that occurs on the Project site would be minimized
upon buildout of the Project and would be reduced relative to existing conditions. Because the Project
would be required to utilize erosion and sediment control measures to preclude substantial, long-term
soil erosion and loss of topsoil, impacts related to post-development soil erosion would be less than
significant. (DEIR, p. 4.6-9)
C. Would the Project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? (Threshold “c”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site is relatively flat and no substantial natural or man-
made slopes are located on or adjacent to the Project site. Because the Project would be engineered for
long-term stability and constructed in accordance with the site-specific recommendations contained
within the Project’s geotechnical report, impacts associated with landslide hazards would be less than
significant. (DEIR, p. 4.6-9)
The geotechnical report prepared for the Project site indicated that the settlement potential can
be attenuated through the excavation and recompaction of fill soils. The City will condition
implementing development to comply with the site-specific ground preparation and construction
recommendations contained in the Project’s geotechnical report. With mandatory compliance with the
Project’s geotechnical report, impacts related to soil shrinkage/subsidence and collapse would be less
than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.6-9)
Lateral spreading is primarily associated with liquefaction hazards. Based on the Project site’s
lack of shallow groundwater, liquefaction on the Project site is considered to be low. Thus, the potential
for lateral spreading is low. Accordingly, impacts associated with lateral spreading would be less than
significant. (DEIR, p. 4.6-11)
D. Would the Project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? (Threshold
“d”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
18
Facts in Support of Finding: R-Value tests performed by Krazan on the Project site’s soils
determined that the expansion pressure of the soils was nil. As such, the Project would not be located
on expansive soil and would not create substantial risks to life or property; therefore, impacts would
be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.6-11)
E. Would the Project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
waste water? (Threshold “e”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Wastewater service for the Project site is provided by North of the
River Sanitation District and no septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems are proposed
as part of the Project. (DEIR, p. 4.6-11)
2.2.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
A. Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Implementation of the Project, which has very minimal GHG
emissions below virtually all numerical thresholds of significance relied on by lead agencies, would
not conflict with the State’s ability to achieve the Statewide GHG reduction mandates and would be
consistent with applicable policies and plans related to GHG emissions reductions. Implementation of
the Project would not actively interfere with any future federally-, State-, or locally-mandated retrofit
obligations (such as requirements to use new technologies such as diesel particulate filters, emissions
upgrades to a higher tier equipment, etc.) enacted or promulgated to legally require development
projects to assist in meeting State-adopted GHG emissions reduction targets, including those
established under EO S-3-05, EO B-30-15, or SB 32. It also bears noting that it is very likely the
Project will be much more efficient and result in less emissions than the existing VA clinic, given it
will be constructed and operated subject to modern regulations that are much more protective of the
environment than those that existed when the existing VA clinic was constructed over 30 years ago.
For these reasons, the Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted
for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. (DEIR, p. 4.7-20)
2.2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
A. Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the
routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? (Threshold “a”)
B. Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
19
Facts in Support of Finding: Based on the Phase I ESA conducted by Krazan, the Project site
contains no evidence of RECs, CRECs, HRECs or other environmental issues. No significant hazard
to the public or the environment would occur through a reasonable risk of upset or the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials associated with these features that are part of the existing site
condition. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.8-8)
Heavy equipment (e.g., dozers, excavators, tractors) would be operated on the Project site
during construction. This heavy equipment likely would be fueled and maintained by petroleum‐based
substances such as diesel fuel, gasoline, oil, and hydraulic fluid, which are considered hazardous if
improperly stored or handled. In addition, materials such as paints, adhesives, solvents, and other
substances typically used in building construction would be located on the Project site during
construction. Improper use, storage, or transportation of hazardous materials can result in accidental
releases or spills, potentially posing health risks to workers, the public, and the environment. This is a
standard risk on all construction sites, and there would be no greater risk for improper handling,
transportation, or spills associated with the Project than would occur on any other similar construction
site. Construction contractors would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local
laws and regulations regarding the transport, use, and storage of hazardous construction‐related
materials, including but not limited requirements imposed by the EPA, DTSC, and the Central Valley
RWQCB. With mandatory compliance with applicable hazardous materials regulations, the Project’s
short-term construction activities would not create significant hazard to the public or the environment
through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Therefore, impacts would be less
than significant and no mitigation is required. (DEIR, pp. 4.8-8 to 4.8-9)
The proposed building would operate as a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) outpatient
medical facility, and hazardous materials and biohazardous materials and medical wastes are expected
to be present as part of the facility’s operation. The VA would be required to comply with California’s
Medical Waste Management Act of 2017. All transporters of biomedical waste also must hold a
Hazardous Waste Transporter Registration through the California DTSC. All biomedical wastes and
hazardous materials used or stored at the proposed clinic would require the VA to comply with all
applicable federal, State, and local regulations to ensure proper use, storage, use, emission, and disposal
of hazardous substances (as described above). With mandatory regulatory compliance, the Project
would not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use,
storage, emission, or disposal of biomedical wastes or hazardous materials, nor would the Project
increase the potential for accident conditions which could result in the release of hazardous materials
into the environment. With mandatory compliance with applicable hazardous materials regulations,
during long-term operation, the Project would not create significant hazard to the public or the
environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of biomedical wastes or hazardous materials.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. (DEIR, p. 4.8-9)
To ensure that Project construction activities do not inadvertently release hazardous materials
into the environment, the following regulatory requirements are required.
HAZ RR-1. Construction contractors shall be required to comply with all applicable federal,
State, and local laws and regulations regarding the transport, use, and storage of hazardous
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
20
construction‐related materials, including but not limited requirements imposed by the EPA,
DTSC, and the Central Valley RWQCB.
HAZ RR-2. If the VA handles hazardous materials as defined in Section 25500 of California
Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.95, it shall be required to comply with
California’s Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Law, which requires
immediate reporting to the Kern County Fire Department and the State Office of Emergency
Services regarding any release or threatened release of a hazardous material, regardless of
the amount handled by the business, and to prepare a Hazardous Materials Business
Emergency Plan (HMBEP).
HAZ RR-3. Activities involving the collection and disposal of medical wastes are required to
comply with California’s Medical Waste Management Act of 2017.
HAZ RR-4. All transporters of medical wastes must be registered hazardous waste haulers
with a valid Hazardous Waste Transporter Registration through the California Department of
Toxic Substances Control (DTSC).
HAZ RR-5. The proposed Project would be required to comply with the Kern County
Operational Area Hazardous Materials Area Plan to ensure compliance with established
procedures, rules, and regulations for emergency responses in the event of a hazardous
materials incident.
C. Would the Project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
(Threshold “c”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The San Lauren Elementary School is located within one-quarter
mile of the Project site. Accordingly, the Project has the potential to emit hazardous emissions or
handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, and/or wastes within one-quarter mile of
an existing or proposed school. The use of and transport of hazardous substances or materials to-and-
from the Project site during construction and long-term operational activities would be required to
comply with applicable federal, State, and local regulations that would preclude substantial public
safety hazards. Accordingly, there would be no potential for existing or proposed schools to be exposed
to substantial safety hazards associated with emission, handling of, or the routine transport of
hazardous substances or materials to-and-from the Project site and impacts would be less than
significant. Additionally, as disclosed in DEIR Subsection 4.2, the Project’s toxic air contaminant
emissions (and their associated health risks) would be less than significant, and in fact, far below
applicable thresholds of significance. (DEIR, p. 4.8-10)
D. Would the Project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Threshold “d”)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
21
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Because the Project site is not located on any list of hazardous
materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, the Project has no potential
to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment associated with a site which is included
on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. (DEIR,
p. 4.8-10)
E. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project result in
a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
(Threshold “e”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site is located 0.9-mile southwest of the Meadow
Fields Airport. According to Kern County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP), the Project
site is located inside of Compatibility Zone “C” for the Meadows Field Airport; however, the Project
site is located outside of the noise contours of the airport. The Project land use is consistent with
permitted uses inside of Compatibility Zone “C” of the ALUCP, and therefore, there is no potential for
implementation of the Project to result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or
working in the Project area. Impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.8-10)
Regarding other airport related risks to occupants, the Meadows Field land use exhibit allows
commercial, industrial, and low-density residential uses within the Project site. The ALUCP also
allows the construction of medical clinics and single-story offices within APLUCP Zones B and C,
subject to a density limitation of 150 persons/acre. As designed, the approximately 10.05-gross acre
VA community-based outpatient clinic development would not exceed the allowable density.
Therefore, the Project would not result in additional safety hazards beyond the baseline condition of
the range of land use activities the APLUCP allows including adjacent commercial uses. Thus, the
Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area. (DEIR, p. 4.8-11)
F. Would the Project impair implementation of, or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Threshold “f”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site does not contain any emergency facilities nor
does it serve as an emergency evacuation route. During construction and long-term operation, the
proposed Project would be required to maintain adequate emergency access for emergency vehicles.
As part of the Project design, a dedicated ambulatory pick-up area is proposed. As part of the City’s
discretionary review process, the City of Bakersfield reviewed the Project’s application materials to
ensure that appropriate emergency ingress and egress would be available to-and-from the Project site
and that the Project would not substantially impede emergency response times in the local area.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
22
Additionally, the proposed Project would be required to comply with the Kern County Operational
Area Hazardous Materials Area Plan to ensure compliance with established procedures, rules, and
regulations for emergency responses in the event of a hazardous materials incident. Accordingly,
implementation of the Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan. (DEIR, p. 4.8-11)
G. Would the Project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? (Threshold “g”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site is not located within a very high fire hazard
severity zone. Neither Cal Fire nor the City of Bakersfield identify the Project site within an area
susceptible to wildland fires and the Project site and surrounding areas generally consist of commercial,
industrial, and/or residential uses, which are generally not associated with wildland fire hazards.
Because the Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death
involving wildland fires, no impact would occur. (DEIR, p. 4.8-11)
2.2.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
A. Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? (Threshold “a”)
B. Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management plan? (Threshold “e”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Pursuant to the requirements of the Central Valley RWQCB and
Chapter 15.05 (California Building Code) of the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code, the Project
Applicant would be required to obtain a NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit for construction
activities. The NPDES permit is required for all projects that include construction activities, such as
clearing, soil stockpiling, grading, and/or excavation that disturb at least one acre of total land area. In
addition, the Project would be required to comply with the WQCP. Compliance with the NPDES permit
and the WQCP involves the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP for construction-related
activities, including grading. The SWPPP would specify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that
the Project would be required to implement during construction activities to ensure that all potential
pollutants of concern are prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately treated prior to being
discharged from the subject property. Mandatory compliance with the SWPPP would ensure that the
Project does not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during
construction activities. (DEIR, pp. 4.9-7 to 4.9-8)
All runoff generated on the Project site would be treated by the proposed on-site water
quality/retention basin, which would provide water quality treatment of storm water prior to infiltration
of the runoff into the on-site soils. Additionally, the City of Bakersfield along with the County of Kern
adopted a Storm Water Management Plan. The Commercial and Industrial Element of the Storm Water
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
23
Management Plan establishes measures to control potential pollutants from ongoing operations in that
category of land use. Accordingly, during operation of the proposed Project, the City's program for
"best conventional pollutant control technology" would be in effect. This includes site inspections by
City personnel and enforcement of vegetation, sediment, and debris that may accumulate in
retention/detention basins. With implementation of the proposed water quality/retention basin and
compliance with the Storm Water Management Plan, long-term operation of the Project would not
violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade
surface or groundwater quality, and the Project would not conflict with the Storm Water Management
Plan requirements. (DEIR, p. 4.9-9)
Although the Project would result in less than significant impacts relating to hydrology and
water quality, the Project will be required to implement the following regulatory requirements to
further minimize the Project’s less than significant effect.
HYD RR-1. The Project Applicant and construction contractor are required to comply with
the requirements of a NPDES permit and SWPPP. Compliance with the NPDES permit and
the SWPPP require an effective combination of erosion control and sediment control measures
(i.e., Best Management Practices) to reduce or eliminate discharges to surface water from
storm water and non-stormwater discharges during construction activities.
HYD RR-2. During construction, Project construction contractors are required to comply with
the requirements of the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (CalGreen, Part 11
of Title 24, California Code of Regulations) or any subsequent version of the Title 24 in effect
at the time of building permit issuance, which requires among other items the installation of
low water-use features.
C. Would the Project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: No operating groundwater wells occur on the Project site under
existing conditions, and no wells are proposed as part of the Project. As such, the Project would not
result in the direct long-term extraction of groundwater supplies. (DEIR, p. 4.9-9)
The Project would be served with potable water by California Water Service (Cal Water). The
Project site is located in the Bakersfield District North Garden water system. The Bakersfield District
derives its water supply from a combination of groundwater, untreated local surface water purchased
from the City of Bakersfield, and treated local surface and imported water purchased from Kern County
Water Agency (KCWA) Improvement District 4 (ID-4). The combination of groundwater and
purchased imported water supplies is expected to be sufficient to support the Bakersfield District’s
projected water demand through 2045. (DEIR, p. 4.9-9) The Project does not have a significant water
demand.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
24
The Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) for the Bakersfield District forecasts 70,314
acre‐feet of reliable supply for a normal year, single‐year drought, and multi‐year drought in 5‐year
increments through 2045. Similarly, the KRGSA Groundwater Sustainability Plan estimates
groundwater safe yield combined with other sources of supply and supplemental supply projects which
combined “fully mitigate potential future overdraft”. due to the actions to be undertaken pursuant to
the Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Plan, as well as the fact that the Bakersfield District would
have adequate groundwater to serve the Project, the Project’s water demand would not substantially
decrease groundwater supplies. The Project’s relatively low water demand would not stress or
otherwise significantly impact the Cal Water’s water sources, whether local groundwater or purchased
water that comes from the Colorado River or the State Water Project. Further, the end result of the
Project will be to essentially move the existing VA clinic, and thus it does not result in any truly new
water demand. (DEIR, pp. 4.9-9 to 4.9-10)
With implementation of the proposed Project, runoff generated on the site would be conveyed
to the proposed on-site water quality/retention basin, where the runoff would infiltrate into the on-site
soils. Because runoff from the Project site would be captured to allow infiltration into on-site soils,
the Project would not interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, and impacts would be less
than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.9-10)
D. Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would (Threshold “c”):
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site?
ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on or off site?
iii. Create or contribute runoff which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows?
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: With implementation of the Project’s water quality/retention basin
and implementation of a SWPPP during construction activities, Project impacts to water quality,
including erosion and siltation, during both construction and long-term operation would be less than
significant. (DEIR, p. 4.9-10)
All runoff generated on the Project site would be conveyed to the proposed on-site water
quality/retention basin, where the runoff would be allowed to infiltrate into on-site soils. There would
be no runoff from the Project site following site development. As such, the Project has no potential to
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-
site, and the Project would not create runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems. (DEIR, p. 4.9-10)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
25
FEMA FIRM Map Number 06029C1825F, which includes the Project site, indicates that the
Project area is in “Zone X”, an area of minimal flooding. Accordingly, the Project has no potential to
impede or redirect flood flows, and no impact would occur. (DEIR, p. 4.9-10)
E. Would the Project result in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants
due to project inundation? (Threshold “d”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: FEMA FIRM Map Number 06029C1825F, which includes the
Project site, indicates that the Project area is in “Zone X”. Accordingly, the Project site would not be
subject to inundation during peak storm events, and the Project therefore would not risk the release of
pollutants due to flood hazards, and no impact would occur. (DEIR, p. 4.9-11)
There are no enclosed or semi-enclosed bodies of water in proximity to the Project site other
than the Beardsley Canal, located approximately 0.3-mile northeast, which would not be subject to
seiches because it is not a large water body. Accordingly, the Project would not risk the release of
pollutants due to inundation from seiches, and no impact would occur. (DEIR, p. 4.9-11)
The Project site is located approximately 74 miles northeast of the Pacific Ocean. As such, the
Project site is not subject to inundation due to tsunamis. Accordingly, the Project would not risk the
release of pollutants due to inundation from seiches, and no impact would occur. (DEIR, p. 4.9-11)
2.2.9 Land Use and Planning
A. Would the Project physically divide an established community? (Threshold “a”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: There is no reasonable possibility of the Project dividing an
established community. Existing commercial development borders the Project site to the north, vacant
land and SR 99 occur to the east, existing commercial development is located to the south of the Project
site, and Knudsen Drive and existing public facility uses are located to the west of the Project site.
Residential communities are located to the west of the Project site at a distance. The residential
communities are separated from the Project site by Knudsen Drive and existing public facility land
uses. Because the Project site is already physically separated from developed residential properties
under existing conditions, development of the Project site as proposed would not physically divide any
established residential community. (DEIR, p. 4.10-5)
The Project would connect to the existing roadway system and other infrastructure and would
not involve the reconfiguration of streets that could have the potential to alter the surrounding pattern
of future development and affect the connectivity of existing residential uses located to the west of the
Project site and west of Knudsen Drive. (DEIR, p. 4.10-5)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
26
B. Would the Project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land
use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The proposed Project would not conflict with the AQAPs
SJVAPCD thresholds of significance. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with the
applicable air quality plan, and impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.10-5)
The Project would not conflict with the adopted goals of the 2022 Regional Transportation
Plan. The proposed Project is a consistent use within the Service Industrial (SI) General Plan land use
designation, and that designation and the Project are consistent with the City’s General Manufacturing
(M-2) zoning classification, which under the City’s Euclidean pyramid zoning structure, allows all
uses permitted in the C-O zone, including medical clinics. Because the proposed Project is a permitted
land use, is consistent with existing zoning, and has been designed in accordance with all applicable
regulations, the proposed Project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to conflict
with the MBGP. The Project would not conflict with any of the specific objectives, polices, or actions
in the General Plan’s Elements that were adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect. (DEIR, p. 4.10-8 to 4.10-9)
2.2.10 Noise
A. Would the Project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (Threshold “a”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The facts presented below evaluate three components of the
Project that would generate noise – the construction process, on-site operational activities, and off-site
traffic.
Construction Noise
Project-related construction noise would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature
and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction. The number and mix of
construction equipment are expected to occur in the following stages: site preparation, grading,
building construction, paving, architectural coating. (DEIR, p. 4.11-15)
Project-related construction noise levels are expected to range from 48.0 to 60.7 dBA Leq, at
the nearby receiver locations. To evaluate whether the proposed Project would generate potentially
significant short-term noise levels at the nearest receiver locations, a construction-related daytime
noise level threshold of 80 dBA Leq is used as a reasonable threshold to assess the daytime construction
noise level impacts. The nearest receiver locations would satisfy the reasonable daytime 80 dBA Leq
significance threshold during Project construction activities. Therefore, the noise impacts due to
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
27
Project construction noise are considered less than significant at all receiver locations. (DEIR, p. 4.11-
15)
On-Site Operational Noise
The on-site Project-related noise sources are expected to include but not be limited to: outdoor
loading dock activity, roof-top air conditioning units, emergency generator, trash enclosure activity,
parking lot vehicle movements, and truck movements. (DEIR, p. 4.11-16)
The operational noise levels associated with the proposed Project would satisfy the City of
Bakersfield daytime and nighttime exterior noise level standards. Therefore, the operational noise
impacts would be less than significant at the nearby noise-sensitive receiver locations. The Project
would generate daytime operational noise level increases ranging from 0.0 to 0.6 dBA Leq at the nearest
receiver locations. The Project would generate nighttime operational noise level increases ranging from
0.0 to 1.0 dBA Leq at the nearest receiver locations. Because the Project-related operational noise level
increases would not exceed the operational noise level increase significance criteria, the increases at
the sensitive receiver locations would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.11-18)
Off-Site Traffic Noise
The analysis of existing traffic noise levels plus traffic generated by the proposed Project is
provided for information purposes only in order to fully analyze all of the existing traffic scenarios
identified in the Project’s Traffic Study. With the addition of Project traffic to existing traffic levels,
Project off-site traffic noise level increases would range from 0.0 to 0.2 dBA CNEL on the study area
roadway segments. Based on the significance criteria for off-site traffic noise, existing noise sensitive
land uses adjacent to the study area roadway segments would experience noise level increases that are
below the identified thresholds of significance. As such, Project-related traffic noise impacts under
Existing with Project conditions would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.11-20)
The Project off-site traffic noise level increases would range from 0.0 to 0.2 dBA CNEL under
2024 traffic conditions. Based on the significance criteria for off-site traffic noise, land uses adjacent
to the study area roadway segments would experience noise level increases due to Project-related
traffic noise levels that are below the identified thresholds of significance under 2042 traffic conditions.
As such, Project-related traffic noise impacts under 2042 traffic conditions would be less than
significant. (DEIR. p. 4.11-21)
The proposal to establish a community-based outpatient clinic on the Project site would not
exacerbate any existing noise impact, and thus the analysis of the impacts of existing noise on the
Project is not required under CEQA (see California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369). Further, MBGP Figure VII-1, Land Use
Compatibility for Community Noise Environments establishes that for hospitals and nursing homes (the
most similar land use to the Project), a noise environment up to 70 dBA CNEL is acceptable. As
disclosed in DEIR Subsection 4.11, Table 4.11-6, Daytime Project Operational Noise Level Increases,
and Table 4.11-7, Nighttime Project Operational Noise Level Increases, ambient noise levels at the
measured locations are all below the acceptable level of 70 dBA CNEL. The Project would generate
daytime operational noise level increases ranging from 0.0 to 0.6 dBA Leq at the nearest receiver
locations with ambient noise levels all being below 70 dBA CNEL. The Project would generate
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
28
nighttime operational noise level increases ranging from 0.0 to 1.0 dBA Leq at the nearest receiver
locations, also with ambient noise levels all being below 70 dBA CNEL. Based on the substantial
evidence contained in the DEIR and in the technical noise analysis contained in DEIR Technical
Appendix H, Project-related noise impacts would be less than significant, included any purported
“impacts” of existing ambient noise on the Project. (FEIR, p. F-134)
B. Would the Project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: At distances ranging from 557 to 1,307 feet from Project
construction activities, construction vibration velocity levels are estimated to range from 0.001 to 0.002
in/sec PPV. Based on maximum acceptable continuous vibration threshold of 0.3 PPV (in/sec), the
typical Project construction vibration levels would fall below the building damage thresholds at all the
noise sensitive receiver locations. Therefore, the Project-related vibration impacts are considered less
than significant during typical construction activities at the Project site. (DEIR, p. 4.11-22)
C. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive
noise levels? (Threshold “c”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The closest airport to the Project site is the Meadows Field Airport
located approximately 0.9 miles northeast of the Project site. According to the Kern County Airport
Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP), the Project site is located within the Airport Influence Area,
but located well outside of the 60 dBA CNEL noise level contour boundary of the airport. According
to the ALUCP, the Project medical outpatient commercial land use is considered normally acceptable
with exterior noise levels of 55-60 dBA CNEL, and any noise form the airport plus ambient noise
levels will be below this range. Impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.
(DEIR, p. 4.11-22)
2.2.11 Transportation
A. Would the Project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? (Threshold
“a”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The improvements associated with the Project’s construction are
fully consistent with all goals and policies of the City’s General Plan Circulation Element, as well as
the requirements of the City’s Municipal Code. (DEIR, p. 4.12-5)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
29
As indicated in the Project’s TIA, all roadway segments within the scope of the study currently
operate at or above LOS C and are expected to continue to do so through the year 2042, both with and
without the Project. The intersections Knudsen Drive & Olive Drive and Mohawk Street & Hageman
Road operate below an acceptable level of service, prior to the addition of the Project traffic. With the
addition of the planned but not yet constructed Hageman Flyover, which is projected to be completed
by 2042, the intersection of Knudsen Drive & Olive Drive is projected to operate at an acceptable level
of service in the year 2042 with or without the addition of Project traffic. The intersection of Hageman
Road and Mohawk Street will continue to operate below an acceptable level of service, with the Project
contributing 0.8 seconds of delay in the morning peak hour and 2.3 seconds of delay in the evening
peak hour, which is less than significant according to Section 6.2.2.7 of the City’s Transportation
Design Manual. For these reasons, the Project is fully consistent with the General Plan Circulation
Element policies related to streets and roadways. (DEIR, p. 4.12-5)
Existing bus stops in the area are adequate for this existing route, and no new bus stops are
required along the Project site’s frontage with Knudsen Drive. The Project would not conflict with any
of the goals or policies identified in the General Plan Circulation Element related to transit. (DEIR, pp.
4.12-5 to 4.12-6)
According to the City of Bakersfield Bicycle Transportation Plan, Hageman Road has a
designated Class 2 Bike Lane and Knudsen Drive is planned to have a Class 2 Bike Lane (Bakersfield,
2013). These designations also are consistent with the Kern County 2012 Bicycle Master Plan. Class
2 bike lanes are defined by pavement striping and signage used to allocate a portion of a roadway for
exclusive or preferential bicycle travel. Bike lanes are one-way facilities on either side of a roadway.
As part of the Project’s roadway frontage improvements with Knudsen Drive, right-of-way will be
provided for a Class 2 bike lane, would be in full compliance with the City of Bakersfield “Bicycle &
Pedestrian Safety Plan.” Accordingly, the Project would be fully consistent with the General Plan
Circulation Element goals and policies related to bikeways. (DEIR, p. 4.12-6)
The Project would not conflict with any of the goals or policies included in the General Plan
Circulation Element related to parking. The Project is required to accommodate a total of 214 vehicle
parking spaces, which the Project as proposed will accommodate. (DEIR, p. 4.12-6)
The Project site is located approximately 0.9-mile southwest of the Meadows Field Airport.
The Project site is located inside of Compatibility Zone “C” for the Meadows Field Airport.
Compatibility Zone “C” includes areas in the common traffic pattern of the airport that are at limited
risk for impacts. These areas may have frequent noise intrusion; however, the Project site is located
outside of the noise contours of the airport. The Project would be implemented in accordance with the
ALUCP restricting occupancy of the site to no more than 150 persons per acre, and would not conflict
with the General Plan Circulation Element goals and policies related to airports. (DEIR, p. 4.12-6)
With respect to the City’s Municipal Code, the Project would be required to comply with all
applicable provisions of Municipal Code Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic). Specifically, the Project
Applicant would be required to contribute transportation impact fees pursuant to Chapter 15.84 of the
City’s Municipal Code (Transportation Impact Fee) to help provide for acceptable LOS within the
City. Project-related roadway improvements also would be required to comply with Chapter 10.12
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
30
(Traffic-Control Devices) of the City’s Municipal Code, which requires the City to provide for orderly
and safe traffic conditions within the City and to have installed and maintained such signals and other
devices as may be necessary to effectively carry out such purposes. There are no components of the
proposed Project that would conflict with any of the provisions of Municipal Code Title 10. (DEIR, p.
4.12-6)
Accordingly, and based on the foregoing analysis, the proposed Project would not conflict with
a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway,
bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.12-6)
Although the Project would result in less than significant impacts relating to transportation, the
Project will be required to implement the following regulatory requirements to further minimize the
Project’s less than significant effect.
TRN RR-1. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Project Applicant shall pay appropriate
Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) fees at the rates then in effect in accordance with Chapter 15.84 of
the City’s Municipal Code.
TRN RR-2. All off-site roadway improvements shall comply with applicable provisions of City
of Bakersfield Municipal Code Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) and Chapter 13.12 (Development
Improvements Standards and Specifications).
B. Would the Project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project VMT/employee of 12.0 is less than the countywide
significance threshold of 14.56 VMT/employee. This analysis is highly conservative and overstates
actual impacts because it does not “net out” the VMT that will be eliminated when the VA clinic’s
current location on Westwind Drive closes when the Project begins operations. Further, the proposed
Project would actually reduce overall VMT in the area because the proposed VA community-based
outpatient clinic is programmed to provide medical services not currently offered at the current location
on Westwind Drive (in addition to replacing the same services offered at the existing facility), which
will allow veterans to receive local care and eliminate long drives to other VA facilities in distant
geographic areas to receive medical care, just over 100 miles away in Los Angeles. During the 2021
City hearings relating to the Project, a number of veterans testified that they currently must drive to
Los Angeles for services, but once the Project is operational, will no longer do so. Therefore, VMT
associated with the Project would represent a less-than-significant impact. (DEIR, p. 4.12-7)
For informational purposes, the trips generated by the existing VA clinic located on Westwind
Drive were quantified, and it is estimated to generate 1,116 average daily trips (ADTs), 74 a.m. peak
hour trips, and 110 p.m. peak hour trips. This is substantially similar to the projected trips for the
Project, which are estimated to be 1,457 ADTs, 95 a.m. peak hour trips, and 143 p.m. peak hour trips.
The VMT generated by the existing facility is likewise substantially similar to that generated by the
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
31
proposed Project. Thus, the Project essentially steps into the shoes of the existing facility’s impacts,
rather than generating truly “new” impacts on the environment relating to transportation. (DEIR, pp.
4.12-7 to 4.12-8) However, the City and the EIR are not relying on this “netting out” when disclosing,
analyzing and mitigating the Project’s impacts.
C. Would the Project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
(Threshold “c”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: All of the proposed roadway improvements would be implemented
in a manner consistent with Chapter 13.12 (Development Improvements Standards and Specifications)
of the City’s Municipal Code, which requires compliance with a number of standard manuals. The
purposes of Municipal Code Chapter 13.12 are intended to protect the health, safety and general
welfare of the citizens of the City by establishing standards and specifications related to a number of
public improvements, including roadway improvements. Additionally, the Project’s proposed
improvements have been reviewed by the City for compliance with the provisions of Chapter 13.12,
and have determined that the Project’s proposed improvements are in full compliance with the City’s
requirements as well as Municipal Code Chapter 13.12. Accordingly, the Project would not
substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature, and impacts would be less than
significant. (DEIR, p. 4.12-8)
D. Would the Project result in inadequate emergency access? (Threshold “d”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: During construction of the proposed Project, Project construction
contractors would be required to maintain adequate emergency access routes on site. Additionally, the
Project’s plans have been reviewed by the Bakersfield Fire Department (BFD), which has determined
that the Project’s design would provide for adequate access for emergency vehicles under long-term
operations. Furthermore, the Project would be subject to the requirements of Section 15.65.190
(Appendix D, Section D103.5 Fire apparatus access road gates – Amended), which identifies
requirements associated with emergency access. Accordingly, the Project would not result in
inadequate emergency access, and impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.12-8)
2.3 Impacts Identified in the EIR as Potentially Significant that Have been Mitigated to a
Level of Less than Significant
The City Council hereby finds that feasible mitigation measures have been identified in the
EIR that will avoid or substantially lessen the following potentially significant environmental impacts
to a less than significant level, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1). The potentially significant
impacts, and the mitigation measures that will reduce them to a less than significant level, are as
follows:
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
32
2.3.1 Biological Resources
A. Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Threshold “a”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation
Facts in Support of Finding: Based on the field survey, none of the 9 special-status plant species
that have been documented as potentially occurring in the vicinity of the Project site have the potential
to occur within the Project site based on habitat, soils, topography, previously documented occurrence
of the species, and the extremely disturbed conditions found on the Project site. Therefore, there is no
potential for the Project to cause direct or indirect impacts to special-status plant species. (DEIR, p.
4.3-7)
Although no Crotch’s bumble bees were observed during the site visit in 2022, the survey was
conducted during an inactive period for the Crotch’s bumble bee. Another survey was conducted on
May 26, 2023; however, no Crotch’s bumble bees were observed. Potential habitat for the Crotch’s
bumble bee, including small mammal burrows and annual grassland, are present on the site. Because
potential foraging and nesting habitat could be present on the site, there is potential for Crotch’s bumble
bee nests to be impacted during Project-related ground disturbance. The potential presence of Crotch’s
bumble bee is therefore considered a significant direct impact and mitigation is required.
Although no burrowing owls or sign of species presence was observed during focused surveys
conducted on the Project site, California ground squirrel burrows, which are frequently used by
burrowing owls for nesting and shelter, were observed. Therefore, the site is likely to support small
mammals that are potential prey items in the diet of burrowing owl. Thus, the Project’s construction
activities could remove potential foraging and potential nesting habitat for burrowing owl. The
potential presence of burrowing owl is considered a significant direct and cumulatively considerable
impact because the species is migratory and could be present on the Project site at the time the Project’s
construction activities commence, and mitigation is required. (DEIR, p. 4.3-8)
The Project site provides suitable denning habitat for SJKF and American badger. Several
suitably sized holes were observed during the survey effort. Impacts to suitable dens could occur;
however, no known SJKF or American badger dens were observed on the Project site. The nearest
historic record of American badger occurred approximately 0.5-mile southeast of the Project site. With
the amount of human foot traffic and trash dumping on the Project site, the site is considered lower
quality habitat then adjacent parcels that experience less disturbance; however, it is not possible to
conclude that SJKF would not visit or occupy the site. Because there is potential for SJKF or American
badger to occupy the Project site, potential direct impacts would be significant and mitigation is
required. (DEIR, p. 4.3-8)
Birds nesting on or in the immediate vicinity of the Project site could be disturbed if the
Project’s construction activities occur during the nesting season when active nests are present. If these
nests are disturbed to the extent that eggs are destroyed, young are injured or killed, or adults abandon
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
33
the nests, a violation of the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code could result. Therefore,
potential direct impacts to nesting and migratory birds would be significant and mitigation is required.
(DEIR, p. 4.3-8)
To ensure that Project impacts to special-status wildlife species are mitigated to a level of less
than significant, the following mitigation measures are required.
BIO MM-1. Surveys to detect burrowing owls shall be conducted by a professional biologist
in consultation with CDFW no more than 30 days prior to any ground disturbance activities
on the Project site and can be conducted concurrently with the pre-activity surveys required
per BIO MM-2, BIO MM-3 and BIO MM-4. Occupied burrows shall not be disturbed during
the nesting season (February 1 through September 15) unless a professional biologist verifies
through non-invasive methods that either: (1) the birds have not begun egg-laying and
incubation; or (2) that juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and
are capable of independent survival. If burrowing owls are observed using burrows during the
surveys, owls shall be excluded from all active burrows through the use of exclusion devices
placed in occupied burrows in accordance with CDFW protocols, Staff Report on Burrowing
Owl Mitigation, shall be implemented. In such case, exclusion devices shall not be placed until
the young have fledged and are no longer dependent upon the burrow, as determined by a
professional biologist. Specifically, exclusion devices, utilizing one-way doors, shall be
installed in the entrance of all active burrows. The devices shall be left in the burrows for at
least 48 hours to ensure that all owls have been excluded from the burrows. Each of the
burrows shall then be excavated by hand and refilled to prevent reoccupation. Exclusion shall
continue until the owls have been successfully excluded from the site, as determined by a
professional biologist.
BIO MM-2. If vegetation clearing or initial ground-disturbing construction activity occurs
during the migratory bird nesting season (February 1 to September 15) a professional avian
biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey to identify any active nests present within the
proposed work area. If active nests are found, initial ground disturbance shall be postponed
or halted within a buffer area, established by the professional avian biologist, that is suitable
to the particular bird species and location of the nest, until juveniles have fledged or the nest
has been abandoned, as determined by the biologist. The construction avoidance area shall be
clearly demarcated in the field with highly visible construction fencing or flagging, and
construction personnel shall be instructed on the sensitivity of nest areas. Specific to
Swainson’s hawk, if the Project’s vegetation clearing or initial ground-disturbance
construction activity will commence during the migratory bird nesting season, the pre-
construction nesting bird survey shall follow survey methodology developed by the species’
SWHA Technical Advisory Committee (SWHA TAC 2000). If Swainson’s hawk is nesting
within one-half mile of the Project site, construction activities shall not commence unless an
ITP is obtained from the CDFW or until the breeding season has ended or until a qualified
biologist has determined that the birds have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or
parental care for survival.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
34
BIO MM-3. Prior to vegetation clearing or initial ground-disturbing construction activities, a
professional biologist shall conduct a survey to determine the presence of suitable foraging,
nesting, or over-wintering habitat for the Crotch bumblebee (CBB) within or immediately
adjacent to the work limits. If suitable habitat is present, at least 2 visual surveys shall be
conducted by a professional biologist between April 1 and May 30 to detect CBB on or within
100 feet of the work limits prior to vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance. The surveys
shall target the peak flowering period of CBB preferred nectar plants and shall be conducted
by a professional biologist who is familiar with CBB behavior and life history to determine
presence/absence of CBB within one year of vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance.
CBB individuals shall only be handled for identification if appropriate authorizations are
issued. Surveys shall be conducted under suitable conditions for observation of bumble bees.
Methods shall be in accordance agency protocols if issued. If no agency protocols have been
issued at the time of the surveys, the following survey parameters will be applied: the
professional biologist will walk slow (≤2 mph) meandering transects covering all portions
suitable habitat within and immediately adjacent to the work limits containing suitable habitat;
surveys will be conducted no earlier than 2 hours after sunrise and 3 hours before sunset, on
mostly sunny days with temperature between 65° and 90°F; surveys will not be conducted on
cloudy days (≥90% cloud cover) or under wet or windy conditions (≥8 mph). Surveyors will
search for bumble bees in flight and potential nest sites.
All potential CBB nests found in small mammal burrows, under thatched grasses, brush piles
or other suitable ground locations shall be further examined based on observations of entering
or exiting CBB. Observations of potential CBB nest sites shall be conducted for no less than
15 minutes per location where CBB are possibly entering/exiting, or a longer period as
determined by the professional biologist. If no CBB or their nests are detected, no further
measures will be necessary provided that vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance occurs
prior to March 1 of the year following the negative survey. If vegetation/initial ground
disturbance does not occur before March 1 of the year following the negative survey, the survey
shall be repeated following the above procedure. If CBB is found to be present, BIO MM-5
shall apply.
BIO MM-4. No more than 30 days prior to vegetation clearing or initial ground-disturbing
construction activities, pre-construction surveys for San Joaquin kit fox and American badger
shall be conducted by a professional biologist. The purpose of the preconstruction survey is to
provide current biological information in order to implement all avoidance and minimization
measures that are required based on any previous observations of special-status species and
to update observations shall any new site occupation by special-status species occur. If any
known San Joaquin kit fox dens are detected, implementation of the most recent USFWS
protocols (Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the Endangered San Joaquin Kit
Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance (2011)) is required per BIO MM-5 unless
protocols are issued by either CDFW or USFWS that supersede these protocols. If American
badger is present, BIO MM-5 shall apply.
BIO MM-5. If California or Federal listed threatened or endangered species are found
occupying burrows, dens, or nests on the Project site or any such species could be injured or
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
35
killed due to Project-related activities, the CDFW and/or USFWS (as appropriate) shall be
contacted for further guidance. Should either agency determine that incidental take
authorization is required prior to construction, the appropriate CESA/FESA authorization
shall be obtained by the Project Applicant. CESA and FESA authorizations shall include
measures addressing the respective state and/or federal listed species and shall include the
following at a minimum:
a) Implementation of standardized biological resource protective measures
included in BIO MM-4;
b) Biological preconstruction surveys conducted by qualified biologists approved
by each applicable agency no more than 30 days prior to conducting work on
the Project site;
c) If any known San Joaquin kit fox dens are detected, implementation of the most
recent USFWS protocols (Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the
Endangered San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance
(2011)) unless protocols are issued by either CDFW or USFWS that supersede
these protocols.
d) Destruction of San Joaquin kit fox dens shall follow the monitoring and
excavation procedures in USFWS (2011).
e) If CBB individuals or nests are detected during any surveys conducted per BIO
MM-3, and the CBB remains a state candidate species or is listed under CESA,
the Project Applicant shall obtain take authorization from CDFW prior to
vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance. A CBB Mortality Reduction
Plan shall be submitted for CDFW approval no less than 30 days prior to initial
vegetation removal or ground disturbance and the Plan shall contain the
following information at a minimum:
o Active CBB nests shall be avoided by 50 feet. If CBB nests cannot be
avoided, the Plan shall include seasonal restrictions for disturbance
within 50 feet of any nest and procedures for determining when nest
impacts will be minimized.
o Vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance shall be limited to the
period when impacts to individual CBB that may be underground will
be minimized (e.g., after nests have become inactive).
o Prior to vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance, small mammal
burrows that may harbor overwintering CBB queens shall be
excavated by hand. The Plan shall include timing and excavation
methods. In addition, the Plan shall include procedures for handling
and disposition of CBB if encountered during burrow excavations.
o The Plan shall include procedures for handling and disposition of
individual CBB if they are encountered in the work limits or on
construction equipment during construction activities.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
36
f) Biological monitoring of initial ground disturbance during each phase of
grading;
g) Provision for compliance reporting to be provided to each agency as required
in respective take authorizations;
h) Compensation for habitat disturbance acceptable to CDFW (state listed
species) and/or USFWS (federal listed species) at a ratio of no less than 3:1
for permanent impacts and 1.1:1 for temporary impacts to listed species
habitat. The only existing approved conservation bank for impacts to San
Joaquin kit fox habitat in Kern County is the Kern Water Bank Authority
Conservation Bank. Lands used to mitigate for San Joaquin kit fox must be
contiguous with other potentially occupied lands, provide suitable foraging
and denning habitat for San Joaquin kit fox, and be located in the southern San
Joaquin Valley portion of Kern County below 1,500’ in elevation;
i) Compensation land shall be funded for maintenance, protection, and
management through establishment of a long-term funding mechanism such as
an endowment. The endowment must be a non-wasting account that is
acceptable to both CDFW and USFWS.
BIO MM-6. All biological monitors working on the Project site shall be required by their
contract to notify the USFWS and CDFW of the discovery of any protected species identified
on the site other that nesting birds, Crotch bumblebee, San Joaquin kit fox and American
badger which are addressed by BIO MM-1, BIO MM-2, BIO MM-3, BIO MM-4, and BIO MM-
5. Any take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately to USFWS and CDFW.
BIO MM-7 The Project Applicant shall ensure that the Project’s construction contractors
adhere to the following best management practices. Construction contractors shall be required
by their contracts to comply with these best practices and permit periodic inspection of the
construction site by City of Bakersfield staff or its designee to confirm compliance. A note that
requires compliance is required on all grading and building plans approved by the City of
Bakersfield.
a) Traffic restraints and signs shall be established to minimize temporary disturbances during
construction beyond the construction site boundaries. All construction traffic shall be
restricted to designated access roads and routes, Project site, storage areas, and staging and
parking areas. Off-road traffic outside designated Project boundaries shall be prohibited. A
15 mile-per-hour (24 kilometer-per-hour) speed limit shall be observed in all Project
construction areas, except as otherwise posted on county roads and state and federal highways.
b) All construction personnel involved in ground-disturbing construction activities shall attend a
worker orientation program. The worker orientation program shall present measures required
to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to biological resources and shall include, at a
minimum, the following subjects: A summary of the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA),
California Endangered Species Act (CESA), and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA);
biological survey results for the current construction area; life history information for the
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
37
species of concern; biological resource avoidance, minimization, and mitigation requirements;
consequences for failure to successfully implement requirements; and procedures to be
followed if dead or injured wildlife are located during Project activities. Upon completion of
the orientation, employees shall sign a form stating that they attended the program and
understand all biological resource mitigation measures. Forms verifying worker attendance
shall be filed at the Project Applicant’s office and be accessible to the City of Bakersfield,
USFWS and CDFW staff. No untrained personnel shall be allowed to work onsite with the
exception of delivery trucks that are only onsite for 1 day or less and are under the supervision
of a trained employee.
c) All equipment storage and parking during construction activities shall be confined to the
designated construction area or to previously disturbed offsite areas that are not habitat for
listed species.
d) All Project construction activities involving initial surface disturbance shall occur during
daylight hours.
e) Trenches shall be inspected for entrapped wildlife each morning prior to the onset of
construction. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall be thoroughly inspected for
entrapped animals. Any wildlife so discovered shall be allowed to escape voluntarily, without
harassment, before construction activities resume. A professional biologist may remove
wildlife from a trench, hole or other entrapment out of harm’s way if the immediate welfare of
the individual is in jeopardy. State or federal listed species may not be handled. Should any
state or federal listed species become entrapped, CDFW and USFWS shall be contacted as
appropriate.
f) All food-related trash items such as wrappers, cans, bottles and food scraps generated by
Project construction activities shall be disposed of in closed containers and removed at least
once each week from the site. Deliberate feeding of wildlife shall be prohibited.
g) To prevent harassment of special-status species, construction personnel shall not be allowed
to have firearms or pets on the Project site.
h) All equipment and work-related materials shall be contained in closed containers either in the
work area or on vehicles. Loose items (e.g. rags, hose, etc.) shall be stored within closed
containers or enclosed in vehicles when on the work site.
i) All liquids shall be in closed, covered containers. Any spills of hazardous liquids shall not be
left unattended until clean-up has been completed.
j) Use of rodenticides and herbicides on the Project shall be prohibited unless approved by the
USFWS and the CDFW. This is necessary to prevent primary or secondary poisoning of
special-status species using adjacent habitats, and to avoid the depletion of prey upon which
they depend. If rodent control must be conducted, zinc phosphide shall be used because of its
proven lower risk to SJKF.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
38
k) Any employee who inadvertently kills or injures a listed species, or who finds any such wildlife
dead, injured, or entrapped on the Project site, shall be required to report the incident
immediately to a designated site representative (e.g., foreman, project manager, environmental
inspector, etc.).
l) In the case of entrapped wildlife that are listed species, escape ramps or structures shall be
installed immediately, if possible, to allow the subject wildlife to escape unimpeded.
m) In the case of injured special-status wildlife, the CDFW shall be notified immediately. During
business hours Monday through Friday, the phone number is (559) 243-4017. For non-
business hours, report to (800) 952-5400. Notification shall include the date, time, location,
and circumstances of the incident. Instructions provided by the CDFW for the care of the
injured animal shall be followed by the contractor onsite.
n) In the case of dead wildlife that are listed as threatened or endangered, the USFWS and the
CDFW shall be immediately (within 24 hours) notified by phone or in person, and shall
document the initial notification in writing within 2 working days of the findings of any such
wildlife. Notification shall include the date, time, location, and circumstances of the incident.
o) Prior to commencement of construction, work areas not adjacent to public streets shall be
clearly marked with fencing, stakes with rope or cord, or other means of delineating the work
area boundaries.
p) If any suspected federally or State protected plant or animal species is found to be present
during Project-related construction activities, occupied areas shall be avoided and the
construction contractor shall be required by its contract to call a CDFW-approved biologist
to the site to identify the species. If the species is protected, the qualified biologist shall notify
the USFWS and CDFW of any previously unreported protected species. Any take of protected
wildlife shall be reported immediately to USFWS and CDFW.
With implementation of BIO MM-1, BIO MM-2, BIO MM-3, BIO MM-4, BIO MM-5, BIO
MM-6, and BIO MM-7, the Project’s potential impacts Crotch bumble bee, burrowing owl, SJKF, and
American badger, and all other potential impacts on biological resources, would be reduced to less
than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.3-17)
2.3.2 Cultural Resources
A. Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? (Threshold “a”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation
Facts in Support of Finding: No historical resources were identified on the Project site with
either the SSJVIC records search or during the field survey. Therefore, because no historical resources
exist on the surface of the Project site, implementation of the Project has no potential to result in a
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
39
substantial adverse change in the significance of a known historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5.
However, it is possible (although unlikely due to the disturbed nature of the site) historical resources
may be present beneath the site’s subsurface, and may be unearthed by ground-disturbing activities
associated with Project construction. If any historical resources are unearthed during Project
construction that meet the definition of a significant historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.5 and are disturbed/damaged by Project construction activities, impacts to those
resources would be significant. (DEIR, p. 4.4-7)
To ensure that Project impacts to any significant archaeological resources that may be
encountered during ground-disturbing activities associated with Project construction are mitigated to
a level of less than significant, the following mitigation measures are required.
CR MM-1. Prior to construction and as needed throughout the construction period involving
ground-disturbing construction activities, a construction worker cultural awareness training
program shall be provided to all new construction workers within one week of employment at
the project site. The training shall be prepared and conducted by a qualified cultural resources
specialist that meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards.
Workers attending the training shall sign a form that shall be kept by the Project Applicant
and made available to the City of Bakersfield upon request.
CR MM-2. If suspected historical or archaeological resources are encountered during ground
disturbance activities, the construction contractor(s) shall be required by their contract to
immediately cease work within 100 feet of the resources and have the area partitioned off until
a qualified cultural resource specialist that meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualification Standards can evaluate the resources found and make
recommendations. If the specialist determines that the discovery represents a potentially
significant cultural resource, additional investigations may be required. If cultural resources
are discovered that may have relevance to Native Americans, the specialist or Project
Applicant must provide written notice to the City of Bakersfield, Tejon Indian Tribe, Native
American Heritage Commission, and any other appropriate individuals, agencies, and/or
groups as determined by the specialist in consultation with the City of Bakersfield to receive
input regarding treatment and disposition of the resource, which may include avoidance,
testing, and/or excavation to prevent destruction of the resource and/or to allow documentation
of the resource for research potential. All reports, correspondence, and determinations
regarding the discovery shall be submitted to the California Historical Resources Information
System’s Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center at California State University
Bakersfield.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures (MMs) CR MM-1 and CR-MM-2 would ensure the
proper identification and subsequent treatment of any significant archaeological resources that may be
encountered during ground-disturbing activities associated with Project construction. With
implementation of the required mitigation, the Project’s potential impacts to important archaeological
resources would be reduced to less than significant. Cumulatively-considerable impacts would likewise
be reduced to less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.4-11)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
40
B. Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation
Facts in Support of Finding: Based on the cultural records search and pedestrian survey of the
Project site, no known archaeological resources are present on the Project site. Additionally, no Native
American tribes requested consultation regarding the Project. Because no archaeological resources are
known to exist on the Project site, implementation of the proposed Project would not cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5. However, it is
possible (although unlikely due to the disturbed nature of the site) that previously undiscovered
archaeological resources may be present beneath the site’s subsurface, and may be impacted by ground-
disturbing activities associated with Project construction. If any prehistoric cultural resources are
unearthed during Project construction that meet the definition of an archaeological resource pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 and are disturbed/damaged by Project construction activities,
impacts to those prehistoric cultural resources would be significant. (DEIR, p. 4.4-8)
C. Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries? (Threshold “c”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site does not contain a cemetery and no known formal
cemeteries are located within the immediate vicinity of the site. A field survey conducted on the Project
site did not identify the presence of any human remains and no human remains are known to exist
beneath the surface of the site. Nevertheless, the remote potential exists that human remains may be
unearthed during grading and excavation activities associated with Project construction. (DEIR, p. 4.4-
8)
If human remains are unearthed during Project construction, the construction contractor would
be required by law to comply with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 “Disturbance of
Human Remains.” According to Section 7050.5(b) and (c), if human remains are discovered, the
County Coroner must be contacted and if the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a
Native American, or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, the Coroner is
required to contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) by telephone within 24 hours.
Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, whenever the NAHC receives
notification of a discovery of Native American human remains from a county coroner, the NAHC is
required to immediately notify those persons it believes to be most likely descended from the deceased
Native American. The descendants may, with the permission of the owner of the land, or his or her
authorized representative, inspect the site of the discovery of the Native American human remains and
may recommend to the owner or the person responsible for the excavation work means for treatment
or disposition, with appropriate dignity, of the human remains and any associated grave goods. The
descendants shall complete their inspection and make recommendations or preferences for treatment
within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. According to Public Resources Code Section
5097.94(k), the NAHC is authorized to mediate disputes arising between landowners and known
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
41
descendants relating to the treatment and disposition of Native American human burials, skeletal
remains, and items associated with Native American burials. Notwithstanding the requirements of
California Health and Safety Code § 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code § 5097.98, due to
the potential (although unlikely due to the disturbed nature of the site) to discover buried human
remains during Project construction activities (i.e., grading), a potentially significant impact would
occur and mitigation would be required. (DEIR, pp. 4.4-8 to 4.4-9)
To ensure that the Project’s potential impacts to buried human remains are mitigated to a level
of less than significant, the following mitigation measure is required.
CR MM-3. During construction, if human remains are discovered, further ground disturbance
shall be prohibited pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. The specific
protocol, guidelines, and channels of communication outlined by the Native American Heritage
Commission, in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, Public Resources
Code 5097.97, and Senate Bill 447 shall be followed. In the event of the discovery of human
remains, at the direction of the county coroner, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(c) shall
guide Native American consultation. Unless otherwise required by law, the site of any reburial
of Native American human remains or associated grave goods shall not be disclosed and shall
not be governed by public disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act. The
coroner, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code Section
6254 (r), parties, and Lead Agencies, will be asked to withhold public disclosure information
related to such reburial, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government
Code Section 6254 (r).
In the event that human remains are discovered during construction activities, Mitigation
Measure CR MM-3 would require compliance with the applicable provisions of California Health and
Safety Code § 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code § 5097 et. seq. Mandatory compliance
with Mitigation Measure CR MM-3, State law, and applicable regulatory requirements would reduce
the Project’s potential impacts to buried human remains to less-than-significant levels. (DEIR, p. 4.4-
11)
2.3.3 Geology and Soils
A. Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature? (Threshold “f”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site does not contain any known unique geologic
features. The Project area has a very low potential for containing important fossil remains because the
area is underlain by alluvial deposits that are too young to contain significant fossil remains. However,
the possibility exists in the area that older fossiliferous alluvium may be present six feet below the
surface since the remains of Pleistocene (ice age) land animals have been collected from older alluvial
deposits in Kern County. If excavations penetrate below six (6) feet, there is a “low to moderate
potential” for the discovery of fossils. A “low to moderate potential” indicates that grading operations
may expose fossils during development. These activities could destroy any fossils present. The
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
42
destruction of such fossils could adversely impact the region’s paleontological resources. Therefore, if
any unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature are unearthed during the
Project’s construction activities and are disturbed/damaged by Project construction activities, impacts
would be significant. (DEIR, p. 4.6-11)
To ensure that the Project’s potential impacts to paleontological resources are mitigated to a
level of less than significant, the following mitigation measures and regulatory requirements are
required.
GEO MM-1. Prior to construction and as needed throughout the construction period involving
ground-disturbing construction activities, a construction worker paleontological resource
awareness training program shall be provided to all new construction workers within one week
of employment at the project site, if their work will involve ground-disturbing construction
activities greater than six feet in depth in older alluvium soils. The training shall be prepared
and conducted by a qualified professional paleontologist. Workers attending the training shall
sign a form that shall be kept by the Project Applicant and made available to the City of
Bakersfield upon request.
GEO MM-2. If paleontological resources are encountered, all work within 100 feet of the
resources shall halt until a qualified paleontologist can be called to the site to evaluate the
resources and make recommendations. Paleontological resource materials may include
fossils, plant impressions, or animal tracks that have been preserved in rock. If the qualified
paleontologist determines that the discovery represents a potentially significant
paleontological resource, additional investigations and fossil recovery may be required to
mitigate adverse impacts to less than significant levels. Construction within 100 feet of the
resources found shall not resume until the appropriate mitigation measures are implemented
or the materials are determined to be to be less than significant by the paleontologist.
GEO MM-3. Recovered specimens, if any, shall be properly prepared to a point of
identification and permanent preservation, including screen washing sediments to recover
small invertebrates and vertebrates, if necessary. Identification and curation of specimens into
a professional, accredited public museum repository with a commitment to archival
conservation and permanent retrievable storages shall be required for discoveries of
significance as determined by the paleontologist.
GEO MM-4. A final monitoring and mitigation report of findings and significance shall be
prepared, including lists of all fossils recovered, if any, and necessary maps and graphics to
accurately record the original location of the specimens. The report shall be submitted to the
City of Bakersfield prior to final building inspection.
GEO RR-5. In compliance with City of Bakersfield Municipal Code Chapter 15.05, California
Building Code, construction of the Project is required to adhere to the California Building
Standards Code and its requirement to prepare and adhere to site-specific recommendations
contained in a geotechnical report prepared for the Project site. As such, compliance with the
recommendations provided in the Project’s geotechnical study prepared by Krazan &
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
43
Associates, Inc. and dated May 6, 2019 (contained as Technical Appendix E to this EIR) is
required.
GEO RR-6. To address wind erosion, the Project construction activities are required to comply
with the provisions of Chapter 15 Section 104.12 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code to ensure
that dust abatement measures comply with the current standards set for by the San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD).
GEO RR-7. The Project Applicant is required, pursuant to the State Water Resources Control
Board, to obtain coverage under the State’s General Construction Storm Water Permit for
construction activities (NPDES permit). Compliance with the NPDES permit involves the
preparation and implementation of a SWPPP for construction-related activities. The SWPPP
will specify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that construction contractors will be
required to implement during construction activities to ensure that waterborne pollution –
including erosion/sedimentation – is prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately
treated prior to surface runoff being discharged from the subject property. Examples of BMPs
that may be utilized during construction include, but are not limited to, sandbag barriers,
geotextiles, storm drain inlet protection, sediment traps, rip rap soil stabilizers, and hydro-
seeding.
Mitigation Measures GEO MM-1, GEO MM-2, GEO MM-3, and GEO-MM-4 would ensure
the proper identification and subsequent treatment of any paleontological resources that may be
encountered during ground-disturbing activities associated with implementation of the proposed
Project. Therefore, with implementation of GEO MM-1, GEO MM-2, GEO MM-3, and GEO-MM-4,
the Project’s potential direct and cumulatively considerable impacts to a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature would be reduced to less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.6-15)
2.3.4 Tribal Cultural Resources
A. Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe,
and that is (Threshold “a”):
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native American tribe.
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
44
Facts in Support of Finding: No prehistoric resource sites, features, places, or landscapes were
identified on the Project site that are either listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historic Places. No resources were identified on the Project site that meet any of the criteria to be
eligible for the California Register and no prehistoric resource sites or isolates were found on the
Project site based on the cultural records search and pedestrian survey of the Project site. Furthermore,
no substantial evidence was presented to or found by the City of Bakersfield that led to the
identification of any resources on the Project site that in the City’s discretion had the potential to be
considered a tribal cultural resource. (DEIR, p. 4.13-3)
Because no tribal cultural resources exist on the Project site under existing conditions,
implementation of the proposed Project would not impact such resources. However, it is possible
(although unlikely due to the disturbed nature of the site) that previously undiscovered tribal cultural
resources may be present beneath the site’s subsurface, and may be impacted by ground-disturbing
activities associated with Project construction. If any tribal cultural resources are unearthed during
Project construction that meet the definition of a significant tribal cultural resource and are
disturbed/damaged by Project construction activities, impacts to those tribal cultural resources would
be significant. (DEIR, p. 4.13-3)
To ensure proper identification and subsequent treatment of any significant tribal cultural
resources that may be encountered during ground-disturbing activities associated with Project
development, CR MM-1 through CR MM-3, previously noted herein, are required.
Implementation of CR MM-1 through CR-MM 3 would ensure the proper identification and
subsequent treatment of any significant tribal cultural resources that may be encountered during
ground-disturbing activities associated with Project development. With implementation of the required
mitigation, the Project’s potential impact to significant tribal cultural resources would be reduced to
less-than-significant. (DEIR, p. 4.13-4)
2.4 Impacts Identified in the EIR as being Significant and Unavoidable
The City Council hereby finds that, despite the incorporation of mitigation measures outlined
herein and in the EIR, the following impacts from the proposed Project and related approvals cannot
be fully mitigated to a less than significant level by any feasible mitigation measures pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines 15091(a)(2) and (a)(3), which are infeasible as a result of specific economic, legal, social,
technological, and other considerations, or are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency, including the federal government, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is
therefore included herein. For the reasons set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the
City Council finds and declares, in its independent judgment, that the Project’s significant benefits
substantially outweigh and justify the following significant and unavoidable impacts:
2.4.1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
A. Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the environment? (Threshold “a”)
Finding: Significant and Unavoidable Cumulatively-Considerable Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
45
Facts in Support of Finding: The City of Bakersfield is using a highly conservative net-zero
threshold for this Project, meaning that any amount of GHG emissions from the Project is considered
a significant impact. Because the Project would result in a total gross increase of 946.85 MT CO2e
annually, or when taking into account the VA’s vacation of its existing facility to move to the new
proposed facility on the Project site, an estimated net new increase of 83.15 MT CO2e annually, the
Project’s impact is significant on a cumulatively-considerable basis. (DEIR, pp. 4.7-18 to 4.7-19)
The following mitigation measures and regulatory requirements are required to reduce the
Project-related GHG emissions.
GHG MM-1. Construction contractors shall assure that construction equipment greater than
150 horsepower achieves or is equivalent to or better than Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA)/California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 4 emissions standards, or Tier 3 standards
if Tier 4 equipment is not available at the time of construction. Prior to grading and building
permit issuance, the construction contractor(s) shall submit an equipment list to the City’s
Development Services Director confirming that the equipment used is compliant.
GHG MM-2. Construction contractors shall assure that hand tools, forklifts, and pressure
washers used for construction are electric-powered and shall designate an area of the
construction site where electric-powered construction vehicles and equipment can charge. The
City of Bakersfield shall verify the location of the designated charging area in association with
grading and building permit issuance.
GHG MM-3. Project construction contractors shall tune and maintain all construction
equipment in accordance with the equipment manufacturer’s recommended maintenance
schedule and specifications. Maintenance records for all pieces of equipment shall be kept on-
site for the duration of construction activities and shall be made available for periodic
inspection by City of Bakersfield or its designee.
GHG MM-4. The building roof shall, upon the approval of a design modification by the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), be outfitted with a solar photovoltaic system of the
maximum size feasible to provide power to the building and given the constraints of applicable
Building Code requirements, clearance requirements around roof-mounted equipment, PG&E
interconnection regulations, and other code compliance requirements. Should the VA not
approve a design modification to add a rooftop PV system, the building may be constructed
and operated without a PV system.
GHG RR-4. The building shall be constructed in compliance with Title 24 of the Uniform
Building Code to minimize total consumption of energy. The City of Bakersfield shall confirm
Title 24 compliance prior to the issuance of building permits.
Although the Project’s GHG emissions would only be a very small fraction of the global GHG
emissions that contribute to climate change, the City is using an extremely conservative net-zero
threshold. While the foregoing measures all reduce the Project’s GHG emissions to the maximum
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
46
extent feasible, unless the VA approves the rooftop solar imposed by Mitigation Measure GHG-4, the
Project would still not achieve net-zero emissions. The City cannot force the VA to approve rooftop
solar, and therefore the City must assume it will not be implemented for the purpose of disclosing,
analyzing and mitigating impacts. Because the Project would result in a net increase in GHG emissions
as compared to existing conditions even with implementation of mitigation measures, the Project’s
impacts due to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable on a cumulatively-considerable
basis. (DEIR, p. 4.7-22) It bears noting that the Project’s GHG impacts would be considered less than
significant under virtually any other numerical threshold relied on by many lead agencies throughout
the state, as described in more detail in the FEIR’s response to comments.
2.5 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Which Would Be Caused by the
Proposed Project Should It Be Implemented
The CEQA Guidelines require EIRs to address any significant irreversible environmental changes that
would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented (CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.2(c)). An environmental change would fall into this category if: a) the project would involve a
large commitment of non-renewable resources; b) the primary and secondary impacts of the project
would generally commit future generations to similar uses; c) the project involves uses in which
irreversible damage could result from any potential environmental accidents; or d) the proposed
consumption of resources is not justified (e.g., the project results in the wasteful use of energy). (DEIR,
p. 5-1)
Determining whether the proposed Project may result in significant irreversible environmental changes
requires a determination of whether key non-renewable resources would be degraded or destroyed in
such a way that there would be little possibility of restoring them. Natural resources, in the form of
construction materials and energy resources, would be used in the construction of the proposed Project,
but development of the Project site as proposed would have no measurable adverse effect on the
availability of such resources, including resources that may be non-renewable (e.g., fossil fuels).
Construction and operation of the proposed Project would not involve the use of large sums or sources
of non-renewable energy and with respect to operation, the Project would replace an existing clinic of
similar size, essentially stepping into the shoes of its existing impacts, including energy use.
Additionally, the Project is required by law to comply with the California Green Building Standards
Code (CALGreen), compliance with which reduces a building operation’s energy volume that is
produced by fossil fuels. The Project would be subject to regulations to reduce the Project’s reliance
on non-renewable energy sources. The Project also would be subject to the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007, which contains provisions designed to increase energy efficiency and availability
of renewable energy. The Project also would be subject to California Energy Code, or Title 24, which
contains measures to reduce natural gas and electrical demand, thus requiring less non-renewable
energy resources. Further, because the Project is contracted with the federal government, the following
items are required to be implemented:
• Reduction in energy cost by 30% over baseline performance rating using the following:
o Energy efficient mechanical, electrical, and plumbing equipment.
o Energy control strategies for HVAC, plumbing and lighting systems.
o Low flow plumbing fixtures and shower heads.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
47
• Natural gas is boilers over No. 2 Oil where uninterrupted natural gas supply is available.
The Project would avoid the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy during
Project construction, operation, and maintenance. With mandatory compliance to the energy efficiency
regulations as well as implementation of Project design features and mitigation measures, the Project
would not involve the use of large sums or sources of non-renewable energy. A more detailed
discussion of Project energy consumption is provided in EIR Subsection 4.5, Energy. (DEIR, pp. 5-1
to 5-2)
EIR Subsection 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, provides an analysis of the proposed Project’s
potential to transport or handle hazardous materials and biomedical waste which, if released into the
environment, could result in irreversible damage. As concluded in the analysis, compliance with
federal, State, and local regulations related to hazardous materials would be required of all contractors
working on the property. Similarly, compliance with federal, State, and local regulations related to
hazardous materials and biomedical waste would be required of the U.S Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) as the operator of the proposed VA community-based outpatient medical clinic. As such,
construction and long-term operation of the proposed Project would not have the potential to cause
significant irreversible damage to the environment, including damage that may result from upset or
accident conditions. (DEIR, p. 5-2)
2.6 Growth-Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Project
CEQA requires a discussion of the ways in which the proposed Project would be growth inducing. The
CEQA Guidelines identify a project as growth inducing if it would foster economic or population
growth or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding
environment (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d)). New employees and new residential
developments represent direct forms of growth. These direct forms of growth have a secondary effect
of expanding the size of local markets and inducing additional economic activity in the area. (DEIR,
p. 5-2)
A project could indirectly induce growth at the local level by increasing the demand for additional
goods and services associated with an increase in population or employment and thus reducing or
removing the barriers to growth. This typically occurs in suburban or rural environments where
population or employment growth results in increased demand for service and commodity markets
responding to the new population of residents or employees. The Project’s temporary construction-
related employees would purchase goods and services in the region, but any secondary increase in
employment associated with meeting these goods and services needs would be marginal,
accommodated by existing goods and service providers, and highly unlikely to result in any new
physical impacts to the environment as the construction workers are likely to already be in the local
employment pool and would not be coming from out of the region. Operation of the proposed VA
community-based outpatient medical clinic, which is already operating in the area at 1801 Westwind
Drive, also would not increase the need for secondary goods and services, because the VA would
provide medical services in the same geographic market that it already serves. A change in location of
the VA’s services from 1801 Westwind Drive to the Project site would not induce substantial new
growth in the region. (DEIR, p. 5-3)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
48
Under CEQA, growth inducement is not considered necessarily detrimental, beneficial, or of
significance to the environment. Typically, growth-inducing potential of a project would be considered
significant if it fosters growth or a concentration of population in excess of what is assumed in pertinent
master plans, land use plans, or in projections made by regional planning agencies such as the Kern
County Association of Governments (Kern COG). Significant growth impacts also could occur if a
project provides infrastructure or service capacity to accommodate growth beyond the levels currently
permitted by local or regional plans and policies. In general, growth induced by a project is considered
a significant impact if it directly or indirectly affects the ability of agencies to provide needed public
services, or if it can be demonstrated that the potential growth significantly affects the environment in
some other way. (DEIR, p. 5-3)
According to the growth trends included in Kern COGs RTP/SCS, Metropolitan Bakersfield’s
population is projected to grow by 6,643 residents between 2020 and 2046 (approximately 1.0% annual
growth). Over this same time period, employment in Metropolitan Bakersfield is expected to add 1,077
new jobs (approximately 0.5% annual job growth). Economic growth is not reasonably expected to
take place as a result of the Project’s operation because the VA is already operating a medical clinic in
the local area, and the VA would move those services to the Project site. The move of a medical service
provider in the same geographic market has no reasonable possibility of causing a substantial increase
in population or economic growth. The purpose of the proposed VA community-based outpatient clinic
is to serve existing U.S. military veterans living in the Bakersfield area. Accordingly, because it is
anticipated that most of the VA clinic’s employees and patients would already be living in the
Bakersfield area, the relocation of the VA medical clinic to a new location at the Project site would not
induce substantial growth in the area. (DEIR, p. 5-3)
The area immediately surrounding the Project site contains a variety of uses, including vacant parcels,
and parcels developed with commercial, industrial, public facilities, and school uses. Development of
the Project site is not expected to place short-term development pressure on abutting properties because
these areas are already built-out or are planned for future development, which has no reasonable
possibility of being accelerated by the introduction of a VA community-based outpatient medical clinic
on the Project site. Furthermore, the proposed Project’s improvements to the public infrastructure,
including roads, drainage infrastructure, and other utility improvements are consistent with the City’s
General Plan and would not indirectly induce substantial and unplanned population growth in the local
area. (DEIR, pp. 5-3 to 5-4)
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in substantial, adverse growth-inducing
impacts. (DEIR, p. 5-4)
2.7 Project Alternatives
The EIR analyzed three alternatives to the Project as proposed and evaluated these alternatives
for their ability to avoid or reduce the Project’s significant environmental effects while also meeting
the majority of the Project’s objectives.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
49
2.7.1 Alternatives Considered but not Carried Forward for Detailed Analysis
A. Alternative Sites
CEQA does not require that an analysis of alternative sites be included in an EIR. However,
if the surrounding circumstances make it reasonable to consider an alternative site, then an alternative
sites analysis should be considered and analyzed in the EIR. In making the decision to include or
exclude an analysis of an alternative site, the “key question and first step in analysis is whether any of
the significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the project
in another location. Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects
of the project need to be considered for inclusion in the EIR” (CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.6(f)(2)).
The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs established the following geographic boundary as an
acceptable area for establishment of a new clinic:
• Bounded on the North (from west): East on Olive Drive, southeast on Roberts Lane, southeast
on Manor Street and then northeast on Panorama Drive to Fairfax Road.
• Bounded on the South (from east): West on E. White Lane which becomes White Lane, to
intersection with Gosford Road.
• Bounded on the West (from south): Starting at the intersection of Gosford Road and White
Lane, head north to where Gosford Road becomes Coffee Road, continue north to Olive Drive.
• Bounded on the East (from north): South on Fairfax Road to E. Brundage Lane, west on E.
Brundage Lane and then south on Cottonwood Road to E. White Lane. (DEIR, p. 6-3)
On December 9, 2019, the VA issued a Solicitation for Offers for “up to a 20-year lease for 30,100 Net
Usable Square Feet of space for use by VA for personnel, furnishings, and equipment to be operated
as a Community Based Outpatient Clinic” in the geographic area described above. The VA received
four proposals, for the following three locations:
• Renovation of the existing VA clinic at 1801 Westwind Drive (two proposals).
• A new clinic proposed by the existing landlord of the VA Clinic at 1801 Westwind Drive
(referred to as PBV, or Progress for Bakersfield Veterans, LLC), at an undisclosed location
• The Project site evaluated in this EIR. (DEIR, p. 6-4)
The VA evaluated the four proposals and selected the Project site. PBV protested the VA’s
determination in several iterations administratively, and in the United States Court of Federal Claims,
Case No. 20-1050C. All appeals and challenges were denied, as detailed in the January 7, 2021
decision by the Court of Federal Claims. (DEIR, pp. 6-4 to 6-5) Since that time additional protests have
been filed by PBV. On May 6, 2021, PBV protested the U.S. Government Accountability Office
(GAO) challenging VA’s award of the lease to the Project Applicant (SASD), and on May 24, 2021,
PBV filed a supplemental protest with GAO. Both of these protests were dismissed and denied by
GAO on August 11, 2021. On November 8, 2021, PBV effectively appealed GAO’s August 11, 2021
decision by filing a protest with the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (COFC) challenging VA’s award to
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
50
the Project Applicant (SASD). PBV also challenged VA’s elimination of PBV’s offers from the
competition even though the COFC had already considered and rejected those arguments in its
December 22, 2020 decision that denied and dismissed PBV’s August 20, 2020 protest. The COFC
dismissed and denied PBV’s November 8, 2021 protest on March 11, 2022. On May 10, 2022, PBV
filed a notice of appeal with the Federal Circuit challenging one aspect of the COFC’s March 11, 2022
ruling. On May 4, 2023, Three days after holding oral arguments, the Federal Circuit summarily denied
PBV’s appeal and affirmed the COFC’s March 11, 2022 decision.
It is beyond the jurisdictional scope and authority of the City of Bakersfield as the CEQA lead agency
to evaluate other sites that have not been offered to or selected by the VA, particularly those that have
been rejected after a long and thorough federal administrative and legal process, specifically including
remodeling and rebuilding a clinic on the existing site at 1801 Westwind Drive. As such, no alternative
sites are feasible because the VA has already selected the Project site for the Project, and an alternative
sites analysis is thus not required in this EIR. (DEIR, p. 6-5)
Furthermore, even completing setting aside the federal bid selection process, no significant effects of
the Project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the Project in another location. None
of the Project’s impacts – and in particular, its sole significant impact, GHG emissions – are due to
where the Project is located, or would be reduced in a different location. Instead, the same Project
located anywhere in the City would have identical GHG impacts to the proposed Project on the Project
Site. Thus, on this independent basis, further consideration of an alternative site was not warranted.
(See, CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(2) [“Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen
any of the significant effects of the project need to be considered for inclusion in the EIR”]).
2.7.2 Alternatives Selected for Analysis in the EIR
A. No Project Alternative
The No Project Alternative considers a scenario in which the proposed Project does not
proceed. In this circumstance, the VA clinic would continue to operate in its existing location at 1801
Westwind Drive and the Project site would remain undeveloped. (DEIR, p. 6-6)
Implementation of the No Project Alternative would result in no physical environmental
impacts to the Project site beyond those that have historically occurred on the Project site and that will
continue to occur into the future from routine activities. Almost all effects of the proposed Project
would be avoided or lessened by selection of the No Project Alternative, with the exception of long-
term erosion and sedimentation impacts, which would be increased under this alternative. The
foregoing does not take into account the fact that under the No Project Alternative, the existing VA
clinic at 1801 Westwind Drive would continue to operate indefinitely, and as a result, while avoiding
construction period and Project site-specific impacts, the No Project Alternative would have
substantially similar operational impacts to the proposed Project. The No Project Alternative, however,
would fail to meet any of the Project’s objectives. Specifically, the No Project Alternative would not
result in the establishment of a new VA community-based outpatient clinic, provide high quality
patient care for veterans, enable veterans to receive healthcare at an easily accessible facility, provide
a diverse range of consolidated outpatient services, or provide community vitality, economic growth
and employment opportunities in Bakersfield. The VA itself has already determined that the existing
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
51
facility at 1801 Westwind Drive is inadequate; it is outdated and does not provide the full suite of
services needed by the City’s veterans, who are instead currently forced to travel outside the
Bakersfield area to obtain these services. Many local veterans testified that the existing facility is
inadequate and substandard during the City’s 2021 hearings on the Project, confirmed they drive over
100 miles to Los Angeles for needed services, and others have submitted written comments and even
articles in media stating the same. As mentioned above, the VA has also already specifically rejected
a proposal to remodel the existing clinic or otherwise keep the existing clinic at the existing location.
(DEIR, p. 6-11)
B. Net Zero Alternative
The Net Zero Alternative considers the development of a VA clinic on the Project site with a
design that would achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions. To achieve this result, a smaller sized
clinic than proposed by the Project and required by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs would be
required, which does not meet the requirements of the request for proposals issued by the VA. The Net
Zero Alternative would reduce the size of the clinic by 3,648 s.f. and construct a 36,000 s.f. clinic
(approximately 9% smaller than the proposed Project at 39,648 s.f.), which would have a net usable
square footage well below 30,100 s.f. The number of parking spaces also would be concomitantly
reduced by approximately 9%. Areas not developed with the building or parking would be landscaped.
Under this alternative, the exiting clinic would no longer operate and the 36,000 s.f. new clinic built
on the Project site would operate in place of the existing VA clinic and would achieve net zero
greenhouse gas emissions. (DEIR, p. 6-11)
The Net Zero Alternative would reduce the Project’s significant and unavoidable cumulatively-
considerable GHG impacts to a less than significant level. The Net Zero Alternative would also
moderately reduce the Project’s already less than significant impacts to air quality, energy, and noise.
All other impacts from the Net Zero Alternative would be similar to the Project. (DEIR, p. 6-15)
The Net Zero Alternative would not meet Project Objective B because it does not meet the
VA’s physical design requirements and would not meet Project Objective G due to not utilizing all the
available space on the Project site to construct a larger building which would achieve operational
efficiency and create optimal space for increased patient and staff satisfaction. Additionally, the Net
Zero Alternative would not offer the full suite of services needed by veterans in the Bakersfield area.
The Net Zero Alternative would generally meet all of the Project’s other objectives, but to a less extent.
The feasibility of selecting this Alternative is outside of the jurisdictional authority of the City of
Bakersfield because the physical characteristics of a feasible Project are determined by the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs (the VA). Modifications to the Project by the City of Bakersfield are
not possible because the Project applicant is limited to the design improvements approved by the
federal government as part of the already concluded federal procurement process. As a result, the City
has no jurisdiction or ability to select this Alternative because it would conflict with the Project
approved by the VA / federal government. Further, approval of the smaller Net Zero Alternative would
likely result in some veterans traveling out of town, including to VA facilities in Los Angeles, to
receive timely services, which would then increase air quality, GHG and transportation impacts,
thereby negating the impact reductions associated with constructing and operating a smaller facility.
(DEIR, p. 6-15) The Net Zero alternative is rejected for this second reason on an independent basis, in
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
52
addition to the lack of feasibility of reducing the size of, and services offered by, the Project contrary
to the bid specifications issued by the VA. Each of these reasons, standing alone, are sufficient grounds
for rejecting this Alternative.
C. Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative
The Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative considers the development of a VA
clinic on the Project site with the same site design as proposed with the Project, but with the addition
of a solar system on the building roof, the addition of canopy covers over parking areas equipped with
solar panels, and the addition of on-site battery storage such that site operations could be powered
without connecting to the electrical grid. Under this Alternative, the exiting VA clinic located at 1801
Westwind Drive would no longer operate and the Alternative would achieve a net reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions compared to the existing condition. The total amount of energy needed to
offset the Project is approximately 371,171 kWh/year. The building itself is expected to need 341,211
kWh/year, and the remaining 29,960 kWh/year is for the parking lot operations. These values are based
on the mitigated electricity needs, which assumes a 10% improvement over Title 24 requirements.
Assuming that 1 kW of rooftop solar in Bakersfield can generate about 1,650 kWh/year, solar panels
capable of producing a total of 225 kW (207 kW for the building and 18 kW for the parking lot) would
be required. Assuming that approximately 100 square feet (sq. ft.) of surface area are needed to hold
1kW of rooftop solar, 22,500 sq. ft. of solar panel coverage would be required on the site. (DEIR, p.
6-16)
The Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative would reduce the Project’s
significant and unavoidable cumulatively-considerable GHG impacts to a less than significant level.
The Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative would also incrementally reduce the
Project’s already less than significant impacts to air quality and energy. Potential hazardous materials
impacts would increase due to the introduction of on-site battery storage, but the potential impacts
would be less than significant with mandatory regulatory compliance. All other impacts from the Net
Zero Alternative would be similar to the Project. (DEIR, p. 6-20)
The Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative would meet the Project Objectives
except for Objective B because it does not meet the VA’s physical design requirements, and therefore
could be rejected by the VA (which would have to fund any increased costs resulting from the
Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative, which could be significant). The feasibility of
selecting this Alternative is outside of the jurisdictional authority of the City of Bakersfield because
the physical characteristics of a feasible Project are determined by the VA. Modifications to the Project
by the City of Bakersfield are not possible because the Project applicant is limited to the design
improvements approved by the federal government as part of the already concluded federal
procurement process. As a result, the City has no jurisdiction or ability to select this Alternative
because it would conflict with the Project approved by the VA / federal government. (DEIR, p. 6-20)
However, it bears noting that GHG MM-4 essentially requires Renewable Energy System Project
Design Alternative, if approved by the VA.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
53
2.7.3 Environmentally Superior Alternative
CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6 requires the identification of the environmentally superior
alternative. As discussed in the DEIR, implementation of the No Project Alternative would result in
no physical environmental impacts beyond those that have historically occurred on the property, and
those that occur from the operation of the existing VA clinic at 1801 Westwind Drive. Because the No
Project Alternative would avoid most of the Project’s impacts, it warrants consideration as the
“environmentally superior alternative.” However, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(e)(2), if a
no project alternative is identified as the environmentally superior alternative, then the EIR shall also
identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. Accordingly, the Net
Zero Alternative evaluated herein is identified as the Environmentally Superior Alternative pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6. If the Net Zero Alternative is determined not feasible, then the
Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative would become the Environmentally Superior
Alternative. (DEIR, pp. 6-20 to 6-21)
3.0 Statement of Overriding Considerations
The Planning Commission hereby declares that it has balanced the benefits of the Project
against any significant and unavoidable environmental impacts in determining whether to approve the
Project. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, if the benefits of the Project outweigh its
unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, those impacts may be considered “acceptable.”
Having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Project to the extent
feasible by adopting the Mitigation Measures contained in the EIR, the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (MMRP), and herein, having considered the entire administrative record on the
Project, and having weighed the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable adverse impacts after
implementation of all feasible mitigation, the Planning Commission has determined that each of the
following social, economic and environmental benefits of the Project separately and individually
outweigh the potential unavoidable adverse impact and render those potential adverse environmental
impacts acceptable based upon the following overriding considerations:
A. The Project provides a much needed new VA community-based outpatient medical clinic
in Bakersfield on a site that has been vetted by and selected by the U.S. Government, which
is highly desired by local veterans.
B. The Project provides a new VA community-based outpatient medical clinic that meets the
VA’s physical design requirements.
C. The Project provides high quality patient care for local veterans in a safe, advanced-care
medical facility throughout the Bakersfield area and surrounding communities.
D. The Project enables veterans to receive health care at a medical facility that is easily
accessible and nearby a State highway system to reduce out of area health trips.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
54
E. The Project provides a VA medical clinic that is capable of providing a diverse range of
consolidated outpatient services, such as audiology, mental health, telehealth, ambulatory
care, an eye clinic, physical and occupational therapy, prosthetics, dental services, a lab
and pharmacy, and ancillary and diagnostic services, which are not all currently available
in the City at the existing location, avoiding the need for veterans to travel out of the
Bakersfield area for these services.
F. The Project creates a comprehensively planned, advanced-care VA medical clinic that
provides community vitality, economic growth, and employment opportunities in the City
of Bakersfield.
G. Upon build-out, the Project provides a VA medical clinic with maximum operational
efficiency to optimize health care outcomes for veterans and create a space for increased
patient and staff satisfaction.
H. The Project enables veterans to receive a full range of services not currently available in
the City, eliminating the need for long-distance driving to Los Angeles for certain services.
I. The Project creates valuable short term construction and long term employment
opportunities for residents of the City.
J. The Project implements the City’s General Plan by developing an underutilized site that is
adjacent to urban infrastructure, with a use consistent with the City’ General Plan and
zoning code.
K. The Project implements Federal and State policy by providing needed health care to a
vulnerable community of veterans.
The Planning Commission hereby declares that the foregoing benefits provided to the public
through the approval and implementation of the Project outweigh the identified significant adverse
environmental impact of the Project that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. The
Planning Commission finds that each of the Project’s benefits separately and individually outweigh all
of the unavoidable adverse environmental effects identified in the EIR and therefore finds those
impacts to be acceptable.
4.0 Additional Facts on Record
4.1 Adoption of a Monitoring Plan for Mitigation Measures
Pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code, the City of Bakersfield hereby
adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”). The City finds that the MMRP
is designed to ensure compliance with the changes (i.e., mitigation measures) imposed on the Project
to mitigate or avoid effects on the environment during Project implementation. The MMRP is on file
with the City of Bakersfield Development Services Department, 1715 Chester Avenue, 2nd Floor,
Bakersfield, CA 93301.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
55
4.2 Custodian of Record
The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings
have been based are located at the City of Bakersfield Development Services Department, 1715 Chester
Avenue, 2nd Floor Bakersfield, CA 93301. The custodian for these records is Louis Ramirez, Associate
Planner II. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 1
Goals and Policies Project Consistency Discussion
Goal 1. Accommodate new development which captures
the economic demands generated by the marketplace and
establishes Bakersfield's role as the capital of the southern
San Joaquin Valley.
Consistent. The Project would support this goal by providing medical
services to Veterans that currently are not available to them in the current
VA medical clinic. Thus, continue to establish Bakersfield as the capital of
the southern San Joaquin Valley
Goal 2. Accommodate new development which provides a
full mix of uses to support its population.
Consistent. The Project would support this goal by being an addition to the
surrounding land uses. Currently north of the project site are gas station
convenience stores, restaurants, fast food, commercial retail, hotels and car
washes. West of the site is consists of a firefighter training facility and to the
south is an elementary school, self storage and a furniture store. Thus the
addition of a community based medical outpatient clinic would be an
addition to an already established mix use area.
Goal 3. Accommodate new development which is
compatible with and complements existing land uses.
Consistent. The Project is proposed on a property is compatible with the
surrounding area. The Project is adjacent to a collector road and near an
arterial road that is connected to a State Highway, assuring accessibility to
services. Two bus stops are less than a quarter mile away from the site. The
community based medical outpatient clinic is surrounded by existing uses
that would complement the medical outpatient. Due to the location of the
Project site, services would not only be provided to residents of Bakersfield
but also outlying communities within the southern San Joaquin Valley.
Patients would have access to the existing service in the area such as gas
station convenience stores, fast food restaurants, and hotels. The Project
would develop Landco Drive, Knudsen Road, and Street ”A” which would
not only provide access to the site from the east, south and west but would
also provide landscaping along the newly developed roads complementing
the surrounding aesthetics.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 2
Goals and Policies Project Consistency Discussion
Goal 4. Accommodate new development which channels
land uses in a phased, orderly manner and is coordinated
with the provision of infrastructure and public
improvements.
Consistent. The Project would support this goal by providing surrounding
infrastructure with the development of Knudsen Road, Landco Drive and
Street “A”. Public improvements would include sidewalks, bike paths and
landscaped frontage. Also providing medical services to Veterans in an
outpatient setting.
Goal 6. Accommodate new development that is sensitive to
the natural environment, and accounts for environmental
hazards.
Consistent. The Project site was previously disturbed and does not contain a
high degree of natural resources. The Project entails a proposed community
based medical outpatient clinic designed to contemporary standards and
compliant with the California Green Building Code (CalGreen). No
environmental hazards are known to exist on the property that needed to
be accounted for in the Project’s design. The potential environmental
impacts of the Project have been studied throughout the FEIR to ensure any
potentially significant impacts are minimized or mitigated to the extent
feasible.
Goal 7. Establish a built environment which achieves a
compatible functional and visual relationship among
individual buildings and sites.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this goal because it would
be architecturally designed to meet contemporary industry standards.
Goal 8. Target growth companies that meet clean air
requirements, and create sustainable employment in jobs
paying higher wages.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this goal because
mitigation measures, regulatory requirements, and project design features
have been established which any future user must comply with. The Project
would sustain employment of 50 higher wage jobs.
Commercial Development
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 3
Goals and Policies Project Consistency Discussion
Policy 15. Allow for the development of a variety of
commercial centers/corridors which are differentiated by
their function, intended users and level of intensity,
including convenience centers servicing local residential
neighborhoods, sub-regional centers which serve groupings
of neighborhoods, and major regional centers which serve
the planning area and surrounding areas.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy because it
would diversify the mix of uses in the northern portion of the City of
Bakersfield by providing outpatient medical service for Veterans, along with
the existing variety of retail shopping opportunities to local residents and
passers-by on SR-99, which is part of the State highway system.
Policy 16. Allow for the development of a variety of
commercial uses, including those which serve residents
(groceries, clothing, etc.), highway users, and tourists-
visitors.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy by serving
Veterans in the City of Bakersfield and surrounding communities. Tourist-
visitors and highway users that are Veterans would also be eligible for
services provided by the Project.
Policy 18. Require all new commercial designations be
assigned to sites where the aggregate of all contiguous
parcels designated for commercial use is no less than five
(5) acres, except for approved specific plans, parcels to be
developed for highway-oriented service uses at freeway on-
and off-ramps, or where physical conditions are such that
commercial is the only logical use of the property.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy because the
Project proposes more than five (5) acres of commercial land use. The
commercial component of the Project would span 10.05 acres.
Policy 19. Allow for the intensification and development of
existing commercial areas in an infill fashion.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy because it
proposes infill development of an undeveloped parcel with outpatient
medical services. The site is bounded by commercial uses to the north and
the south. Thus, the commercial area would intensify in an infill fashion with
the development of an outpatient medical clinic.
Policy 20. The depth of new commercial developments shall
be at least half the length of the street frontage. Exceptions
may be made where existing development or physical
constraints provide a more logical shape.
Consistent. The Project has street frontage from the east, south and west
of the project site. The development is equidistant from each frontage due
to physical constraints.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 4
Goals and Policies Project Consistency Discussion
Policy 25. Provide for infill of commercial land uses to be
compatible with the scale and character of existing
commercial districts and corridors.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy because it
proposes infill development on a undeveloped property surrounded by
roadways and land that is developed or planned for development.
Policy 26. Encourage adjacent commercial uses to be of
compatible height, setback, color and materials.
Consistent. Although the Project design was reviewed and approved by the
United States Department of Veterans Affairs, the height, setback, color,
and materials meet city standards within the zone district.
Policy 28. Require that commercial development provide
design features such as screen walls, landscaping and
height, setback and lighting restrictions between the
boundaries of adjacent residential land use designations so
as to reduce impacts on residences due to noise, traffic,
parking, and differences in scale.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy because the
closest residential community is located more than 1,000 feet to the west of
the Project site. Exterior lighting associated with the Project would be
required to comply with the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code Section
17.71, which among other things requires that all outdoor lighting be fully
shielded and aimed downward onto the ground surface with no escaping
light permitted to contribute to sky glow by shining upward into the sky.
Landscaping would be installed around the Project site.
Policy 29. Require that automobile and truck access to
commercial properties sited adjacent to designated
residential parcels be located at the maximum practical
distance from the residential parcel.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy because the
property sited is not adjacent to designated residential parcels and the
nearest resident is more than 1,000 feet away to the west.
Policy 30. Street frontages along all new commercial
development shall be landscaped.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy because
ornamental landscaping is proposed around the perimeter of the Project
site. The Project’s Landscaping Plan will be required to meet the landscaping
standards in chapter 17.61 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code.
Public Facilities
Policy 50. Coordinate with the appropriate agencies so that
adequate land and facilities are set aside for schools, parks,
police/fire, libraries, cultural facilities, recreational facilities
and other service uses to serve the community.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy because
adequate public services are available to service the proposed community
based medical outpatient clinic.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 5
Goals and Policies Project Consistency Discussion
Policy 54. The developer shall be responsible for all on-site
costs incurred as a result of the proposed project, in
addition to a proportional share of off-site costs incurred in
service extension or improvements. The availability of
public or private services or resources shall be evaluated
during discretionary project consideration. Availability may
affect project approval or result in a reduction in size,
density, or intensity otherwise indicated in the general
plan's map provisions.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with the policy because the
Project Applicant would assume responsibility of on-site costs and off-site
cost through the Site Plan Review process.
Policy 55. Provide for the mitigation of significant noise
impacts on adjacent sensitive uses from transportation
corridor improvements.
Consistent. A noise impact analysis was completed for the Project and
concluded in EIR Subsection 4.11, the Project would not generate
substantial temporary or permanent increases in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the City’s General
Plan or Noise Ordinance and impacts would be less than significant.
Image
Policy 66. Develop a distinctive identity for the Bakersfield
region which differentiates it as a unique place in the
Southern San Joaquin Valley.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy because it
would attract employment-generating businesses to the City of Bakersfield
and diversify the mix of uses in the City and greater Kern County. Veterans
from within the City and outlying communities would utilize services that
the Project will provide.
Policy 69. Allow variation in the use of street trees, shrubs,
lighting, and other details to give streets better visual
continuity and increased shade canopy.
Consistent. Upon development of the proposed Project, the site would be
landscaped. Landscaping would be ornamental and feature trees, hedges,
shrubs, groundcovers, and accent plants. The plans are required to comply
with Chapter 17.61 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code, which establishes
requirements for landscape design, automatic irrigation system design, and
water-use efficiency.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 6
Goals and Policies Project Consistency Discussion
Policy 70. Provide for the installation of street trees which
enhance pedestrian activity and convey a distinctive and
high-quality visual image.
Policy 71. Encourage landscaping the banks of flood control
channels, canals, roadways and other public improvements
with trees to provide a strong visual element in the
planning area.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy because it
would include ornamental landscaping featuring trees, hedges, shrubs,
groundcovers, and accent plants. The Project’s Conceptual Landscaping Plan
calls for the planting of over 150 trees throughout the site of which
approximately over 60 trees along the perimeter.
Policy 72. Promote the establishment of attractive
entrances into communities, major districts, and
transportation terminals, centers, and corridors within the
planning area.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy as it would
include perimeter landscaping, including along the Project site frontages
with Knudsen Road, Landco Drive, and Street “A”. The landscaping would
be ornamental in nature and include trees, hedges, shrubs, groundcovers,
and accent plants.
Policy 74. Encourage the establishment of design programs
which may include signage, street furniture, landscape,
lighting, pavement treatments, public art, and architectural
design.
Consistent. The Project is designed to meet applicable provisions of the City
of Bakersfield Municipal Code, including standards for design. The Project
includes a healing garden, walkways, and landscaping. The Project would
not impede the City’s authority to establish design programs.
General
Policy 75. Provide adequate land area for the expansion of
existing uses and development of new uses consistent with
the policies of the general plan.
Consistent. The Project would provide two new streets (Street “A” and
Landco Drive) which provide adequate land area for the expansion of
existing uses and development of new uses consistent with policies of the
general plan.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 7
Goals and Policies Project Consistency Discussion
Policy 76. Provide for a mix of land uses which meets the
diverse needs of residents; offers a variety of employment
opportunities; capitalizes, enhances, and expands upon
existing physical and economic assets; and allows for the
capture of regional growth.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy as it would
provide medical service which are not currently available to Veterans in the
City of Bakersfield or surrounding communities. The Project would provide
Medical, Dental, Orthopedic, Optical, Psychiatrically, and other services.
Veterans currently are referred to clinics outside City of Bakersfield. By
providing Veterans with this service would attract employment-generating
businesses to the City of Bakersfield that would expand economic
development, and increase the tax base for the City.
Policy 78. Accommodate new projects which are infill or
expansion of existing urban development.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy because it
proposes infill development of an undeveloped parcel expanding the
existing commercial development area. The site is bounded by existing
commercial uses to the north and the south. The development of new roads
with this project will allow expansion of new development along SR-99.
Policy 79. Provide for an orderly outward expansion of new
"urban" development (any commercial, industrial, and
residential development having a density greater than one
unit per acre) so that it maintains continuity of existing
development, allows for the incremental expansion of
infrastructure and public services, minimizes impacts on
natural environmental resources, and provides a high-
quality environment for living and business.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy because it
proposes the development of an undeveloped parcel with a community
based medical outpatient clinic representing incremental expansion of
infrastructure with the construction of Street “A” and Landco Drive and
completion of Knudsen Road. As evaluated throughout the FEIR, the
Project’s effects on natural environmental resources and people and their
living and working environments have been minimized to the maximum
feasible extents.
Policy 82. Preserve existing significant sound residential
neighborhoods, commercial districts, and industrial areas.
Consistent. Although the Project site does not contain any existing
development to be preserved, there is no component of the Project that
would cause physical disturbances to or otherwise significantly affect the
preservation of existing, sound, neighborhoods, commercial districts, and
industrial areas.
File SPR No. 21-0399 Page 8
Goals and Policies Project Consistency Discussion
Policy 86. Encourage infill of vacant parcels. Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy because it
proposes infill development of an undeveloped parcel with a community
based medical outpatient clinic. The site is bounded by Knudsen Road and a
fire fighter training facility to the west, commercial development to the
north, undeveloped land to the east, and commercial development and a
school to the south.
Policy 89. Encourage new uses and buildings in pedestrian
sensitive areas to incorporate design characteristics which
include:
a) Walls which are aesthetically treated by the use of color,
materials, offset planes, columns, and/or other
architectural details, to provide visual interest to
pedestrians; b) Landscaping, including trees, flowering
shrubs, and ground cover; c) Pedestrian amenities, such as
benches, trash receptacles and signage oriented to the
pedestrian; d) Design amenities related to the street level
such as awnings, arcades, and paseos; e) Visual access to
the interior of buildings; f) Uses other than parking and
traffic circulation between the sidewalk and building.
Consistent. The Project would be consistent with this policy because it
proposes walls which are aesthetically treated by the use of color, materials,
offset planes, and other architectural details, to provide visual interest to
pedestrians; landscaping, including trees, flowering shrubs, and ground
cover; c) pedestrian amenities, such as benches, trash receptacles and
signage oriented to the pedestrian; design amenities related to the street
level such as awnings, arcades, and paseos; visual access to the interior of
buildings; and a healing garden between the sidewalk and building.
Policy 99. Develop a plan to ensure that all parking lots are
40 percent shaded at maturity to help alleviate “heat island
effect.”
Consistent. As shown on the Project’s Conceptual Landscaping Plan, the
passenger vehicle parking lots would have a shade cover with a minimum of
40% is required by Chapter 17.61 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code.
Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BAKERSFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION TO CERTIFY AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT; ADOPT SECTION 15091 FINDINGS AND SECTION 15093 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERTIONS; AND ADOPT MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM, FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A MEDICAL OUTPATIENT FACILITY ON APPROXIMATELY 10 ACRES IN AN M-2
(GENERAL MANUFACTURING) ZONE, LOCATED AT 5512 KNUDSEN DRIVE (SPR NO.21-0399).
WHEREAS, SASD Development Group (LLC) is requesting a Site Plan Review of an
approximately 39,650 square foot medical outpatient facility on approximately 10 acres
in an M-2 (General Manufacturing) zone district, located at the 5512 Knudsen Drive (the
“Project”); and
WHEREAS, an initial study was conducted and it was determined the Project
would have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, an Environmental
Impact Report was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Report was circulated for a public
review period from May 5, 2023 to June 20, 2023 in accordance with CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Secretary of the Planning Commission set Thursday, September 7, 2023 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield,
California, as the time and place for a public hearing before the Planning Commission to consider the proposed Environmental Impact Report as required by the City of
Bakersfield California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Implementation Procedure as of (Resolution 145-2021); and
WHEREAS, during the hearing, the Planning Commission considered all facts,
testimony, and evidence; and
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and certification
of an Environmental Impact Report as set forth in CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines,
and the City of Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures have been duly followed
by City staff ; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15090 the Lead Agency
(City of Bakersfield) shall certify that:
1. The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; and
2. The Final EIR was presented to the decision-making body of the Lead
Agency and that the decision-making body reviewed and considered the
information contained in the Final EIR prior to approving the project; and
3. The final EIR reflects the Lead Agency’s independent judgment and
analysis; and
Page 2 of 3
WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield Development Service Department (1715
Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California) is the Custodian of all documents and other material upon which the environmental determination is based; and
WHEREAS, the facts presented in the staff report, environmental document and
special studies, and evidence received in writing support the following findings:
1. All required public notices have been given. Hearing notices regarding
the Project were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the Project
area and published in the Bakersfield Californian, a local newspaper of
general circulation, 10 days prior to the hearing.
2. The provisions of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of
Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures have been followed. Staff
determined that the proposal is a project under CEQA and an initial study
was completed. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared and
properly noticed for public review.
3. An Environmental Impact Report for the Project is appropriate
environmental document to accompany its approval. In accordance
with CEQA, the Lead Agency prepared an Environmental Impact Report, and mitigation measures were identified and have been incorporated
into Projects.
4. Based on the analysis presented in the Environmental Impact Report, the Project would result in significant and unavoidable adverse impacts to
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. WHEREAS, the “Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program,” attached as Exhibit “A,” is incorporated into the Project; and
WHEREAS, THE “Section 15091 Statement of Facts, Findings, and Mitigation
Measures,” and the “Section 15093 Statement of Overriding Considerations”, attached
as Exhibit “B” are appropriate and incorporated into the Project; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Bakersfield Planning Commission as
follows:
1. The above recitals, incorporated herein, are true and correct.
2. The Environmental Impact Report is hereby certified by the Planning
Commission.
3. The Project is subject to mitigation, monitoring and reporting program
found in Exhibit A for the Project which is incorporated herein.
4. A Statement of Overriding Consideration pertaining to significant and
unavoidable adverse impact related to Greenhouse Gas Emissions is hereby adopted.
Page 3 of 3
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on
September 7, 2023, on a motion by_________________and seconded
by_________________, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
APPROVED
_______________________________________
ZACHARY BASHIRTASH, CHAIR
City of Bakersfield Planning Commission Exhibits (attached):
Exhibit A: Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program Exhibit B: Section 15091 Statement of Facts, Findings and Mitigation Measures
Section 15093 Statement of Overriding Considerations Exhibit C: Location Map
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 1
Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
4.1 Aesthetics
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: The Project site does not
comprise all or part of a scenic vista and
does not contain any visually prominent
scenic features. No unique views to scenic
vistas are visible from the property. The
Project would not substantially change a
scenic view or substantially block or
obscure a scenic vista; therefore, impacts to
scenic vistas would be less than significant.
No mitigation is required.
The City of Bakersfield is required to assure that
implementing development complies with the
assumptions relied upon herein and applicable
regulatory requirements pertaining to the topic of
Aesthetics, which include the following:
AES DF-1: Prior to the approval of building
permits and other permits and approvals that
authorize construction, the City of Bakersfield shall
review the construction documents and plans to
assure the following:
a. All lighting fixtures shall comply with
applicable City of Bakersfield Municipal Code
requirements pertaining to lighting and
illumination of buildings, parking areas, and
signs.
b. All landscaping shall be installed to comply
with all applicable City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code standards pertaining to
perimeter landscaping and minimum shade
cover.
City of Bakersfield
City of Bakersfield
Prior to approval of
building permits.
Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold b: The Project site is not located
within the viewshed of a scenic highway
and, therefore, the Project site does not
contain any scenic resources visible from a
scenic highway.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold c: The Project site is located
within an urbanized area and would not
conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality during
construction or operation.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 2
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Threshold d: Project-related development
would not create substantial light or glare.
Compliance with Bakersfield Municipal
Code requirements for lighting would
ensure less than significant impacts
associated with light and glare affecting day
or nighttime views in the area from on-site
lighting elements.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
4.2 Air Quality
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: Project emissions would not
exceed SJVAPCD thresholds for criteria
pollutants, and as such the Project would be
consistent with the AQMP.
The City of Bakersfield is required to assure that
implementing development complies with the
assumptions relied upon herein and applicable
regulatory requirements pertaining to the topic of Air
Quality, which include the following:
AIR RR-1: In compliance with SJVAPCD Rule
9510 (Indirect Source Review (ISR)), the Project
Applicant or its successor in interest shall submit an
Air Impact Assessment (AIA) application to the
SJVAPCD, which will identify emission reduction
measures for emissions of NOX and PM10. The
performance measures listed below can be met
through any combination of on-site emission
reduction measures or off-site fees.
a. Related to construction-related emissions, the
exhaust emissions for construction equipment
greater than fifty (50) horsepower used or
associated with the project shall be reduced by
the following amounts from the statewide
average as estimated by the ARB: 20% of the
total NOX emissions, and 45% of the total PM10
exhausts emissions. Construction emissions
can be reduced by using less polluting
construction equipment, which can be achieved
by utilizing addon controls, cleaner fuels, or
newer lower emitting equipment.
City of Bakersfield
City of Bakersfield
Prior to construction.
Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 3
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
b. Related to operational emissions, NOX
emissions shall be reduced by 33.3% of the
project’s operational baseline NOX emissions
over a period of ten years as quantified in the
approved AIA. PM10 emissions shall be
reduced by 50% of the project’s operational
baseline PM10 emissions over a period of ten
years as quantified in the approved AIA.
AIR RR-2: The Project is required to be constructed
and operated in compliance with all applicable
SJVAPCD Rules, including but not limited to the
following:
a. SJVAPCD Rule 4601, Architectural Coatings,
which limits VOC emissions from architectural
coatings.
b. SVAPCD Rule 4102, Nuisance, which
prohibits the discharge of air contaminants and
other materials which cause injury, detriment,
nuisance or annoyance to any considerable
number of persons or to the public or which
endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety
of any such person or the public or which cause
or have a natural tendency to cause injury or
damage to business or property.
c. SJVAPCD Rule 4641, Cutback, Slow Cure and
Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance
Operations, which limits VOC emissions by
restricting the application and manufacturing
of certain types of asphalt for paving and
maintenance operations.
Threshold b: Project emissions would not
exceed any of the SJVAPCD significance
thresholds.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold c: The Project would not result
in air quality emissions that would result in
carcinogenic risk or non-cancer risk
exceeding the identified thresholds of
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 4
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
significance of one in 20 million and 1.0,
respectively, and Project cancer and non-
cancer risks would therefore be less than
significant. The Project also would result in
less than significant impacts due to
visibility to nearby areas.
Threshold d: The Project is not considered
a source of objectionable odors or odorous
compounds.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
4.3 Biological Resources
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: The Project contains suitable
habitat for Crotch bumble bee, burrowing
owl, San Joaquin Kit Fox (SJKF), and
American badger. In the event that any of
these species are present on the Project site
at the time Project construction activities
commence, implementation of the Project
would have the potential to significantly
impact the species. The Project also has the
potential to impact nesting migratory birds
protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA) and the CDFW.
BIO MM-1: Surveys to detect burrowing owls shall
be conducted by a professional biologist in
consultation with CDFW no more than 30 days prior
to any ground disturbance activities on the Project
site and can be conducted concurrently with the pre-
activity surveys required per BIO MM-2, BIO MM-
3 and BIO MM-4. Occupied burrows shall not be
disturbed during the nesting season (February 1
through August 31September 15) unless a
professional biologist verifies through non-invasive
methods that either: (1) the birds have not begun egg-
laying and incubation; or (2) that juveniles from the
occupied burrows are foraging independently and are
capable of independent survival. If burrowing owls
are observed using burrows during the surveys, owls
shall be excluded from all active burrows through the
use of exclusion devices placed in occupied burrows
in accordance with CDFW protocols, Staff Report on
Burrowing Owl Mitigation, shall be implemented. In
such case, exclusion devices shall not be placed until
the young have fledged and are no longer dependent
upon the burrow, as determined by a professional
biologist. Specifically, exclusion devices, utilizing
one-way doors, shall be installed in the entrance of
all active burrows. The devices shall be left in the
burrows for at least 48 hours to ensure that all owls
have been excluded from the burrows. Each of the
Professional Biologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
30 days prior to ground
disturbance
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Incorporated
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 5
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
burrows shall then be excavated by hand and refilled
to prevent reoccupation. Exclusion shall continue
until the owls have been successfully excluded from
the site, as determined by a professional biologist.
BIO MM-2: If vegetation clearing or initial ground-
disturbing construction activity occurs during the
migratory bird nesting season (February 1 to August
31September 15) a professional avian biologist shall
conduct a nesting bird survey to identify any active
nests present within the proposed work area. If active
nests are found, initial ground disturbance shall be
postponed or halted within a buffer area, established
by the professional avian biologist, that is suitable to
the particular bird species and location of the nest,
until juveniles have fledged or the nest has been
abandoned, as determined by the biologist. The
construction avoidance area shall be clearly
demarcated in the field with highly visible
construction fencing or flagging, and construction
personnel shall be instructed on the sensitivity of nest
areas. Specific to Swainson’s hawk, if the Project’s
vegetation clearing or initial ground-disturbance
construction activity will commence during the
migratory bird nesting season, the pre-construction
nesting bird survey shall follow survey methodology
developed by the species’ SWHA Technical
Advisory Committee (SWHA TAC 2000). If
Swainson’s hawk is nesting within one-half mile of
the Project site, construction activities shall not
commence unless an ITP is obtained from the CDFW
or until the breeding season has ended or until a
qualified biologist has determined that the birds have
fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or
parental care for survival.
Professional Biologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to ground disturbance
if such disturbance will
occur between February 1
and August 31
BIO MM-3: Prior to vegetation clearing or initial
ground-disturbing construction activities, a
professional biologist shall conduct a survey to
Professional Biologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to ground disturbing
activities
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 6
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
determine the presence of suitable foraging, nesting,
or over-wintering habitat for the Crotch bumblebee
(CBB) within or immediately adjacent to the work
limits. If suitable habitat is present, at least 2 visual
surveys shall be conducted by a professional
biologist between April 1 and May 30 to detect CBB
on or within 100 feet of the work limits prior to
vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance. The
surveys shall target the peak flowering period of
CBB preferred nectar plants and shall be conducted
by a professional biologist who is familiar with CBB
behavior and life history to determine
presence/absence of CBB within one year of
vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance. CBB
individuals shall only be handled for identification if
appropriate authorizations are issued. Surveys shall
be conducted under suitable conditions for
observation of bumble bees. Methods shall be in
accordance agency protocols if issued. If no agency
protocols have been issued at the time of the surveys,
the following survey parameters will be applied: the
professional biologist will walk slow (≤2 mph)
meandering transects covering all portions suitable
habitat within and immediately adjacent to the work
limits containing suitable habitat; surveys will be
conducted no earlier than 2 hours after sunrise and 3
hours before sunset, on mostly sunny days with
temperature between 65° and 90°F; surveys will not
be conducted on cloudy days (≥90% cloud cover) or
under wet or windy conditions (≥8 mph). Surveyors
will search for bumble bees in flight and potential
nest sites.
All potential CBB nests found in small mammal
burrows, under thatched grasses, brush piles or other
suitable ground locations shall be further examined
based on observations of entering or exiting CBB.
Observations of potential CBB nest sites shall be
conducted for no less than 15 minutes per location
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 7
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
where CBB are possibly entering/exiting, or a longer
period as determined by the professional biologist. If
no CBB or their nests are detected, no further
measures will be necessary provided that vegetation
removal/initial ground disturbance occurs prior to
March 1 of the year following the negative survey. If
vegetation/initial ground disturbance does not occur
before March 1 of the year following the negative
survey, the survey shall be repeated following the
above procedure. If CBB is found to be present, BIO
MM-5 shall apply.
BIO MM-4: No more than 30 days prior to
vegetation clearing or initial ground-disturbing
construction activities, pre-construction surveys for
San Joaquin kit fox and American badger shall be
conducted by a professional biologist. The purpose
of the preconstruction survey is to provide current
biological information in order to implement all
avoidance and minimization measures that are
required based on any previous observations of
special-status species and to update observations
shall any new site occupation by special-status
species occur. If any known San Joaquin kit fox dens
are detected, implementation of the most recent
USFWS protocols (Standardized Recommendations
for Protection of the Endangered San Joaquin Kit
Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance (2011))
is required per BIO MM-5 unless protocols are issued
by either CDFW or USFWS that supersede these
protocols. If American badger is present, BIO MM-5
shall apply.
Professional Biologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
30 days prior to ground
disturbance
BIO MM-5: If California or Federal listed threatened
or endangered species are found occupying burrows,
dens, or nests on the Project site or any such species
could be injured or killed due to Project-related
activities, the CDFW and/or USFWS (as appropriate)
shall be contacted for further guidance. Should either
Professional Biologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
If threatened or endangered
species are found
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 8
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
agency determine that incidental take authorization is
required prior to construction, the appropriate
CESA/FESA authorization shall be obtained by the
Project Applicant. CESA and FESA authorizations
shall include measures addressing the respective state
and/or federal listed species and shall include the
following at a minimum:
a) Implementation of standardized biological
resource protective measures included in BIO
MM-4;
b) Biological preconstruction surveys conducted
by qualified biologists approved by each
applicable agency no more than 30 days prior to
conducting work on the Project site;
c) If any known San Joaquin kit fox dens are
detected, implementation of the most recent
USFWS protocols (Standardized
Recommendations for Protection of the
Endangered San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or
During Ground Disturbance (2011)) unless
protocols are issued by either CDFW or
USFWS that supersede these protocols.
d) Destruction of San Joaquin kit fox dens shall
follow the monitoring and excavation
procedures in USFWS (2011).
e) If CBB individuals or nests are detected during
any surveys conducted per BIO MM-3, and the
CBB remains a state candidate species or is
listed under CESA, the Project Applicant shall
obtain take authorization from CDFW prior to
vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance.
A CBB Mortality Reduction Plan shall be
submitted for CDFW approval no less than 30
days prior to initial vegetation removal or
ground disturbance and the Plan shall contain
the following information at a minimum:
o Active CBB nests shall be avoided by 50
feet. If CBB nests cannot be avoided, the
Plan shall include seasonal restrictions for
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 9
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
disturbance within 50 feet of any nest and
procedures for determining when nest
impacts will be minimized.
o Vegetation removal/initial ground
disturbance shall be limited to the period
when impacts to individual CBB that may
be underground will be minimized (e.g.,
after nests have become inactive).
o Prior to vegetation removal/initial ground
disturbance, small mammal burrows that
may harbor overwintering CBB queens
shall be excavated by hand. The Plan shall
include timing and excavation methods. In
addition, the Plan shall include procedures
for handling and disposition of CBB if
encountered during burrow excavations.
o The Plan shall include procedures for
handling and disposition of individual
CBB if they are encountered in the work
limits or on construction equipment
during construction activities.
f) Biological monitoring of initial ground
disturbance during each phase of grading;
g) Provision for compliance reporting to be
provided to each agency as required in respective
take authorizations;
h) Compensation for habitat disturbance acceptable
to CDFW (state listed species) and/or USFWS
(federal listed species) at a ratio of no less than
3:1 for permanent impacts and 1.1:1 for
temporary impacts to listed species habitat. The
only existing approved conservation bank for
impacts to San Joaquin kit fox habitat in Kern
County is the Kern Water Bank Authority
Conservation Bank. Lands used to mitigate for
San Joaquin kit fox must be contiguous with
other potentially occupied lands, provide
suitable foraging and denning habitat for San
Joaquin kit fox, and be located in the southern
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 10
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
San Joaquin Valley portion of Kern County
below 1,500’ in elevation;
i) Compensation land shall be funded for
maintenance, protection, and management
through establishment of a long-term funding
mechanism such as an endowment. The
endowment must be a non-wasting account that
is acceptable to both CDFW and USFWS.
BIO MM-6: All biological monitors working on the
Project site shall be required by their contract to
notify the USFWS and CDFW of the discovery of
any protected species identified on the site other that
nesting birds, Crotch bumblebee, San Joaquin kit fox
and American badger which are addressed by BIO
MM-1, BIO MM-2, BIO MM-3, BIO MM-4, and
BIO MM-5. Any take of protected wildlife shall be
reported immediately to USFWS and CDFW.
Professional Biologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
If threatened or endangered
species are found
BIO MM-7: The Project Applicant shall ensure that
the Project’s construction contractors adhere to the
following best management practices. Construction
contractors shall be required by their contracts to
comply with these best practices and permit periodic
inspection of the construction site by City of
Bakersfield staff or its designee to confirm
compliance. A note that requires compliance is
required on all grading and building plans approved
by the City of Bakersfield.
a. Traffic restraints and signs shall be established
to minimize temporary disturbances during
construction beyond the construction site
boundaries. All construction traffic shall be
restricted to designated access roads and routes,
Project site, storage areas, and staging and
parking areas. Off-road traffic outside
designated Project boundaries shall be
prohibited. A 15 mile-per-hour (24 kilometer-
Professional Biologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
During construction
activities
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 11
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
per-hour) speed limit shall be observed in all
Project construction areas, except as otherwise
posted on county roads and state and federal
highways.
b. All construction personnel involved in ground-
disturbing construction activities shall attend a
worker orientation program. The worker
orientation program shall present measures
required to avoid, minimize, and mitigate
impacts to biological resources and shall
include, at a minimum, the following subjects:
A summary of the Federal Endangered Species
Act (FESA), California Endangered Species
Act (CESA), and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA); biological survey results for the
current construction area; life history
information for the species of concern;
biological resource avoidance, minimization,
and mitigation requirements; consequences for
failure to successfully implement requirements;
and procedures to be followed if dead or injured
wildlife are located during Project activities.
Upon completion of the orientation, employees
shall sign a form stating that they attended the
program and understand all biological resource
mitigation measures. Forms verifying worker
attendance shall be filed at the Project
Applicant’s office and be accessible to the City
of Bakersfield, USFWS and CDFW staff. No
untrained personnel shall be allowed to work
onsite with the exception of delivery trucks that
are only onsite for 1 day or less and are under
the supervision of a trained employee.
c. All equipment storage and parking during
construction activities shall be confined to the
designated construction area or to previously
disturbed offsite areas that are not habitat for
listed species.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 12
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
d. All Project construction activities involving
initial surface disturbance shall occur during
daylight hours.
e. Trenches shall be inspected for entrapped
wildlife each morning prior to the onset of
construction. Before such holes or trenches are
filled, they shall be thoroughly inspected for
entrapped animals. Any wildlife so discovered
shall be allowed to escape voluntarily, without
harassment, before construction activities
resume. A professional biologist may remove
wildlife from a trench, hole or other entrapment
out of harm’s way if the immediate welfare of
the individual is in jeopardy. State or federal
listed species may not be handled. Should any
state or federal listed species become
entrapped, CDFW and USFWS shall be
contacted as appropriate.
f. All food-related trash items such as wrappers,
cans, bottles and food scraps generated by
Project construction activities shall be disposed
of in closed containers and removed at least
once each week from the site. Deliberate
feeding of wildlife shall be prohibited.
g. To prevent harassment of special-status
species, construction personnel shall not be
allowed to have firearms or pets on the Project
site.
h. All equipment and work-related materials shall
be contained in closed containers either in the
work area or on vehicles. Loose items (e.g.
rags, hose, etc.) shall be stored within closed
containers or enclosed in vehicles when on the
work site.
i. All liquids shall be in closed, covered
containers. Any spills of hazardous liquids shall
not be left unattended until clean-up has been
completed.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 13
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
j. Use of rodenticides and herbicides on the
Project shall be prohibited unless approved by
the USFWS and the CDFW. This is necessary
to prevent primary or secondary poisoning of
special-status species using adjacent habitats,
and to avoid the depletion of prey upon which
they depend. If rodent control must be
conducted, zinc phosphide shall be used
because of its proven lower risk to SJKF.
k. Any employee who inadvertently kills or
injures a listed species, or who finds any such
wildlife dead, injured, or entrapped on the
Project site, shall be required to report the
incident immediately to a designated site
representative (e.g., foreman, project manager,
environmental inspector, etc.).
l. In the case of entrapped wildlife that are listed
species, escape ramps or structures shall be
installed immediately, if possible, to allow the
subject wildlife to escape unimpeded.
m. In the case of injured special-status wildlife, the
CDFW shall be notified immediately. During
business hours Monday through Friday, the
phone number is (559) 243-4017. For non-
business hours, report to (800) 952-5400.
Notification shall include the date, time,
location, and circumstances of the incident.
Instructions provided by the CDFW for the care
of the injured animal shall be followed by the
contractor onsite.
n. In the case of dead wildlife that are listed as
threatened or endangered, the USFWS and the
CDFW shall be immediately (within 24 hours)
notified by phone or in person, and shall
document the initial notification in writing
within 2 working days of the findings of any
such wildlife. Notification shall include the
date, time, location, and circumstances of the
incident.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 14
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
o. Prior to commencement of construction, work
areas not adjacent to public streets shall be
clearly marked with fencing, stakes with rope
or cord, or other means of delineating the work
area boundaries.
p. If any suspected federally or State protected
plant or animal species is found to be present
during Project-related construction activities,
occupied areas shall be avoided and the
construction contractor shall be required by its
contract to call a CDFW-approved biologist to
the site to identify the species. If the species is
protected, the qualified biologist shall notify
the USFWS and CDFW of any previously
unreported protected species. Any take of
protected wildlife shall be reported
immediately to USFWS and CDFW.
Threshold b: There is no potential for the
Project to have a substantial adverse effect
on any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or by
the CDFG or USFWS because these
resources do not exist on the Project site.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold c: There is no potential for the
Project to have a substantial adverse effect
on State or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means because these resources do not exist
on the Project site.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold d: There is no potential for the
Project to interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites because the
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 15
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Project site does not function as part of a
wildlife movement corridor.
Threshold e: There is no potential for the
Project to conflict with any local policies or
ordinance protecting biological resources
because no such policies or ordinances are
in place that have applicability to the
Project site.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold f: The Project would not
conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan because not such plans
are in place that have applicability to the
Project site.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
4.4 Cultural Resources
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: The Project would not
impact any known historical resources and
would not cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of any known
historical resources pursuant to California
Code of Regulation, Section 15064.5.
However, there is a remote possibility that
subsurface historical resources may exist
and may be unearthed and impacted during
Project-related construction activities.
Therefore, the Project’s potential impact to
potentially present subsurface historical
resources would be significant prior to
mitigation.
CR MM-1: Prior to construction and as needed
throughout the construction period involving ground-
disturbing construction activities, a construction
worker cultural awareness training program shall be
provided to all new construction workers within one
week of employment at the project site. The training
shall be prepared and conducted by a qualified
cultural resources specialist that meets the U.S.
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification
Standards. Workers attending the training shall sign
a form that shall be kept by the Project Applicant and
made available to the City of Bakersfield upon
request.
Professional Cultural
Resource Specialist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to the issuance of a
grading permit or any
permit that authorizes
ground disturbance
Less-than Significant
Impact with mitigation
incorporated
CR MM-2: If suspected historical or archaeological
resources are encountered during ground disturbance
activities, the construction contractor(s) shall be
required by their contract to immediately cease work
within 100 feet of the resources and have the area
partitioned off until a qualified cultural resource
specialist that meets the U.S. Secretary of the
Construction Contractors
and Professional Cultural
Resource Specialist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
If suspected cultural
resources are encountered
Less-than Significant
Impact with mitigation
incorporated
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 16
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards can
evaluate the resources found and make
recommendations. If the specialist determines that
the discovery represents a potentially significant
cultural resource, additional investigations may be
required. If cultural resources are discovered that
may have relevance to Native Americans, the
specialist or Project Applicant must provide written
notice to the City of Bakersfield, Tejon Indian Tribe,
Native American Heritage Commission, and any
other appropriate individuals, agencies, and/or
groups as determined by the specialist in consultation
with the City of Bakersfield to receive input
regarding treatment and disposition of the resource,
which may include avoidance, testing, and/or
excavation to prevent destruction of the resource
and/or to allow documentation of the resource for
research potential. All reports, correspondence, and
determinations regarding the discovery shall be
submitted to the California Historical Resources
Information System’s Southern San Joaquin Valley
Information Center at California State University
Bakersfield.
Threshold b: The Project would not impact
any known archaeological sites and would
not cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of any known
archaeological resources pursuant to
California Code of Regulation, Section
15064.5. However, there is a possibility
that subsurface archaeological resources
may exist and may be unearthed and
impacted during Project-related
construction activities. Therefore, the
Project’s potential impact to potentially
present subsurface archaeological
resources would be significant prior to
mitigation.
See CR MM-1 above. Professional Archaeologist
retained by Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to the issuance of a
grading permit or any
permit that authorizes
ground disturbance
Less-than Significant
Impact with mitigation
incorporated
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 17
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
See CR MM-2 above. Construction Contractors
and Professional
Archaeologist retained by
Project Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
If suspected cultural
resources are encountered
Less-than Significant
Impact with mitigation
incorporated
Threshold c: The Project site does not
contain a cemetery and no known
cemeteries are located within the
immediate site vicinity. Although the
Project Applicant would be required to
comply with the applicable provisions of
California Health and Safety Code § 7050.5
and California Public Resources Code §
5097 et. seq., the Project’s potential
impacts to buried human remain, if
discovered, s would be significant on a
direct and cumulatively-considerable basis
prior to mitigation.
CR MM-3: During construction, if human remains
are discovered, further ground disturbance shall be
prohibited pursuant to California Health and Safety
Code Section 7050.5. The specific protocol,
guidelines, and channels of communication outlined
by the Native American Heritage Commission, in
accordance with Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5, Public Resources Code 5097.97, and Senate
Bill 447 shall be followed. In the event of the
discovery of human remains, at the direction of the
county coroner, Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5(c) shall guide Native American consultation.
Unless otherwise required by law, the site of any
reburial of Native American human remains or
associated grave goods shall not be disclosed and
shall not be governed by public disclosure
requirements of the California Public Records Act.
The coroner, pursuant to the specific exemption set
forth in California Government Code Section 6254
(r), parties, and Lead Agencies, will be asked to
withhold public disclosure information related to
such reburial, pursuant to the specific exemption set
forth in California Government Code Section 6254
(r).
Construction Contractors County Coroner
If human remains are
discovered
Less-than Significant
Impact with mitigation
incorporated
4.5 Energy
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: The amount of energy and
fuel consumed by construction and
operation of the Project would not be
inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary.
Furthermore, the Project would not cause or
result in the need for additional energy
facilities or energy delivery systems.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 18
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Threshold b: The Project would not
conflict with or obstruct the achievement of
energy conservation goals within the State
of California identified in State and local
plans for renewable energy and energy
efficiency.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A
4.6 Geology and Soils
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: Implementation of the Project
would not expose people or structures to
substantial direct or indirect adverse effects
related to liquefaction or fault rupture. The
Project site is subject to seismic ground
shaking associated with earthquakes;
however, mandatory compliance with local
and State regulatory requirements and
building codes would ensure that the
Project minimizes potential hazards related
to seismic ground shaking to less than
significant levels.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold b: Implementation of the Project
would not result in substantial soil erosion
or loss of topsoil. The Project Applicant
would be required to obtain a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit for construction activities
minimizing impacts to less than significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold c: There is no potential for the
Project’s construction or operation to cause,
or be impacted by, on- or off-site landslides
or lateral spreading. Potential hazards
associated with unstable soils would be
precluded through mandatory adherence to
the recommendations contained in the site-
specific geotechnical report during Project
construction.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold d: The Project site contains soils
with very low susceptibility to expansion;
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 19
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
therefore, the Project would not create
substantial direct or indirect risks to life or
property associated with the presence of
expansive soils. Impacts would be less than
significant.
Threshold e: No septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems are proposed
to be installed on the Project site.
Accordingly, no impact would occur
associated with soil compatibility for
wastewater disposal systems.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold f: The Project would not impact
any known paleontological resource or
unique geological feature. However,
construction activities on the Project site
extending more than six (6) feet in depth
have the potential to unearth and adversely
impact a unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature that may be
buried beneath the ground surface.
GEO MM-1: Prior to construction and as needed
throughout the construction period involving ground-
disturbing construction activities, a construction
worker paleontological resource awareness training
program shall be provided to all new construction
workers within one week of employment at the
project site, if their work will involve ground-
disturbing construction activities greater than six feet
in depth in older alluvium soils. The training shall be
prepared and conducted by a professional
paleontologist. Workers attending the training shall
sign a form that shall be kept by the Project Applicant
and made available to the City of Bakersfield upon
request.
Professional paleontologist
retained by the Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to the issuance of a
grading permit
Less-than-Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated
GEO MM-2: If paleontological resources are
encountered, all work within 100 feet of the resources
shall halt until a qualified paleontologist can be
called to the site to evaluate the resources and make
recommendations. Paleontological resource
materials may include fossils, plant impressions, or
animal tracks that have been preserved in rock. If the
qualified paleontologist determines that the
discovery represents a potentially significant
paleontological resource, additional investigations
and fossil recovery may be required to mitigate
adverse impacts to less than significant levels.
Construction within 100 feet of the resources found
Construction contractors
and professional
paleontologist retained by
the Project Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
If paleontological resources
are discovered
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 20
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
shall not resume until the appropriate mitigation
measures are implemented or the materials are
determined to be to be less than significant by the
paleontologist.
GEO MM-3: Recovered specimens, if any, shall be
properly prepared to a point of identification and
permanent preservation, including screen washing
sediments to recover small invertebrates and
vertebrates, if necessary. Identification and curation
of specimens into a professional, accredited public
museum repository with a commitment to archival
conservation and permanent retrievable storages
shall be required for discoveries of significance as
determined by the paleontologist.
Professional paleontologist
retained by the Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
If paleontological resources
are discovered
GEO MM-4: A final monitoring and mitigation
report of findings and significance shall be prepared,
including lists of all fossils recovered, if any, and
necessary maps and graphics to accurately record the
original location of the specimens. The report shall
be submitted to the City of Bakersfield prior to final
building inspection.
Professional paleontologist
retained by the Project
Applicant
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
If paleontological resources
are discovered and prior to
final building inspection
The City of Bakersfield is required to assure that
implementing development complies with the
assumptions relied upon herein and applicable
regulatory requirements pertaining to the topic of
Geology and Soils.
GEO RR-5: In compliance with City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code Chapter 15.05, California Building
Code, construction of the Project is required to
adhere to the California Building Standards Code and
its requirement to prepare and adhere to site-specific
recommendations contained in a geotechnical report
prepared for the Project site. As such, compliance
with the recommendations provided in the Project’s
geotechnical study prepared by Krazan & Associates,
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 21
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Inc. and dated May 6, 2019 (contained as Technical
Appendix E to this EIR) is required.
GEO RR-6: To address wind erosion, the Project
construction activities are required to comply with
the provisions of Chapter 15 Section 104.12 of the
Bakersfield Municipal Code to ensure that dust
abatement measures comply with the current
standards set for by the San Joaquin Valley Air
Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD).
GEO RR-7: The Project Applicant is required,
pursuant to the State Water Resources Control Board,
to obtain coverage under the State’s General
Construction Storm Water Permit for construction
activities (NPDES permit). Compliance with the
NPDES permit involves the preparation and
implementation of a SWPPP for construction-related
activities. The SWPPP will specify the Best
Management Practices (BMPs) that construction
contractors will be required to implement during
construction activities to ensure that waterborne
pollution – including erosion/sedimentation – is
prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise
appropriately treated prior to surface runoff being
discharged from the subject property. Examples of
BMPs that may be utilized during construction
include, but are not limited to, sandbag barriers,
geotextiles, storm drain inlet protection, sediment
traps, rip rap soil stabilizers, and hydro-seeding.
4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a: The Project would generate
approximately 83.15 net new MT CO2e
annually of GHGs, which is significant on
a cumulatively-considerable basis.
GHG MM-1: Construction contractors shall assure
that construction equipment greater than 150
horsepower achieves or is equivalent to or better than
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/California
Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 4 emissions
Construction contractors
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to issuance of a
grading permit and prior to
issuance of a building
permit, and during
construction
Significant and
Unavoidable Cumulatively-
Considerable Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 22
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
standards, or Tier 3 standards if Tier 4 equipment is
not available at the time of construction. Prior to
grading and building permit issuance, the
construction contractor(s) shall submit an equipment
list to the City’s Development Services Director
confirming that the equipment used is compliant.
GHG MM-2: Construction contractors shall assure
that hand tools, forklifts, and pressure washers used
for construction are electric-powered and shall
designate an area of the construction site where
electric-powered construction vehicles and
equipment can charge. The City of Bakersfield shall
verify the location of the designated charging area in
association with grading and building permit
issuance.
Construction contractors
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to issuance of a
grading permit and prior to
issuance of a building
permit, and during
construction
GHG MM-3: Project construction contractors shall
tune and maintain all construction equipment in
accordance with the equipment manufacturer’s
recommended maintenance schedule and
specifications. Maintenance records for all pieces of
equipment shall be kept on-site for the duration of
construction activities and shall be made available for
periodic inspection by City of Bakersfield or its
designee.
GHG MM-4: The building roof shall, upon the
approval of a design modification by the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), be outfitted
with a solar photovoltaic system of the maximum
size feasible to provide power to the building and
given the constraints of applicable Building Code
requirements, clearance requirements around roof-
mounted equipment, PG&E interconnection
regulations, and other code compliance
requirements. Should the VA not approve a design
modification to add a rooftop PV system, the building
Construction contractors
City of Bakersfield or
its designee
Prior to issuance of a
grading permit and prior to
issuance of a building
permit, and during
construction
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 23
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
may be constructed and operated without a PV
system.
The City of Bakersfield is required to assure that
implementing development complies with the
assumptions relied upon herein and applicable
regulatory requirements pertaining to the topic of
Greenhouse Gas Emissions, which include the
following:
GHG RR-4: The building shall be constructed in
compliance with Title 24 of the Uniform Building
Code to minimize total consumption of energy. The
City of Bakersfield shall confirm Title 24 compliance
prior to the issuance of building permits.
Threshold b: The Project would be
consistent with the CARB 2020 Scoping
Plan Update, which was prepared to
address the GHG reduction requirements
set forth by SB 32. Because the Project
would be consistent with the Scoping Plan
Update, the Project also would not interfere
with the State’s ability to achieve the GHG
reduction requirements of SB 32. Thus, the
Project would not conflict with an
applicable plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases, and impacts
would be less than significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Summary of Impacts
Threshold a and b: During Project
construction and operation, mandatory
compliance to federal, State, and local
regulations would ensure that the Project
would not create a significant hazard to the
environment due to routine transport, use,
disposal, or upset of hazardous materials.
No mitigation is required.
The City of Bakersfield is required to assure that
implementing development complies with the
assumptions relied upon herein and applicable
regulatory requirements pertaining to the topic of
Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 24
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
HAZ RR-1: Construction contractors shall be
required to comply with all applicable federal, State,
and local laws and regulations regarding the
transport, use, and storage of hazardous construction‐
related materials, including but not limited
requirements imposed by the EPA, DTSC, and the
Central Valley RWQCB.
HAZ RR-2: If the VA handles hazardous materials
as defined in Section 25500 of California Health and
Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.95, it shall be
required to comply with California’s Hazardous
Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory
Law, which requires immediate reporting to the Kern
County Fire Department and the State Office of
Emergency Services regarding any release or
threatened release of a hazardous material, regardless
of the amount handled by the business, and to prepare
a Hazardous Materials Business Emergency Plan
(HMBEP).
HAZ RR-3: Activities involving the collection and
disposal of medical wastes are required to comply
with California’s Medical Waste Management Act of
2017.
HAZ RR-4: All transporters of medical wastes
must be registered hazardous waste haulers with a
valid Hazardous Waste Transporter Registration
through the California Department of Toxic
Substances Control (DTSC).
HAZ RR-5: The proposed Project would be
required to comply with the Kern County Operational
Area Hazardous Materials Area Plan to ensure
compliance with established procedures, rules, and
regulations for emergency responses in the event of a
hazardous materials incident.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 25
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Threshold c: The Project Site is located
within one-quarter mile of four schools;
however, the Project would be required to
comply with applicable federal, State, and
local regulations related to the handling,
storage, use, and transport of hazardous
materials and biomedical wastes to ensure
that students are not exposed to substantial
hazardous emissions or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold d: The Project site is not located
on any list of hazardous materials sites
complied pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold e: The Project is consistent with
the requirements of the Meadow Field
ALUCP. As such, the Project would not
result in an airport safety hazard for people
residing or working in the Project area.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold f: The Project site does not
contain any emergency facilities nor does it
serve as an emergency evacuation route.
During construction and long-term
operation, adequate emergency vehicle
access is required to be provided.
Accordingly, implementation of the Project
would not impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold g: The Project site is not located
in close proximity to wildlands or areas
with high fire hazards. Thus, the Project
would not expose people or structures to a
significant wildfire risk.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Threshold a and e: The Project would be
required to comply with a Stormwater
The City of Bakersfield is required to assure that
implementing development complies with the
N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 26
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for
construction-related activities, including
grading. Best management practices
(BMPs) would be implemented as part of
the SWPPP to ensure that all potential
pollutants of concern are prevented,
minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately
treated. Under long-term conditions, the
Project’s proposed water quality/retention
basin would capture all first-flush flows
generated on the Project site and infiltrate
the captured water into the groundwater
basin. Furthermore, the Project site is not
tributary to any impaired water bodies
listed on the CWA Section 303(d) list. As
such, the Project has no potential to cause
or contribute to surface water quality
impacts downstream. Accordingly, the
Project would not violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements
or otherwise substantially degrade surface
or groundwater quality, and would not
conflict with or obstruct implementation of
a water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan. Impacts
would be less than significant.
assumptions relied upon herein and applicable
regulatory requirements pertaining to the topic of
Hydrology and Water Quality, which include the
following:
HYD RR-1: The Project Applicant and construction
contractor are required to comply with the
requirements of a NPDES permit, and SWPPP.
Compliance with the NPDES permit and the SWPPP
require an effective combination of erosion control
and sediment control measures (i.e., Best
Management Practices) to reduce or eliminate
discharges to surface water from storm water and
non-stormwater discharges during construction
activities.
HYD RR-2: During construction, Project
construction contractors are required to comply with
the requirements of the 2022 California Green
Building Standards Code (CalGreen, Part 11 of Title
24, California Code of Regulations) or any
subsequent version of the Title 24 in effect at the time
of building permit issuance, which requires among
other items the installation of low water-use features.
Threshold b: The Project would be
provided potable water by the Cal Water.
The Cal Water UWMP for the Bakersfield
District forecasts 70,314 acre‐feet of
reliable supply for a normal year, single‐
year drought, and multi‐year drought in 5‐
year increments through 2045. Similarly,
the Kern River Groundwater Sustainability
Plan estimates groundwater safe yield
combined with other sources of supply and
supplemental supply projects which
combined fully mitigate potential future
overdraft. With respect to groundwater
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 27
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
recharge, runoff generated on site would be
conveyed to the proposed on-site water
quality/retention basin, where the runoff
would infiltrate into the on-site soils.
Accordingly, the Project would not
substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the project
may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin, and impacts
would be less than significant.
Threshold c: For the reasons discussed
under the analysis of Thresholds a. and e.,
Project impacts to surface and groundwater
quality would be less than significant. The
Project has no potential to increase the rate
or amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or off-
site, and the Project would not create runoff
water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems. Additionally, the Project site and
surrounding areas are not subject to flood
hazards. Accordingly, the Project would
not substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area in a manner which
would result in flooding on or off site,
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
drainage systems, or impede or redirect
flood flows. Impacts would be less than
significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold d: The Project site is not located
within or near any flood hazard areas, is not
subject to tsunami hazards, and there are no
enclosed or semi-enclosed bodies of water
in proximity to the Project site capable of
producing seiches that could affect the
Project site. Accordingly, Project would not
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 28
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
result in any impacts related to the risk of
release of pollutants due to Project
inundation from floods, tsunamis, or
seiches.
4.10 Land Use and Planning
Threshold a: The Project has no potential
to physically divide an established
community.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A No Impact
Threshold b: The Project is a compatible
land use within the Service Industrial (SI)
General Plan designation and is consistent
with the General Manufacturing (M-2)
zoning classification, which allows all uses
permitted in the CO zone, including
medical clinics. The Project does not
conflict with General Plan goals and
policies and the general intent of the
General Plan and has no potential to result
in significant land use and planning
conflicts in the context of compliance with
applicable environmental plans, policies,
and regulations beyond those identified in
other Subsections of this EIR.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
4.11 Noise
Threshold a: Noise levels generated by the
Project’s short-term construction would be
less than significant at the nearest sensitive
receptor. On-site operational noise levels
would be less than significant at the nearest
sensitive receptors. In addition, Project-
related traffic noise increases would be
below the identified thresholds of
significance under Existing and long-range
traffic conditions. Accordingly, the Project
would not generate substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the project in excess
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 29
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies, and impacts
would be less than significant.
Threshold b: The Project’s construction
and operational activities would not result
in a perceptible groundborne vibration or
noise that exceed thresholds of
significance.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold c: The Project site is located
within the Airport Influence Area of
Meadows Field Airport but is located well
outside of the 60 dBA CNEL noise level
contour boundary of the airport. The
Project medical outpatient commercial land
use is considered normally acceptable with
exterior noise levels of 55-60 dBA CNEL.
Therefore, the Project would not expose
people residing or working in the Project
area to excessive noise levels related to a
private airstrip, airport land use plan or
public airport our public use airport.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
4.12 Transportation
Threshold a: The Project is consistent with
the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan,
including the goals and policies of the
General Plan Circulation Element, and also
would be required to comply with all
applicable requirements of the City’s
Municipal Code. As there are no other
applicable programs, plans, ordinances, or
policies addressing the circulation system,
Project impacts due to a conflict with a
program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system would be
less than significant.
No mitigation is required.
The City of Bakersfield is required to assure that
implementing development complies with the
assumptions relied upon herein and applicable
regulatory requirements pertaining to the topic of
Transportation, which include the following
regulatory requirements.
TRN RR-1: Prior to issuance of building permits,
the Project Applicant shall pay appropriate Traffic
Impact Fee (TIF) fees at the rates then in effect in
accordance with Chapter 15.84 of the City’s
Municipal Code.
N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
Lead Agency: City of Bakersfield SCH No. 2022080337
Page 30
THRESHOLD
MITIGATION MEASURES (MM)
DESIGN FEATURES (DF) AND
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
(RR)
RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
PARTY
IMPLEMENTATION
STAGE
LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE
TRN RR-2: All off-site roadway improvements
shall comply with applicable provisions of City of
Bakersfield Municipal Code Title 10 (Vehicles and
Traffic) and Chapter 13.12 (Development
Improvements Standards and Specifications).
Threshold b: The Project VMT is less than
the threshold of significance and impacts
would be less than significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold c: With mandatory compliance
with City design standards, including
standards contained within the City’s
Municipal Code, the Project would not
substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature. Additionally, due
to the short distance between the Project site
and the on- and off-ramps at SR 99, the
Project would not result in increased
hazards to transportation as a result of
incompatible uses, and impacts due to
incompatible uses would be less than
significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
Threshold d: The provision of adequate
emergency access is required during both
construction and long-term operation, in
accordance with City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code and Fire Department
requirements. Accordingly, the Project
would have adequate emergency access,
and impacts would be less than significant.
No mitigation is required. N/A N/A N/A Less-than-Significant
Impact
4.13 Tribal Cultural Resources
Threshold a: The Project site does not
contain any known tribal cultural resources.
Nonetheless, Project construction activities
have the potential to unearth and adversely
impact tribal cultural resources that may be
buried or masked at the Project site.
Mitigation Measures CR MM-1 through CR MM-3
shall apply.
Less-than-Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Regarding the Environmental Effects of the Approval of the:
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient
Clinic
State Clearinghouse No. 2022080337
Lead Agency
City of Bakersfield
Development Services Department
1715 Chester Avenue, 2nd Floor
Bakersfield, CA 93301
CEQA Consultant
T&B Planning, Inc.
3200 El Camino Real, Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92602
Project Applicant
SASD Development Group, LLC
4895 Pacific Highway
San Diego, CA 92110
August 8, 2023
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
i
Table of Contents
Section Page
1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Summary ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 City of Bakersfield Actions Covered By the EIR .................................................................... 2
1.3 Environmental Review and Public Participation ..................................................................... 2
2.0 Environmental Impacts and Findings ................................................................................. 5
2.1 General Findings ...................................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Impacts Identified in the Initial Study (IS) or EIR as No Impact or Less than Significant Not
Requiring Mitigation ............................................................................................................... 6
2.3 Impacts Identified in the EIR as Potentially Significant that Have been Mitigated to a Level
of Less than Significant ......................................................................................................... 31
2.4 Impacts Identified in the EIR as being Significant and Unavoidable .................................... 44
2.5 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Which Would Be Caused by the Proposed
Project Should It Be Implemented ......................................................................................... 46
2.6 Growth-Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Project ................................................................ 47
2.7 Project Alternatives ............................................................................................................... 48
3.0 Statement of Overriding Considerations .......................................................................... 53
4.0 Additional Facts on Record .............................................................................................. 54
4.1 Adoption of a Monitoring Plan for Mitigation Measures ...................................................... 54
4.2 Custodian of Record .............................................................................................................. 55
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
1
1.0 Introduction
The Planning Commission of the City of Bakersfield (the “Planning Commission”) in approving the
Veterans Affairs (VA) Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project (the “Project”), makes the
Findings presented herein. The Findings are based upon the entire record before the City Council, as
described in Subsection 1.3 below, including the Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) prepared for
the Project on behalf of the City of Bakersfield (the “City”) acting as Lead Agency under the California
Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).
Hereinafter, the Notice of Preparation, Notice of Availability, Draft EIR, Technical Studies, Final EIR
(containing responses to public comments on the Draft EIR and textual revisions to the Draft EIR),
and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program will be referred to collectively herein as the
“EIR” unless otherwise specified.
1.1 Project Summary
1.1.1 Site Location
The 10.05 gross-acre Project site is located within the northern portion of the City of Bakersfield in
Kern County, California. Kern County is bound by Kings, Tulare, and Inyo counties to the north; San
Bernardino County to the east; Los Angeles and Ventura counties to the south; and Santa Barbara and
San Luis Obispo counties to the west. At the local scale, the Project site is located west of State Route
99 (SR-99) and southeast of the intersection of Olive Drive and Knudsen Drive. The Project site
includes Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 365-020-28 and -30.
1.1.2 Project Description
The Project includes the development of 10.05 gross acres with a medical outpatient facility which
would be operated by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Features include a 39,648 s.f. single-
story building (net usable 30,100 safe), a covered drop-off area, bicycle racks, a covered ambulatory
pick-up area, an outdoor physical therapy area, an outdoor dining area, and an elevated loading dock.
Landscaping is proposed along the perimeter of the Project site, around the building, and throughout
the parking areas. In addition, a healing garden is proposed on the east side of the building, which
would include a garden path and benches.
The site development action for the Project entails a Site Plan Review No. 21-0399. Site Plan Review
No. 21-0399 would permit the development of a medical outpatient facility on 10.05 gross acres, which
would be operated by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs.
1.1.3 Project Objectives
The fundamental purpose and goal of the VA Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project is to develop
a modern, state-of-the-art community-based outpatient medical facility to serve U.S. military veterans
in the Bakersfield area. The Project would achieve its underlying purpose and goal through the
following objectives.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
2
A. Establish a new VA community-based outpatient medical clinic in Bakersfield on a site that
has been vetted by and selected by the U.S. Government within the following delineated area:
• North: East on Olive Drive, southeast on Roberts Lane, southeast on Manor Street and
then northeast on Panorama Drive to Fairfax Road.
• East: South on Fairfax Road to E. Brundage Lane.
• South: West on E. Brundage Lane, continuing on Brundage Lane to the intersection of
Brundage Lane and SR-99.
• West: The intersection of Gosford Road and White Lane, north to where Gosford Road
becomes Coffee Road, north to Olive Drive.
B. Establish a new VA community-based outpatient medical clinic that has a minimum size of
30,100 net usable square feet and meets the VA’s physical design requirements.
C. Provide high quality patient care for veterans in a safe, advanced-care medical facility
throughout the Bakersfield area and surrounding communities.
D. Enable veterans to receive health care at a medical facility that is easily accessible and nearby
a State highway system to reduce out of area health trips.
E. Develop a modern, state of the art VA medical clinic that is capable of providing a diverse
range of consolidated outpatient services, such as audiology, mental health, telehealth,
ambulatory care, an eye clinic, physical and occupational therapy, prosthetics, dental services,
a lab and pharmacy, and ancillary and diagnostic services, avoiding the need for veterans to
travel out of the Bakersfield area for these services.
F. Create a comprehensively planned, advanced-care VA medical clinic that provides community
vitality, economic growth, and employment opportunities in the City of Bakersfield.
G. Construct a VA medical clinic with maximum operational efficiency to optimize health care
outcomes and create a space for increased patient and staff satisfaction.
1.2 City of Bakersfield Actions Covered By the EIR
The City of Bakersfield has primary approval responsibility for the proposed Project. As such, the City
serves as the Lead Agency for the EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15050. The City’s
Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to consider the Final EIR and Site Plan No. 21-0399.
The Planning Commission will direct the Development Services Director whether to approve Site Plan
No. 21-0399. Other agencies also may use the EIR as part of their decision-making processes
concerning the proposed Project.
1.3 Environmental Review and Public Participation
The City conducted an extensive environmental review of the Project to ensure that the City’s decision
makers and the public are fully informed about potential significant environmental effects of the
Project; to identify ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced; to prevent
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
3
significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in the Project through the use
of mitigation measures and project design requirements which have been found to be feasible; and to
disclose to the public the reasons why the City has initiated the Project in the manner chosen in light
of the significant environmental effects which have been identified in the EIR. In order to do this, the
City, acting as lead agency under CEQA, undertook the following:
o Prepared an Initial Study and a Notice of Preparation, which were used as the basis for the
determination that an EIR should be prepared for the Project. The Notice of Preparation
identified the environmental issues to be analyzed in detail in the Project’s EIR as: Aesthetics,
Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology & Soils, Greenhouse
Gas Emissions, Hazards & Hazardous Materials, Hydrology & Water Quality, Land Use &
Planning, Noise, Transportation, and Tribal Cultural Resources;
o The Initial Study and Notice of Preparation were sent to the Governor’s Office of Planning and
Research (the “State Clearinghouse”), Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies, and other
interested parties on August 11, 2022, for a 30-day review period;
o Submitted a Notice of Completion, Notice of Availability, and Draft EIR to the State
Clearinghouse on May 5, 2023;
o Mailed a Notice of Availability to all Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies, County Clerk,
other interested parties, and organizations and individuals who had previously requested the
Notice on May 4, 2023 to inform recipients that the Draft EIR was available for a 45-day
review period beginning on May 5, 2023, and ending on June 19, 2023;
o Mailed the Notice of Availability to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the Project
Site on May 4, 2023;
o Made the Notice of Availability and Draft EIR available to the public on the City’s website;
o Published the Notice of Availability in the Bakersfield Californian, which is the newspaper of
general circulation in the area affected by the Project, on May 5, 2023;
o Published a Notice of Time Extension of Public Review and Comment Period to the State
Clearinghouse and on the City’s website on June 14, 2023, extending the public review and
comment period to June 20, 2023 as a courtesy to allow the public additional time to submit
public comments as June 19, 2023 was Juneteenth, although the City was open on June 19,
2023.
o Prepared responses to comments on the Draft EIR received during the 45-day comment period
on the Draft EIR, which have been included in the Final EIR;
o Published a notice on August 28, 2023, in the Bakersfield Californian, the newspaper of general
circulation in the area affected by the Project, that the Planning Commission would hold a
public hearing on September 7, 2023, to consider the Project and EIR for recommendation to
the City Council;
o Sent notice of the Planning Commission’s hearing to all organizations and individuals who had
previously requested notification of anything having to do with the Project on August 28, 2023;
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
4
o Sent written responses to comments to all public agencies, organizations, and individuals who
submitted comments the Draft EIR on August 28, 2023 (four comment letters were received);
All of the documents identified above and all of the documents which are required to be part of the
administrative record pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e), which includes all of the
documents relating to the previous review and approval of the Project in 2020 and 2021, when a
mitigated negative declaration (“MND”) was prepared, are on file with the City of Bakersfield
Development Services Department, 1715 Chester Avenue, 2nd Floor, Bakersfield, CA 93301.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
5
2.0 Environmental Impacts and Findings
2.1 General Findings
2.1.1 Independent Judgment Finding
Finding: The EIR for the Project reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The EIR was prepared by T&B Planning, Inc., an independent,
professional consulting firm hired by the City and working under the supervision and direction of the
City’s Planning Division’s staff. The Planning Commission, as the City’s final decision-making body
for the Project, received and reviewed the EIR and the comments, written and oral, provided by public
agencies and members of the public prior to certifying that the EIR complied with CEQA. The
professional qualifications and reputation of the EIR Consultant, the supervision and direction of the
EIR Consultant by City staff and its consultants, the thorough and independent review of the Draft EIR
and Final EIR, including comments and responses, by City staff, and the review and careful
consideration of the Final EIR by the Planning Commission, including comments and responses, all
conclusively show that the Final EIR is the product of and reflects the independent judgment and
analysis of the City as the Lead Agency, and of the Planning Commission as the decision-making body
for the Project.
2.1.2 Finding of the Absence of any Need to Recirculate the EIR
Finding: The Final EIR does not add significant new information to the Draft EIR that would
require recirculation of the Draft EIR.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The Planning Commission recognizes that the Final EIR
incorporates information obtained and produced after the Draft EIR was completed and that the Final
EIR contains additions, clarifications, and minor modifications to the Draft EIR. The Planning
Commission has reviewed and considered the Final EIR and all of the information contained in it and
has determined that the new information added to the Final EIR does not involve a new significant
environmental impact, a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact, nor a feasible
mitigation measure or an alternative considerably different from others previously analyzed that the
Project Applicant declined to adopt and that would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts
of the Project. No information provided to the Planning Commission indicates that the Draft EIR was
inadequate or conclusory or that the public was deprived of a meaningful opportunity to review and
comment on the Draft EIR.
2.1.3 General Finding on Mitigation Measures
It is the City’s intent to adopt and implement all mitigation measures identified in the EIR which are
applicable to the Project, which the City finds to consist of all feasible measures that reduce the
Project’s significant impacts. If a measure has, through error, been omitted from the Conditions of
Approval or from these Findings, and that measure is not specifically reflected in these Findings, that
measure shall be deemed to be adopted pursuant to this paragraph. In addition, unless specifically
stated to the contrary in these Findings, all Conditions of Approval repeating or rewording mitigation
measures recommended in the EIR are intended to be substantially similar to the mitigation measures
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
6
recommended in the EIR and are found to be equally effective in avoiding or lessening the identified
environmental impact. In each instance, the Conditions of Approval contain the final wording for the
mitigation measures.
2.2 Impacts Identified in the Initial Study (IS) or EIR as No Impact or Less than Significant
Not Requiring Mitigation
Consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21002.1 and Section 15128 of the CEQA Guidelines,
the EIR focused its analysis on potentially significant impacts, and limited discussion of other impacts
for which it can be seen with certainty there is no potential for significant adverse environmental
impacts. CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 does not require specific findings to address environmental
effects that an EIR identifies as “no impact” or a “less than significant” impact. Nevertheless, the City
Council hereby finds that the Project would have either no impact or a less than significant impact
under the following resource areas:
2.2.1 Aesthetics
A. Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (Threshold “a”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site is not located in an area designated as scenic in
the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, is not within the City’s Hillside Development Combining
Zone (Bakersfield Municipal Code Chapter 17.66), and is not within a City-designated Class I or II
Visual Resource Area, Viewshed, or Slope Protection Area. In the far distance on clear days, views are
possible from the Project site and its surrounding area to the Tehachapi Mountains to the south, the
Coast Range to the west, and the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the northeast. Because the existing visual
setting of the Project site does not contain significant visual resources, the construction process has no
potential to obscure a scenic view. At a maximum height of ±31 feet, the proposed building would not
be so tall as to obstruct public views or otherwise substantially detract from public views of the
surrounding topographic features and landforms. In some instances, the landscaping and building
constructed on the Project site may intermittently obstruct mountain views in the distance a from the
far northeast corner of the San Lauren Elementary School yard and from roads as drivers travel
immediately adjacent to the Project site along Knudsen Drive. Single views toward the mountains in
the distance across the Project site from these roads typically are of short duration due to travel speeds,
and viewer sensitivity is considered low-to-moderate because as the passing landscape becomes
familiar, vehicle occupants, pedestrians, and bicyclists using roadway corridors typically focus their
attention on the roadway, roadway signs, and surrounding traffic. As the site exists currently, views
are not available to a front-facing viewer on these roads, and the only potential for the Project to
intermittently obscure a long-distance view would be if a viewer were to look to their side across the
Project site. From the school yard, only viewers in the northeastern-most corner of the yard would
experience partial view obstruction to distant landforms when looking across Knudsen Drive and
across the Project site to the northeast on clear days when distant views are possible; this does not
constitute a substantial adverse effect since distant views would not be obscured by the Project from
any other part of the school site or school yard. As such, the Project would not have a substantial
adverse effect on scenic mountain views. (DEIR, pp. 4.1-11 to 4.1-12)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
7
Although the Project would result in less than significant impacts relating to aesthetics, the
Project will be required to implement the following design feature to further minimize the Project’s
less than significant effect.
AES DF-1. Prior to the approval of building permits and other permits and approvals that
authorize construction, the City of Bakersfield shall review the construction documents and
plans to assure the following:
a. All lighting fixtures shall comply with applicable City of Bakersfield Municipal Code
Requirements pertaining to lighting and illumination of buildings, parking areas, and
signs.
b. All landscaping shall be installed to comply with all applicable City of Bakersfield
Municipal Code standards pertaining to perimeter landscaping and minimum shade cover.
B. Would the Project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees,
rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: There are no designated or eligible State scenic highways within
the Project site’s immediate vicinity. Additionally, there are no rock outcroppings or known historic
buildings in the vicinity of the Project site. Thus, implementation of the Project would result in no
impacts associated with views from a State scenic highway. (DEIR, p. 4.1-13)
C. In non-urbanized areas, would the Project substantially degrade the existing visual character
or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are
experienced from publicly accessible vantage point.) If the project is in an urbanized area,
would the Project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic
quality? (Threshold “c”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site is located within the boundaries of the Census-
defined Bakersfield urbanized area. Because the Project site is located in an area that meets the U.S.
Census Bureau’s definition of an “urbanized area” and is planned for urban uses by the City’s General
Plan, the evaluation in the DEIR focuses on the Project’s compatibility with or potential conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. (DEIR, p. 4.1-13)
The Project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic
quality during construction or operation. The Project has no reasonable possibility of conflicting with
the City’s lighting standards contained in Municipal Code Sections 17.71.010 through 17.71.080,
Outdoor Lighting, standards for the illumination of signs contained in Municipal Code Section
17.60.060, and standards for the illumination of parking lots contained in Municipal Code Section
17.58.060. The Project has no reasonable possibility of conflicting with the City’s Municipal Code
standards pertaining to visual blight, codified in Municipal Code Sections 8.27.010 (Property
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
8
Maintenance), 8.80.010 (Abatement of Public Nuisances), and 12.40.050 (Inspection and Removal [of
Trees]). In reviewing the application materials submitted by the Project Applicant for Site Plan Review
No. 21-0399, the materials appear to meet all applicable Municipal Code requirements including but
not limited to the following items pertaining to visual screening. As indicated on the Site Plan Review’s
Conceptual Landscape Plan (refer to Figure 3-4 in Section 3.0, Project Description), landscaping that
will obscure views is proposed along the perimeter of the Project site. Additionally, a low masonry
wall with green screen above is proposed around the loading dock and trash enclosure area on the
southeast facing side of the building. Also, parapets are proposed along the western side of the
building’s roofline to provide visual screening of rooftop equipment. The Project site is located west
of SR-99 and Landco Drive, south of Olive Drive, east of Knudsen Drive, north of Hageman Road,
and north of proposed Street ‘A’. The developer of the Project would install landscaping along the
entire perimeter of the Project site during construction of the Project including along the street
frontages with Knudsen Drive, Landco Drive, and proposed Street A. As part of construction of the
Project, Landco Drive would be extended along the east side of the Project site and Street A would be
constructed along the south side of the Project site to connect Knudsen Drive and Landco Drive. On
Knudsen Drive to the west, a left turn lane would be added to southbound Knudsen Drive to eastbound
Street A, an additional northbound thru lane would be added, and a deceleration/acceleration lane for
vehicles making a right turn in or right turn out of the main Project site entrance. The northbound
deceleration/acceleration lane would merge into the northbound thru lane at the north end of the Project
site. These proposed improvements are consistent with the MBGP Circulation Element. lighting
would be installed by the driveway entrances to the facility and throughout the interior parking area.
In addition, street lights would be installed along the Project site’s frontages with Knudsen Drive,
Landco Drive, and proposed Street A. (DEIR, p. 4.1-13 to 4.1-17)
D. Would the Project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Threshold “d”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Mandatory compliance with Municipal Code Sections 17.71.010
to 17.71.080, “Outdoor Lighting,” would ensure that the Project’s pole-mounted and building-mounted
light fixtures would not introduce any design features that would cause artificial light or glare to extents
that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. As part of City review and approval of
Site Plan Review No. 21-0399 and the review of implementing plans for construction in any area of
the Project site, City staff is obligated to assure that the lighting plans meet all applicable Municipal
Code standards. Based on the Project’s lighting plans and mandatory requirement to comply with the
Municipal Code, lighting impacts would be less than significant. With respect to glare, the Project’s
building materials would consist of a combination of vertical pattern metal panel system, fiber cement
siding system, and masonry walls. The paint colors proposed for the Project would comply with City
development standards including Title 15 (buildings and construction) as well as California Code of
Regulations Title 24 (building code). The building incorporates some glass elements in the form of
window systems with sun shade louvers or awnings and a glass curtain wall with a metal panel canopy.
While window glazing has a potential to result in minor glare effects, such effects would not adversely
affect daytime views experienced from surrounding properties, including motorists along adjacent
roadways, because the glass proposed for the Project would comply with City development standards
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
9
including Title 15 (buildings and construction) as well as California Code of Regulations Title 24
(building code). Also, the Project’s conceptual landscaping plan calls for the perimeter of the site to be
landscaped, inclusive of perimeter trees consisting of shade trees and screen trees which would filter
light from the surrounding street system and limit the ability for vehicle headlights on public streets to
directly shine onto any glass building elements. The glass elements in the building designs also would
be softened by landscaping proposed along the building perimeter, thereby precluding any substantial
sun glare. Last, the public and staff vehicle parking areas would be substantially shaded by tree
canopies, as shown on the Project’s conceptual landscaping plan. Thus, glare impacts from proposed
building elements and parking surfaces would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.1-17 to 4.1-18)
2.2.2 Air Quality
A. Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
(Threshold “a”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Air quality impacts from proposed projects within the City of
Bakersfield are controlled through policies and provisions of the SJVAPCD and the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan. In order to demonstrate that a proposed project would not cause further air
quality degradation in either the SJVAPCD’s plan to improve air quality within the air basin or the
federal requirements to meet certain air quality compliance goals, each project should also demonstrate
consistency with the SJVAPCD’s adopted AQAPs for O3 and PM10. The Project would not exceed
the SJVAPCD established SPAL limits and, therefore has no possibility of exceeding criteria pollutant
thresholds. Accordingly, the Project, would be consistent with the AQMP. Impacts would be less than
significant. (DEIR, p. 4.2-19)
Although the Project would result in less than significant impacts relating to air quality, the
Project will be required to implement the following regulatory requirements to further minimize the
Project’s less than significant effect.
AIR RR-1. In compliance with SJVAPCD Rule 9510 (Indirect Source Review (ISR)), the
Project Applicant or its successor in interest shall submit an Air Impact Assessment (AIA)
application to the SJVAPCD, which will identify emission reduction measures for emissions of
NOX and PM10. The performance measures listed below can be met through any combination
of on-site emission reduction measures or off-site fees.
a) Related to construction-related emissions, the exhaust emissions for construction
equipment greater than fifty (50) horsepower used or associated with the project shall
be reduced by the following amounts from the statewide average as estimated by the
ARB: 20% of the total NOX emissions, and 45% of the total PM10 exhausts emissions.
Construction emissions can be reduced by using less polluting construction equipment,
which can be achieved by utilizing addon controls, cleaner fuels, or newer lower
emitting equipment.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
10
b) Related to operational emissions, NOX emissions shall be reduced by 33.3% of the
project’s operational baseline NOX emissions over a period of ten years as quantified
in the approved AIA. PM10 emissions shall be reduced by 50% of the project’s
operational baseline PM10 emissions over a period of ten years as quantified in the
approved AIA. (DEIR, p. 4.2-26)
AIR-RR-2. The Project is required to be constructed and operated in compliance with all
applicable SJVAPCD Rules, including but not limited to the following:
a) SJVAPCD Rule 4601, Architectural Coatings, which limits VOC emissions from
architectural coatings.
b) SVAPCD Rule 4102, Nuisance, which prohibits the discharge of air contaminants and
other materials which cause injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any
considerable number of persons or to the public or which endanger the comfort,
repose, health or safety of any such person or the public or which cause or have a
natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property.
c) SJVAPCD Rule 4641, Cutback, Slow Cure and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and
Maintenance Operations, which limits VOC emissions by restricting the application
and manufacturing of certain types of asphalt for paving and maintenance operations.
B. Would the Project result in a cumulatively-considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant
for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient
air quality standard? (Threshold “b” for Construction Emissions)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Following SJVAPCD required mitigation measures for all
projects, the construction emission estimates included watering the exposed area three times per day
and reducing vehicle speed to less than 15 miles per hour. Based on these anticipated activity levels,
the Project construction activities would not exceed construction thresholds. As mentioned in the
DEIR, the below PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds of significance consider risks associated with Valley
Fever, specifically including the potential presence of spores within the soil on the Project site and the
Project’s disturbance thereof. Furthermore, Project construction activities do not exacerbate the risk of
Valley Fever any more than natural wind conditions, and it is a natural condition not caused by the
Project. Impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.2-20)
The long-term operational emissions associated with the proposed Project would be far less
than SJVAPCD significance threshold levels and would, therefore, not pose a significant impact to
criteria air pollutants. This finding is consistent with the SPAL screening thresholds. Impacts would
be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.2-21)
The analysis presented in the DEIR is conservative and does not take into account the fact that
once the Project begins operation, the existing VA clinic at 1801 Westwind Drive would permanently
close, and therefore, all of its operational air quality emissions would cease. Based on the fact that the
existing facility is similar in size to the proposed Project (31,400 s.f.), on a net basis, the Project’s
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
11
already very low air quality emissions would result in virtually no impact. Furthermore, as stated in
public testimony from veterans living in the City, unlike the proposed Project, the existing facility does
not offer the full range of services that veterans need, and thus, many veterans drive to the City to Los
Angeles for certain services. Once the Project is in operation, this long-distance driving for services
would no longer be necessary, and all the resulting air quality impacts from vehicle travel over 100
miles to Los Angeles would cease. Thus, the Project would arguably reduce total operational air
quality emissions on a net basis. (DEIR, p. 4.2-21)
The SJVAPCD has screening levels for requiring an Ambient Air Quality Analysis (AAQA)
and recommends that an AAQA be performed for all criteria pollutants when emissions of any criteria
pollutant resulting from project construction or operational activities exceed the 100 pounds per day
screening level, after compliance with Rule 9510 requirements and implementation of all enforceable
mitigation measures. Average daily emissions for Project construction and operational activities would
not exceed 100 pounds per day. An AAQA is, therefore, not required for the Project. (DEIR, pp. 4.2-
21 to 4.2-22)
C. Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
(Threshold “c”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The proposed Project has the potential to expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations due to emissions of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs)
and visibility. (DEIR, p. 4.2-22)
SJVAPCD has set the level of significance for carcinogenic risk at twenty in one million, which
is understood as the possibility of causing twenty additional cancer cases in a population of one million
people. The level of significance for chronic non-cancer risk is a hazard index of 1.0. at the maximum
exposed individual resident and worker (MEIR and MEIW, respectively) do not exceed the
significance levels of 20 in one million (20E-06) and 1.0, respectively for the Project. The maximum
predicted cancer risk for the proposed Project is 0.752 in a million (0.752E-07). The maximum chronic
non-cancer hazard index for the proposed Project is 0.00672. Since the MEIR and MEIW remained far
below the significance threshold for cancer and chronic risk, the Project would not have an adverse
effect to any of the surrounding communities. Potential risk to the population attributable to emissions
of HAPs from the proposed Project would be less than significant (DEIR, pp. 4.2-23 to 4.2-24)
It should be noted that visibility impact analyses are not usually conducted for area sources.
The recommended analysis methodology was initially intended for stationary sources of emissions
which were subject to the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements in 40 CFR Part
60. Since the Project’s emissions are predicted to be significantly less than the PSD threshold levels,
an impact at either the Dome Land Wilderness or the Sequoia National Park Areas (the two nearest
Class 1 areas to the Project) is extremely unlikely. Therefore, based on the Project’s predicted
emissions, the Project is not expected to have any adverse impact to visibility at any Class 1 Area.
Impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.2-24)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
12
D. Would the Project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting
a substantial number of people? (Threshold “d”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project entails a proposed VA community-based outpatient
medical clinic located near commercial, public facility and residential uses. Expected uses of the
Project are not known to be a source of nuisance odors, and are not identified in the SJVAPCD’s
GAMAQI as such. Accordingly, the Project is not anticipated to have substantial odor impacts. Impacts
would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.2-24)
2.2.3 Biological Resources
A. Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Because no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community
is present on the Project site, implementation of the proposed Project would not have a substantial
adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or by the CDFW or USFWS. (DEIR, p. 4.3-9)
B. Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means? (Threshold “c”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Because no wetlands or potential waters of the U.S., or potential
waters of the State are present on the Project site; the proposed Project has no potential to have a
substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means. (DEIR, p. 4.3-9)
C. Would the Project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impeded the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (Threshold “d”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The vicinity surrounding the Project site is highly disturbed by
urban development, and therefore, the Project site does not serve as part of a wildlife corridor. Because
the Project site is a relatively small parcel of disturbed non-native ruderal species habitat, the site is
not conducive to serve as, interfere substantially with or impede established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or native wildlife nursery sites. (DEIR, p. 4.3-9)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
13
D. Would the Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (Threshold “e”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: There are no biological resources on the Project site which are
separately protected by local policies. (DEIR, p. 4.3-9)
E. Would the Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan? (Threshold “f”)
Finding: No impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site is not located within the boundaries of any adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional,
or state habitat conservation plan. (DEIR, p. 4.3-9)
2.2.4 Energy
A. Would the Project result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or
operation? (Threshold “a”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Construction activities associated with the Project would require
electricity use to power the construction equipment. The electricity use during construction would vary
during different phases of construction: the majority of construction equipment during grading would
be gas-powered or diesel-powered, while later construction phases would require electricity-powered
equipment such as nail guns for interior construction and sprayers for architectural coatings. Overall,
the use of electricity would be temporary in nature and would fluctuate according to the phase of
construction. Additionally, it is anticipated that the majority of electric-powered construction
equipment would be hand tools (e.g., power drills, table saws, compressors) and lighting, which would
result in minimal electricity usage during construction activities. Therefore, Project-related
construction activities would not result in wasteful or unnecessary electricity demands and impacts
would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.5-6 to 4.5-7)
It is not anticipated that construction equipment used for the proposed Project would be
powered by natural gas and no natural gas demand is anticipated during construction. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant with respect to natural gas usage. (DEIR, p. 4.5-7)
The use of energy resources by vehicles and equipment would fluctuate according to the phase
of construction. To limit wasteful and unnecessary energy consumption, the construction contractors
are anticipated to minimize non-essential idling of construction equipment during construction in
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
14
accordance with Section 2449 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9.
In addition, electrical energy would be available for use during construction from existing power lines
and connection, which could minimize or avoid the use of generators that are less efficient than tying
into existing PG&E infrastructure. Furthermore, construction trips would not result in unnecessary use
of energy since the Project site is located close to SR-99 which would provide a direct route from
various areas of the region. Moreover, all construction-equipment would cease upon completion of
Project construction. Thus, impacts related to transportation energy use during construction would be
temporary and would not require expanded energy supplies or the construction of new infrastructure.
Overall, it is expected that construction fuel used during the proposed Project’s construction would not
be any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than similar development projects. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant with respect to transportation energy. (DEIR, p. 4.5-7)
Operation of the Project would create additional demands for electricity and natural gas
compared to existing conditions and would result also in transportation energy use. However, because
the opening of the Project would cause the existing VA clinic in Bakersfield on Westwind Drive to
close, any net increase usage of energy (if an increase at all) would be very small. Operational use of
energy would include heating, cooling, and ventilation of the buildings water heating; operation of
electrical systems, use of on-site equipment and appliances; and indoor, outdoor, perimeter, and
parking lot lighting. It is expected that, on a gross basis without netting out the energy being consumed
by the existing VA clinic, the Project would consume 371,171 kilowatt hours per year (kWh/yr) in
electricity and 462,137 kilo-British thermal units (kBTU/yr) in natural gas. Because the Project would
be built to meet the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, the Project would not result in wasteful or
unnecessary natural gas demands. (DEIR, pp. 4.5-7 to 4.5-8) It is likely that the Project would be more
efficient than the existing facility, given that it will be built subject to modern standards and
regulations, which are much more protective of the environment than those that existed when the
existing clinic was built over 30 years ago.
The Project also would consume transportation energy during operations from the use of motor
vehicles traveling to and from the site. However, because the opening of the Project would cause the
existing VA clinic in Bakersfield to close, any net increase usage of transportation energy (if an
increase at all) would be very small. Further, because the proposed outpatient client would offer
services that are not currently offered at the existing VA clinic in Bakersfield, and veterans are traveling
to Los Angeles and other further VA facilities to receive these medical services under existing
conditions, it is reasonable to expect that transportation energy consumption would substantially
decrease with implementation of the Project. The Project is also within an urbanized area with nearby
amenities and public transit options. Additionally, the Project would include bicycle racks and storage
for employee use. These features and aspects of the Project would contribute in minimizing VMT and
transportation-related fuel usage. Overall, it is expected that operation-related fuel usage associated
with the proposed project would not be any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than similar
development projects. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with respect to operation-
related fuel usage or transportation energy. (DEIR, p. 4.5-8)
B. Would the Project conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency? (Threshold “b”)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
15
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: At this time, the City has not adopted local programs or policies
that support energy efficiency and/or sustainability that would apply to the Project. The Project does
not have any additional ability to incorporate sources of renewable energy (e.g., solar panels) other
than what has already been included in the proposal, because pursuant to the relevant contract with the
U.S. federal government, the Project must be built to the detailed specifications approved in the already
completed federal procurement process and cannot be modified, unless approved by the VA. However,
the Project’s specifications approved by the VA require a number of energy efficiency measures to be
included in the Project. The Project’s mobile equipment and vehicles would comply with federal, state,
and regional requirements where applicable. As applicable, the Project would utilize the best available
equipment to improve diesel fuel efficiency, and equipment that uses energy would implement modern
design and technology to maximize efficiency improvements. The Project would not conflict with or
obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency and would ensure impacts
would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.5-8 to 4.5-9)
2.2.5 Geology and Soils
A. Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury or death involving (Threshold “a”):
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault?
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
iv. Landslides?
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: There are no known active or potentially active faults on or
trending toward the Project site and the Project site is not located within a mapped Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zone. Because there are no known faults located on or trending towards the Project
site, the Project would not directly or indirectly expose people or structures to substantial adverse
effects related to ground rupture. (DEIR, p. 4.6-7)
The Project site is located in a seismically active area of southern California and is expected to
experience moderate to severe ground shaking during the lifetime of the Project. This risk is not
considered substantially different than that of other similar properties in the southern California area.
As a mandatory condition of Project approval, the Project Applicant would be required to construct
the proposed VA community-based outpatient medical clinic building and other site features in
accordance with the California Building Code, which provides standards that must be met to safeguard
life or limb, health, property, and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction,
quality of materials, use and occupancy, location, and maintenance of all buildings and structures, and
have been specifically tailored for California earthquake conditions. In addition, the California
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
16
Building Code requires development projects to prepare geologic engineering reports to identify site-
specific geologic and seismic conditions and implement the site-specific recommendations contained
therein to preclude adverse effects involving unstable soils and strong seismic ground-shaking,
including, but not limited to, recommendations related to ground stabilization, selection of appropriate
foundation type and depths, and selection of appropriate structural systems. The Project Applicant
retained a professional geotechnical firm, Krazan & Associates, to prepare a geotechnical report for
the Project site. This geotechnical report complies with the requirements of the California Building
Code. With mandatory compliance with building code standards and site-specific design and
construction measures, implementation of the Project would not directly or indirectly expose people
or structures to substantial adverse effects, including loss, injury or death, involving seismic ground
shaking. (DEIR, pp. 4.6-7 to 4.6-8)
Due to the observed soil characteristics on the Project site and the lack of shallow groundwater
beneath the site, liquefaction potential is considered to be low. Regardless, the City of Bakersfield
would require the Project site be developed in accordance with the latest applicable seismic safety
guidelines, including the standard requirements of the California Building Code to minimize potential
liquefaction hazards. In addition, the Project would be required by the City of Bakersfield to comply
with the grading and construction recommendations contained within the geotechnical report for the
Project site to further reduce the risk of seismic-related ground failure due to liquefaction. Therefore,
implementation of the Project would not directly or indirectly expose people or structures to substantial
hazards associated with seismic-related ground failure and/or liquefaction hazards. (DEIR, p. 4.6-8)
The Project site is relatively flat, as is the immediately surrounding area. There are no hillsides
or steep slopes on the Project site or in the immediate vicinity of the site. Mandatory compliance with
the recommendations contained within the Project site’s geotechnical report would ensure that the
Project is engineered and constructed to maximize stability and preclude safety hazards to on-site and
abutting off-site areas. With mandatory compliance with the recommendations contained within the
geotechnical report, the Project would not be exposed to substantial landslide risks, and
implementation of the Project would not pose a substantial direct or indirect landslide risk to
surrounding properties. (DEIR, p. 4.6-8)
B. Would the Project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Pursuant to the requirements of the State Water Resources Control
Board, the Project Applicant would be required to obtain coverage under the State’s General
Construction Storm Water Permit for construction activities, a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The NPDES permit is required for all development projects that
include construction activities, such as clearing, grading, and/or excavation, that disturb at least one
(1) acre of total land area. Compliance with the NPDES permit involves the preparation and
implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction-related
activities. The SWPPP will specify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that the Project Applicant
will be required to implement during construction activities to ensure that waterborne pollution –
including erosion/sedimentation – is prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately treated
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
17
prior to surface runoff being discharged from the subject property. Examples of BMPs that may be
utilized during construction include, but are not limited to, sandbag barriers, geotextiles, storm drain
inlet protection, sediment traps, rip rap soil stabilizers, and hydro-seeding. Mandatory compliance with
the SWPPP would ensure that the Project’s implementation does not violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements during construction activities. (DEIR, pp. 4.6-8 to 4.6-9)
Upon Project build-out, the Project site would be covered by buildings, landscaping, and
impervious surfaces. Stormwater runoff from the Project site would be captured, treated to reduce
waterborne pollutants (including sediment), and be filtered into the ground by the proposed on-site
retention basins. Accordingly, the amount of erosion that occurs on the Project site would be minimized
upon buildout of the Project and would be reduced relative to existing conditions. Because the Project
would be required to utilize erosion and sediment control measures to preclude substantial, long-term
soil erosion and loss of topsoil, impacts related to post-development soil erosion would be less than
significant. (DEIR, p. 4.6-9)
C. Would the Project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? (Threshold “c”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site is relatively flat and no substantial natural or man-
made slopes are located on or adjacent to the Project site. Because the Project would be engineered for
long-term stability and constructed in accordance with the site-specific recommendations contained
within the Project’s geotechnical report, impacts associated with landslide hazards would be less than
significant. (DEIR, p. 4.6-9)
The geotechnical report prepared for the Project site indicated that the settlement potential can
be attenuated through the excavation and recompaction of fill soils. The City will condition
implementing development to comply with the site-specific ground preparation and construction
recommendations contained in the Project’s geotechnical report. With mandatory compliance with the
Project’s geotechnical report, impacts related to soil shrinkage/subsidence and collapse would be less
than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.6-9)
Lateral spreading is primarily associated with liquefaction hazards. Based on the Project site’s
lack of shallow groundwater, liquefaction on the Project site is considered to be low. Thus, the potential
for lateral spreading is low. Accordingly, impacts associated with lateral spreading would be less than
significant. (DEIR, p. 4.6-11)
D. Would the Project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? (Threshold
“d”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
18
Facts in Support of Finding: R-Value tests performed by Krazan on the Project site’s soils
determined that the expansion pressure of the soils was nil. As such, the Project would not be located
on expansive soil and would not create substantial risks to life or property; therefore, impacts would
be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.6-11)
E. Would the Project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
waste water? (Threshold “e”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Wastewater service for the Project site is provided by North of the
River Sanitation District and no septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems are proposed
as part of the Project. (DEIR, p. 4.6-11)
2.2.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
A. Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Implementation of the Project, which has very minimal GHG
emissions below virtually all numerical thresholds of significance relied on by lead agencies, would
not conflict with the State’s ability to achieve the Statewide GHG reduction mandates and would be
consistent with applicable policies and plans related to GHG emissions reductions. Implementation of
the Project would not actively interfere with any future federally-, State-, or locally-mandated retrofit
obligations (such as requirements to use new technologies such as diesel particulate filters, emissions
upgrades to a higher tier equipment, etc.) enacted or promulgated to legally require development
projects to assist in meeting State-adopted GHG emissions reduction targets, including those
established under EO S-3-05, EO B-30-15, or SB 32. It also bears noting that it is very likely the
Project will be much more efficient and result in less emissions than the existing VA clinic, given it
will be constructed and operated subject to modern regulations that are much more protective of the
environment than those that existed when the existing VA clinic was constructed over 30 years ago.
For these reasons, the Project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted
for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. (DEIR, p. 4.7-20)
2.2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
A. Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the
routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? (Threshold “a”)
B. Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
19
Facts in Support of Finding: Based on the Phase I ESA conducted by Krazan, the Project site
contains no evidence of RECs, CRECs, HRECs or other environmental issues. No significant hazard
to the public or the environment would occur through a reasonable risk of upset or the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials associated with these features that are part of the existing site
condition. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.8-8)
Heavy equipment (e.g., dozers, excavators, tractors) would be operated on the Project site
during construction. This heavy equipment likely would be fueled and maintained by petroleum‐based
substances such as diesel fuel, gasoline, oil, and hydraulic fluid, which are considered hazardous if
improperly stored or handled. In addition, materials such as paints, adhesives, solvents, and other
substances typically used in building construction would be located on the Project site during
construction. Improper use, storage, or transportation of hazardous materials can result in accidental
releases or spills, potentially posing health risks to workers, the public, and the environment. This is a
standard risk on all construction sites, and there would be no greater risk for improper handling,
transportation, or spills associated with the Project than would occur on any other similar construction
site. Construction contractors would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local
laws and regulations regarding the transport, use, and storage of hazardous construction‐related
materials, including but not limited requirements imposed by the EPA, DTSC, and the Central Valley
RWQCB. With mandatory compliance with applicable hazardous materials regulations, the Project’s
short-term construction activities would not create significant hazard to the public or the environment
through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Therefore, impacts would be less
than significant and no mitigation is required. (DEIR, pp. 4.8-8 to 4.8-9)
The proposed building would operate as a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) outpatient
medical facility, and hazardous materials and biohazardous materials and medical wastes are expected
to be present as part of the facility’s operation. The VA would be required to comply with California’s
Medical Waste Management Act of 2017. All transporters of biomedical waste also must hold a
Hazardous Waste Transporter Registration through the California DTSC. All biomedical wastes and
hazardous materials used or stored at the proposed clinic would require the VA to comply with all
applicable federal, State, and local regulations to ensure proper use, storage, use, emission, and disposal
of hazardous substances (as described above). With mandatory regulatory compliance, the Project
would not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use,
storage, emission, or disposal of biomedical wastes or hazardous materials, nor would the Project
increase the potential for accident conditions which could result in the release of hazardous materials
into the environment. With mandatory compliance with applicable hazardous materials regulations,
during long-term operation, the Project would not create significant hazard to the public or the
environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of biomedical wastes or hazardous materials.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. (DEIR, p. 4.8-9)
To ensure that Project construction activities do not inadvertently release hazardous materials
into the environment, the following regulatory requirements are required.
HAZ RR-1. Construction contractors shall be required to comply with all applicable federal,
State, and local laws and regulations regarding the transport, use, and storage of hazardous
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
20
construction‐related materials, including but not limited requirements imposed by the EPA,
DTSC, and the Central Valley RWQCB.
HAZ RR-2. If the VA handles hazardous materials as defined in Section 25500 of California
Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.95, it shall be required to comply with
California’s Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Law, which requires
immediate reporting to the Kern County Fire Department and the State Office of Emergency
Services regarding any release or threatened release of a hazardous material, regardless of
the amount handled by the business, and to prepare a Hazardous Materials Business
Emergency Plan (HMBEP).
HAZ RR-3. Activities involving the collection and disposal of medical wastes are required to
comply with California’s Medical Waste Management Act of 2017.
HAZ RR-4. All transporters of medical wastes must be registered hazardous waste haulers
with a valid Hazardous Waste Transporter Registration through the California Department of
Toxic Substances Control (DTSC).
HAZ RR-5. The proposed Project would be required to comply with the Kern County
Operational Area Hazardous Materials Area Plan to ensure compliance with established
procedures, rules, and regulations for emergency responses in the event of a hazardous
materials incident.
C. Would the Project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
(Threshold “c”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The San Lauren Elementary School is located within one-quarter
mile of the Project site. Accordingly, the Project has the potential to emit hazardous emissions or
handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, and/or wastes within one-quarter mile of
an existing or proposed school. The use of and transport of hazardous substances or materials to-and-
from the Project site during construction and long-term operational activities would be required to
comply with applicable federal, State, and local regulations that would preclude substantial public
safety hazards. Accordingly, there would be no potential for existing or proposed schools to be exposed
to substantial safety hazards associated with emission, handling of, or the routine transport of
hazardous substances or materials to-and-from the Project site and impacts would be less than
significant. Additionally, as disclosed in DEIR Subsection 4.2, the Project’s toxic air contaminant
emissions (and their associated health risks) would be less than significant, and in fact, far below
applicable thresholds of significance. (DEIR, p. 4.8-10)
D. Would the Project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Threshold “d”)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
21
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Because the Project site is not located on any list of hazardous
materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, the Project has no potential
to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment associated with a site which is included
on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. (DEIR,
p. 4.8-10)
E. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project result in
a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
(Threshold “e”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site is located 0.9-mile southwest of the Meadow
Fields Airport. According to Kern County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP), the Project
site is located inside of Compatibility Zone “C” for the Meadows Field Airport; however, the Project
site is located outside of the noise contours of the airport. The Project land use is consistent with
permitted uses inside of Compatibility Zone “C” of the ALUCP, and therefore, there is no potential for
implementation of the Project to result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or
working in the Project area. Impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.8-10)
Regarding other airport related risks to occupants, the Meadows Field land use exhibit allows
commercial, industrial, and low-density residential uses within the Project site. The ALUCP also
allows the construction of medical clinics and single-story offices within APLUCP Zones B and C,
subject to a density limitation of 150 persons/acre. As designed, the approximately 10.05-gross acre
VA community-based outpatient clinic development would not exceed the allowable density.
Therefore, the Project would not result in additional safety hazards beyond the baseline condition of
the range of land use activities the APLUCP allows including adjacent commercial uses. Thus, the
Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area. (DEIR, p. 4.8-11)
F. Would the Project impair implementation of, or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Threshold “f”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site does not contain any emergency facilities nor
does it serve as an emergency evacuation route. During construction and long-term operation, the
proposed Project would be required to maintain adequate emergency access for emergency vehicles.
As part of the Project design, a dedicated ambulatory pick-up area is proposed. As part of the City’s
discretionary review process, the City of Bakersfield reviewed the Project’s application materials to
ensure that appropriate emergency ingress and egress would be available to-and-from the Project site
and that the Project would not substantially impede emergency response times in the local area.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
22
Additionally, the proposed Project would be required to comply with the Kern County Operational
Area Hazardous Materials Area Plan to ensure compliance with established procedures, rules, and
regulations for emergency responses in the event of a hazardous materials incident. Accordingly,
implementation of the Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan. (DEIR, p. 4.8-11)
G. Would the Project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? (Threshold “g”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site is not located within a very high fire hazard
severity zone. Neither Cal Fire nor the City of Bakersfield identify the Project site within an area
susceptible to wildland fires and the Project site and surrounding areas generally consist of commercial,
industrial, and/or residential uses, which are generally not associated with wildland fire hazards.
Because the Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death
involving wildland fires, no impact would occur. (DEIR, p. 4.8-11)
2.2.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
A. Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? (Threshold “a”)
B. Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management plan? (Threshold “e”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: Pursuant to the requirements of the Central Valley RWQCB and
Chapter 15.05 (California Building Code) of the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code, the Project
Applicant would be required to obtain a NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit for construction
activities. The NPDES permit is required for all projects that include construction activities, such as
clearing, soil stockpiling, grading, and/or excavation that disturb at least one acre of total land area. In
addition, the Project would be required to comply with the WQCP. Compliance with the NPDES permit
and the WQCP involves the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP for construction-related
activities, including grading. The SWPPP would specify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that
the Project would be required to implement during construction activities to ensure that all potential
pollutants of concern are prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately treated prior to being
discharged from the subject property. Mandatory compliance with the SWPPP would ensure that the
Project does not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during
construction activities. (DEIR, pp. 4.9-7 to 4.9-8)
All runoff generated on the Project site would be treated by the proposed on-site water
quality/retention basin, which would provide water quality treatment of storm water prior to infiltration
of the runoff into the on-site soils. Additionally, the City of Bakersfield along with the County of Kern
adopted a Storm Water Management Plan. The Commercial and Industrial Element of the Storm Water
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
23
Management Plan establishes measures to control potential pollutants from ongoing operations in that
category of land use. Accordingly, during operation of the proposed Project, the City's program for
"best conventional pollutant control technology" would be in effect. This includes site inspections by
City personnel and enforcement of vegetation, sediment, and debris that may accumulate in
retention/detention basins. With implementation of the proposed water quality/retention basin and
compliance with the Storm Water Management Plan, long-term operation of the Project would not
violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade
surface or groundwater quality, and the Project would not conflict with the Storm Water Management
Plan requirements. (DEIR, p. 4.9-9)
Although the Project would result in less than significant impacts relating to hydrology and
water quality, the Project will be required to implement the following regulatory requirements to
further minimize the Project’s less than significant effect.
HYD RR-1. The Project Applicant and construction contractor are required to comply with
the requirements of a NPDES permit and SWPPP. Compliance with the NPDES permit and
the SWPPP require an effective combination of erosion control and sediment control measures
(i.e., Best Management Practices) to reduce or eliminate discharges to surface water from
storm water and non-stormwater discharges during construction activities.
HYD RR-2. During construction, Project construction contractors are required to comply with
the requirements of the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (CalGreen, Part 11
of Title 24, California Code of Regulations) or any subsequent version of the Title 24 in effect
at the time of building permit issuance, which requires among other items the installation of
low water-use features.
C. Would the Project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: No operating groundwater wells occur on the Project site under
existing conditions, and no wells are proposed as part of the Project. As such, the Project would not
result in the direct long-term extraction of groundwater supplies. (DEIR, p. 4.9-9)
The Project would be served with potable water by California Water Service (Cal Water). The
Project site is located in the Bakersfield District North Garden water system. The Bakersfield District
derives its water supply from a combination of groundwater, untreated local surface water purchased
from the City of Bakersfield, and treated local surface and imported water purchased from Kern County
Water Agency (KCWA) Improvement District 4 (ID-4). The combination of groundwater and
purchased imported water supplies is expected to be sufficient to support the Bakersfield District’s
projected water demand through 2045. (DEIR, p. 4.9-9) The Project does not have a significant water
demand.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
24
The Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) for the Bakersfield District forecasts 70,314
acre‐feet of reliable supply for a normal year, single‐year drought, and multi‐year drought in 5‐year
increments through 2045. Similarly, the KRGSA Groundwater Sustainability Plan estimates
groundwater safe yield combined with other sources of supply and supplemental supply projects which
combined “fully mitigate potential future overdraft”. due to the actions to be undertaken pursuant to
the Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Plan, as well as the fact that the Bakersfield District would
have adequate groundwater to serve the Project, the Project’s water demand would not substantially
decrease groundwater supplies. The Project’s relatively low water demand would not stress or
otherwise significantly impact the Cal Water’s water sources, whether local groundwater or purchased
water that comes from the Colorado River or the State Water Project. Further, the end result of the
Project will be to essentially move the existing VA clinic, and thus it does not result in any truly new
water demand. (DEIR, pp. 4.9-9 to 4.9-10)
With implementation of the proposed Project, runoff generated on the site would be conveyed
to the proposed on-site water quality/retention basin, where the runoff would infiltrate into the on-site
soils. Because runoff from the Project site would be captured to allow infiltration into on-site soils,
the Project would not interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, and impacts would be less
than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.9-10)
D. Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would (Threshold “c”):
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site?
ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on or off site?
iii. Create or contribute runoff which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows?
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: With implementation of the Project’s water quality/retention basin
and implementation of a SWPPP during construction activities, Project impacts to water quality,
including erosion and siltation, during both construction and long-term operation would be less than
significant. (DEIR, p. 4.9-10)
All runoff generated on the Project site would be conveyed to the proposed on-site water
quality/retention basin, where the runoff would be allowed to infiltrate into on-site soils. There would
be no runoff from the Project site following site development. As such, the Project has no potential to
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-
site, and the Project would not create runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems. (DEIR, p. 4.9-10)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
25
FEMA FIRM Map Number 06029C1825F, which includes the Project site, indicates that the
Project area is in “Zone X”, an area of minimal flooding. Accordingly, the Project has no potential to
impede or redirect flood flows, and no impact would occur. (DEIR, p. 4.9-10)
E. Would the Project result in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants
due to project inundation? (Threshold “d”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: FEMA FIRM Map Number 06029C1825F, which includes the
Project site, indicates that the Project area is in “Zone X”. Accordingly, the Project site would not be
subject to inundation during peak storm events, and the Project therefore would not risk the release of
pollutants due to flood hazards, and no impact would occur. (DEIR, p. 4.9-11)
There are no enclosed or semi-enclosed bodies of water in proximity to the Project site other
than the Beardsley Canal, located approximately 0.3-mile northeast, which would not be subject to
seiches because it is not a large water body. Accordingly, the Project would not risk the release of
pollutants due to inundation from seiches, and no impact would occur. (DEIR, p. 4.9-11)
The Project site is located approximately 74 miles northeast of the Pacific Ocean. As such, the
Project site is not subject to inundation due to tsunamis. Accordingly, the Project would not risk the
release of pollutants due to inundation from seiches, and no impact would occur. (DEIR, p. 4.9-11)
2.2.9 Land Use and Planning
A. Would the Project physically divide an established community? (Threshold “a”)
Finding: No Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: There is no reasonable possibility of the Project dividing an
established community. Existing commercial development borders the Project site to the north, vacant
land and SR 99 occur to the east, existing commercial development is located to the south of the Project
site, and Knudsen Drive and existing public facility uses are located to the west of the Project site.
Residential communities are located to the west of the Project site at a distance. The residential
communities are separated from the Project site by Knudsen Drive and existing public facility land
uses. Because the Project site is already physically separated from developed residential properties
under existing conditions, development of the Project site as proposed would not physically divide any
established residential community. (DEIR, p. 4.10-5)
The Project would connect to the existing roadway system and other infrastructure and would
not involve the reconfiguration of streets that could have the potential to alter the surrounding pattern
of future development and affect the connectivity of existing residential uses located to the west of the
Project site and west of Knudsen Drive. (DEIR, p. 4.10-5)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
26
B. Would the Project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land
use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The proposed Project would not conflict with the AQAPs
SJVAPCD thresholds of significance. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with the
applicable air quality plan, and impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.10-5)
The Project would not conflict with the adopted goals of the 2022 Regional Transportation
Plan. The proposed Project is a consistent use within the Service Industrial (SI) General Plan land use
designation, and that designation and the Project are consistent with the City’s General Manufacturing
(M-2) zoning classification, which under the City’s Euclidean pyramid zoning structure, allows all
uses permitted in the C-O zone, including medical clinics. Because the proposed Project is a permitted
land use, is consistent with existing zoning, and has been designed in accordance with all applicable
regulations, the proposed Project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to conflict
with the MBGP. The Project would not conflict with any of the specific objectives, polices, or actions
in the General Plan’s Elements that were adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect. (DEIR, p. 4.10-8 to 4.10-9)
2.2.10 Noise
A. Would the Project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (Threshold “a”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The facts presented below evaluate three components of the
Project that would generate noise – the construction process, on-site operational activities, and off-site
traffic.
Construction Noise
Project-related construction noise would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature
and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction. The number and mix of
construction equipment are expected to occur in the following stages: site preparation, grading,
building construction, paving, architectural coating. (DEIR, p. 4.11-15)
Project-related construction noise levels are expected to range from 48.0 to 60.7 dBA Leq, at
the nearby receiver locations. To evaluate whether the proposed Project would generate potentially
significant short-term noise levels at the nearest receiver locations, a construction-related daytime
noise level threshold of 80 dBA Leq is used as a reasonable threshold to assess the daytime construction
noise level impacts. The nearest receiver locations would satisfy the reasonable daytime 80 dBA Leq
significance threshold during Project construction activities. Therefore, the noise impacts due to
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
27
Project construction noise are considered less than significant at all receiver locations. (DEIR, p. 4.11-
15)
On-Site Operational Noise
The on-site Project-related noise sources are expected to include but not be limited to: outdoor
loading dock activity, roof-top air conditioning units, emergency generator, trash enclosure activity,
parking lot vehicle movements, and truck movements. (DEIR, p. 4.11-16)
The operational noise levels associated with the proposed Project would satisfy the City of
Bakersfield daytime and nighttime exterior noise level standards. Therefore, the operational noise
impacts would be less than significant at the nearby noise-sensitive receiver locations. The Project
would generate daytime operational noise level increases ranging from 0.0 to 0.6 dBA Leq at the nearest
receiver locations. The Project would generate nighttime operational noise level increases ranging from
0.0 to 1.0 dBA Leq at the nearest receiver locations. Because the Project-related operational noise level
increases would not exceed the operational noise level increase significance criteria, the increases at
the sensitive receiver locations would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.11-18)
Off-Site Traffic Noise
The analysis of existing traffic noise levels plus traffic generated by the proposed Project is
provided for information purposes only in order to fully analyze all of the existing traffic scenarios
identified in the Project’s Traffic Study. With the addition of Project traffic to existing traffic levels,
Project off-site traffic noise level increases would range from 0.0 to 0.2 dBA CNEL on the study area
roadway segments. Based on the significance criteria for off-site traffic noise, existing noise sensitive
land uses adjacent to the study area roadway segments would experience noise level increases that are
below the identified thresholds of significance. As such, Project-related traffic noise impacts under
Existing with Project conditions would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.11-20)
The Project off-site traffic noise level increases would range from 0.0 to 0.2 dBA CNEL under
2024 traffic conditions. Based on the significance criteria for off-site traffic noise, land uses adjacent
to the study area roadway segments would experience noise level increases due to Project-related
traffic noise levels that are below the identified thresholds of significance under 2042 traffic conditions.
As such, Project-related traffic noise impacts under 2042 traffic conditions would be less than
significant. (DEIR. p. 4.11-21)
The proposal to establish a community-based outpatient clinic on the Project site would not
exacerbate any existing noise impact, and thus the analysis of the impacts of existing noise on the
Project is not required under CEQA (see California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air
Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369). Further, MBGP Figure VII-1, Land Use
Compatibility for Community Noise Environments establishes that for hospitals and nursing homes (the
most similar land use to the Project), a noise environment up to 70 dBA CNEL is acceptable. As
disclosed in DEIR Subsection 4.11, Table 4.11-6, Daytime Project Operational Noise Level Increases,
and Table 4.11-7, Nighttime Project Operational Noise Level Increases, ambient noise levels at the
measured locations are all below the acceptable level of 70 dBA CNEL. The Project would generate
daytime operational noise level increases ranging from 0.0 to 0.6 dBA Leq at the nearest receiver
locations with ambient noise levels all being below 70 dBA CNEL. The Project would generate
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
28
nighttime operational noise level increases ranging from 0.0 to 1.0 dBA Leq at the nearest receiver
locations, also with ambient noise levels all being below 70 dBA CNEL. Based on the substantial
evidence contained in the DEIR and in the technical noise analysis contained in DEIR Technical
Appendix H, Project-related noise impacts would be less than significant, included any purported
“impacts” of existing ambient noise on the Project. (FEIR, p. F-134)
B. Would the Project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: At distances ranging from 557 to 1,307 feet from Project
construction activities, construction vibration velocity levels are estimated to range from 0.001 to 0.002
in/sec PPV. Based on maximum acceptable continuous vibration threshold of 0.3 PPV (in/sec), the
typical Project construction vibration levels would fall below the building damage thresholds at all the
noise sensitive receiver locations. Therefore, the Project-related vibration impacts are considered less
than significant during typical construction activities at the Project site. (DEIR, p. 4.11-22)
C. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive
noise levels? (Threshold “c”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The closest airport to the Project site is the Meadows Field Airport
located approximately 0.9 miles northeast of the Project site. According to the Kern County Airport
Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP), the Project site is located within the Airport Influence Area,
but located well outside of the 60 dBA CNEL noise level contour boundary of the airport. According
to the ALUCP, the Project medical outpatient commercial land use is considered normally acceptable
with exterior noise levels of 55-60 dBA CNEL, and any noise form the airport plus ambient noise
levels will be below this range. Impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.
(DEIR, p. 4.11-22)
2.2.11 Transportation
A. Would the Project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? (Threshold
“a”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The improvements associated with the Project’s construction are
fully consistent with all goals and policies of the City’s General Plan Circulation Element, as well as
the requirements of the City’s Municipal Code. (DEIR, p. 4.12-5)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
29
As indicated in the Project’s TIA, all roadway segments within the scope of the study currently
operate at or above LOS C and are expected to continue to do so through the year 2042, both with and
without the Project. The intersections Knudsen Drive & Olive Drive and Mohawk Street & Hageman
Road operate below an acceptable level of service, prior to the addition of the Project traffic. With the
addition of the planned but not yet constructed Hageman Flyover, which is projected to be completed
by 2042, the intersection of Knudsen Drive & Olive Drive is projected to operate at an acceptable level
of service in the year 2042 with or without the addition of Project traffic. The intersection of Hageman
Road and Mohawk Street will continue to operate below an acceptable level of service, with the Project
contributing 0.8 seconds of delay in the morning peak hour and 2.3 seconds of delay in the evening
peak hour, which is less than significant according to Section 6.2.2.7 of the City’s Transportation
Design Manual. For these reasons, the Project is fully consistent with the General Plan Circulation
Element policies related to streets and roadways. (DEIR, p. 4.12-5)
Existing bus stops in the area are adequate for this existing route, and no new bus stops are
required along the Project site’s frontage with Knudsen Drive. The Project would not conflict with any
of the goals or policies identified in the General Plan Circulation Element related to transit. (DEIR, pp.
4.12-5 to 4.12-6)
According to the City of Bakersfield Bicycle Transportation Plan, Hageman Road has a
designated Class 2 Bike Lane and Knudsen Drive is planned to have a Class 2 Bike Lane (Bakersfield,
2013). These designations also are consistent with the Kern County 2012 Bicycle Master Plan. Class
2 bike lanes are defined by pavement striping and signage used to allocate a portion of a roadway for
exclusive or preferential bicycle travel. Bike lanes are one-way facilities on either side of a roadway.
As part of the Project’s roadway frontage improvements with Knudsen Drive, right-of-way will be
provided for a Class 2 bike lane, would be in full compliance with the City of Bakersfield “Bicycle &
Pedestrian Safety Plan.” Accordingly, the Project would be fully consistent with the General Plan
Circulation Element goals and policies related to bikeways. (DEIR, p. 4.12-6)
The Project would not conflict with any of the goals or policies included in the General Plan
Circulation Element related to parking. The Project is required to accommodate a total of 214 vehicle
parking spaces, which the Project as proposed will accommodate. (DEIR, p. 4.12-6)
The Project site is located approximately 0.9-mile southwest of the Meadows Field Airport.
The Project site is located inside of Compatibility Zone “C” for the Meadows Field Airport.
Compatibility Zone “C” includes areas in the common traffic pattern of the airport that are at limited
risk for impacts. These areas may have frequent noise intrusion; however, the Project site is located
outside of the noise contours of the airport. The Project would be implemented in accordance with the
ALUCP restricting occupancy of the site to no more than 150 persons per acre, and would not conflict
with the General Plan Circulation Element goals and policies related to airports. (DEIR, p. 4.12-6)
With respect to the City’s Municipal Code, the Project would be required to comply with all
applicable provisions of Municipal Code Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic). Specifically, the Project
Applicant would be required to contribute transportation impact fees pursuant to Chapter 15.84 of the
City’s Municipal Code (Transportation Impact Fee) to help provide for acceptable LOS within the
City. Project-related roadway improvements also would be required to comply with Chapter 10.12
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
30
(Traffic-Control Devices) of the City’s Municipal Code, which requires the City to provide for orderly
and safe traffic conditions within the City and to have installed and maintained such signals and other
devices as may be necessary to effectively carry out such purposes. There are no components of the
proposed Project that would conflict with any of the provisions of Municipal Code Title 10. (DEIR, p.
4.12-6)
Accordingly, and based on the foregoing analysis, the proposed Project would not conflict with
a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway,
bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.12-6)
Although the Project would result in less than significant impacts relating to transportation, the
Project will be required to implement the following regulatory requirements to further minimize the
Project’s less than significant effect.
TRN RR-1. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Project Applicant shall pay appropriate
Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) fees at the rates then in effect in accordance with Chapter 15.84 of
the City’s Municipal Code.
TRN RR-2. All off-site roadway improvements shall comply with applicable provisions of City
of Bakersfield Municipal Code Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) and Chapter 13.12 (Development
Improvements Standards and Specifications).
B. Would the Project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project VMT/employee of 12.0 is less than the countywide
significance threshold of 14.56 VMT/employee. This analysis is highly conservative and overstates
actual impacts because it does not “net out” the VMT that will be eliminated when the VA clinic’s
current location on Westwind Drive closes when the Project begins operations. Further, the proposed
Project would actually reduce overall VMT in the area because the proposed VA community-based
outpatient clinic is programmed to provide medical services not currently offered at the current location
on Westwind Drive (in addition to replacing the same services offered at the existing facility), which
will allow veterans to receive local care and eliminate long drives to other VA facilities in distant
geographic areas to receive medical care, just over 100 miles away in Los Angeles. During the 2021
City hearings relating to the Project, a number of veterans testified that they currently must drive to
Los Angeles for services, but once the Project is operational, will no longer do so. Therefore, VMT
associated with the Project would represent a less-than-significant impact. (DEIR, p. 4.12-7)
For informational purposes, the trips generated by the existing VA clinic located on Westwind
Drive were quantified, and it is estimated to generate 1,116 average daily trips (ADTs), 74 a.m. peak
hour trips, and 110 p.m. peak hour trips. This is substantially similar to the projected trips for the
Project, which are estimated to be 1,457 ADTs, 95 a.m. peak hour trips, and 143 p.m. peak hour trips.
The VMT generated by the existing facility is likewise substantially similar to that generated by the
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
31
proposed Project. Thus, the Project essentially steps into the shoes of the existing facility’s impacts,
rather than generating truly “new” impacts on the environment relating to transportation. (DEIR, pp.
4.12-7 to 4.12-8) However, the City and the EIR are not relying on this “netting out” when disclosing,
analyzing and mitigating the Project’s impacts.
C. Would the Project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
(Threshold “c”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: All of the proposed roadway improvements would be implemented
in a manner consistent with Chapter 13.12 (Development Improvements Standards and Specifications)
of the City’s Municipal Code, which requires compliance with a number of standard manuals. The
purposes of Municipal Code Chapter 13.12 are intended to protect the health, safety and general
welfare of the citizens of the City by establishing standards and specifications related to a number of
public improvements, including roadway improvements. Additionally, the Project’s proposed
improvements have been reviewed by the City for compliance with the provisions of Chapter 13.12,
and have determined that the Project’s proposed improvements are in full compliance with the City’s
requirements as well as Municipal Code Chapter 13.12. Accordingly, the Project would not
substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature, and impacts would be less than
significant. (DEIR, p. 4.12-8)
D. Would the Project result in inadequate emergency access? (Threshold “d”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact
Facts in Support of Finding: During construction of the proposed Project, Project construction
contractors would be required to maintain adequate emergency access routes on site. Additionally, the
Project’s plans have been reviewed by the Bakersfield Fire Department (BFD), which has determined
that the Project’s design would provide for adequate access for emergency vehicles under long-term
operations. Furthermore, the Project would be subject to the requirements of Section 15.65.190
(Appendix D, Section D103.5 Fire apparatus access road gates – Amended), which identifies
requirements associated with emergency access. Accordingly, the Project would not result in
inadequate emergency access, and impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.12-8)
2.3 Impacts Identified in the EIR as Potentially Significant that Have been Mitigated to a
Level of Less than Significant
The City Council hereby finds that feasible mitigation measures have been identified in the
EIR that will avoid or substantially lessen the following potentially significant environmental impacts
to a less than significant level, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(1). The potentially significant
impacts, and the mitigation measures that will reduce them to a less than significant level, are as
follows:
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
32
2.3.1 Biological Resources
A. Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Threshold “a”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation
Facts in Support of Finding: Based on the field survey, none of the 9 special-status plant species
that have been documented as potentially occurring in the vicinity of the Project site have the potential
to occur within the Project site based on habitat, soils, topography, previously documented occurrence
of the species, and the extremely disturbed conditions found on the Project site. Therefore, there is no
potential for the Project to cause direct or indirect impacts to special-status plant species. (DEIR, p.
4.3-7)
Although no Crotch’s bumble bees were observed during the site visit in 2022, the survey was
conducted during an inactive period for the Crotch’s bumble bee. Another survey was conducted on
May 26, 2023; however, no Crotch’s bumble bees were observed. Potential habitat for the Crotch’s
bumble bee, including small mammal burrows and annual grassland, are present on the site. Because
potential foraging and nesting habitat could be present on the site, there is potential for Crotch’s bumble
bee nests to be impacted during Project-related ground disturbance. The potential presence of Crotch’s
bumble bee is therefore considered a significant direct impact and mitigation is required.
Although no burrowing owls or sign of species presence was observed during focused surveys
conducted on the Project site, California ground squirrel burrows, which are frequently used by
burrowing owls for nesting and shelter, were observed. Therefore, the site is likely to support small
mammals that are potential prey items in the diet of burrowing owl. Thus, the Project’s construction
activities could remove potential foraging and potential nesting habitat for burrowing owl. The
potential presence of burrowing owl is considered a significant direct and cumulatively considerable
impact because the species is migratory and could be present on the Project site at the time the Project’s
construction activities commence, and mitigation is required. (DEIR, p. 4.3-8)
The Project site provides suitable denning habitat for SJKF and American badger. Several
suitably sized holes were observed during the survey effort. Impacts to suitable dens could occur;
however, no known SJKF or American badger dens were observed on the Project site. The nearest
historic record of American badger occurred approximately 0.5-mile southeast of the Project site. With
the amount of human foot traffic and trash dumping on the Project site, the site is considered lower
quality habitat then adjacent parcels that experience less disturbance; however, it is not possible to
conclude that SJKF would not visit or occupy the site. Because there is potential for SJKF or American
badger to occupy the Project site, potential direct impacts would be significant and mitigation is
required. (DEIR, p. 4.3-8)
Birds nesting on or in the immediate vicinity of the Project site could be disturbed if the
Project’s construction activities occur during the nesting season when active nests are present. If these
nests are disturbed to the extent that eggs are destroyed, young are injured or killed, or adults abandon
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
33
the nests, a violation of the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code could result. Therefore,
potential direct impacts to nesting and migratory birds would be significant and mitigation is required.
(DEIR, p. 4.3-8)
To ensure that Project impacts to special-status wildlife species are mitigated to a level of less
than significant, the following mitigation measures are required.
BIO MM-1. Surveys to detect burrowing owls shall be conducted by a professional biologist
in consultation with CDFW no more than 30 days prior to any ground disturbance activities
on the Project site and can be conducted concurrently with the pre-activity surveys required
per BIO MM-2, BIO MM-3 and BIO MM-4. Occupied burrows shall not be disturbed during
the nesting season (February 1 through September 15) unless a professional biologist verifies
through non-invasive methods that either: (1) the birds have not begun egg-laying and
incubation; or (2) that juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and
are capable of independent survival. If burrowing owls are observed using burrows during the
surveys, owls shall be excluded from all active burrows through the use of exclusion devices
placed in occupied burrows in accordance with CDFW protocols, Staff Report on Burrowing
Owl Mitigation, shall be implemented. In such case, exclusion devices shall not be placed until
the young have fledged and are no longer dependent upon the burrow, as determined by a
professional biologist. Specifically, exclusion devices, utilizing one-way doors, shall be
installed in the entrance of all active burrows. The devices shall be left in the burrows for at
least 48 hours to ensure that all owls have been excluded from the burrows. Each of the
burrows shall then be excavated by hand and refilled to prevent reoccupation. Exclusion shall
continue until the owls have been successfully excluded from the site, as determined by a
professional biologist.
BIO MM-2. If vegetation clearing or initial ground-disturbing construction activity occurs
during the migratory bird nesting season (February 1 to September 15) a professional avian
biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey to identify any active nests present within the
proposed work area. If active nests are found, initial ground disturbance shall be postponed
or halted within a buffer area, established by the professional avian biologist, that is suitable
to the particular bird species and location of the nest, until juveniles have fledged or the nest
has been abandoned, as determined by the biologist. The construction avoidance area shall be
clearly demarcated in the field with highly visible construction fencing or flagging, and
construction personnel shall be instructed on the sensitivity of nest areas. Specific to
Swainson’s hawk, if the Project’s vegetation clearing or initial ground-disturbance
construction activity will commence during the migratory bird nesting season, the pre-
construction nesting bird survey shall follow survey methodology developed by the species’
SWHA Technical Advisory Committee (SWHA TAC 2000). If Swainson’s hawk is nesting
within one-half mile of the Project site, construction activities shall not commence unless an
ITP is obtained from the CDFW or until the breeding season has ended or until a qualified
biologist has determined that the birds have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or
parental care for survival.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
34
BIO MM-3. Prior to vegetation clearing or initial ground-disturbing construction activities, a
professional biologist shall conduct a survey to determine the presence of suitable foraging,
nesting, or over-wintering habitat for the Crotch bumblebee (CBB) within or immediately
adjacent to the work limits. If suitable habitat is present, at least 2 visual surveys shall be
conducted by a professional biologist between April 1 and May 30 to detect CBB on or within
100 feet of the work limits prior to vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance. The surveys
shall target the peak flowering period of CBB preferred nectar plants and shall be conducted
by a professional biologist who is familiar with CBB behavior and life history to determine
presence/absence of CBB within one year of vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance.
CBB individuals shall only be handled for identification if appropriate authorizations are
issued. Surveys shall be conducted under suitable conditions for observation of bumble bees.
Methods shall be in accordance agency protocols if issued. If no agency protocols have been
issued at the time of the surveys, the following survey parameters will be applied: the
professional biologist will walk slow (≤2 mph) meandering transects covering all portions
suitable habitat within and immediately adjacent to the work limits containing suitable habitat;
surveys will be conducted no earlier than 2 hours after sunrise and 3 hours before sunset, on
mostly sunny days with temperature between 65° and 90°F; surveys will not be conducted on
cloudy days (≥90% cloud cover) or under wet or windy conditions (≥8 mph). Surveyors will
search for bumble bees in flight and potential nest sites.
All potential CBB nests found in small mammal burrows, under thatched grasses, brush piles
or other suitable ground locations shall be further examined based on observations of entering
or exiting CBB. Observations of potential CBB nest sites shall be conducted for no less than
15 minutes per location where CBB are possibly entering/exiting, or a longer period as
determined by the professional biologist. If no CBB or their nests are detected, no further
measures will be necessary provided that vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance occurs
prior to March 1 of the year following the negative survey. If vegetation/initial ground
disturbance does not occur before March 1 of the year following the negative survey, the survey
shall be repeated following the above procedure. If CBB is found to be present, BIO MM-5
shall apply.
BIO MM-4. No more than 30 days prior to vegetation clearing or initial ground-disturbing
construction activities, pre-construction surveys for San Joaquin kit fox and American badger
shall be conducted by a professional biologist. The purpose of the preconstruction survey is to
provide current biological information in order to implement all avoidance and minimization
measures that are required based on any previous observations of special-status species and
to update observations shall any new site occupation by special-status species occur. If any
known San Joaquin kit fox dens are detected, implementation of the most recent USFWS
protocols (Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the Endangered San Joaquin Kit
Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance (2011)) is required per BIO MM-5 unless
protocols are issued by either CDFW or USFWS that supersede these protocols. If American
badger is present, BIO MM-5 shall apply.
BIO MM-5. If California or Federal listed threatened or endangered species are found
occupying burrows, dens, or nests on the Project site or any such species could be injured or
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
35
killed due to Project-related activities, the CDFW and/or USFWS (as appropriate) shall be
contacted for further guidance. Should either agency determine that incidental take
authorization is required prior to construction, the appropriate CESA/FESA authorization
shall be obtained by the Project Applicant. CESA and FESA authorizations shall include
measures addressing the respective state and/or federal listed species and shall include the
following at a minimum:
a) Implementation of standardized biological resource protective measures
included in BIO MM-4;
b) Biological preconstruction surveys conducted by qualified biologists approved
by each applicable agency no more than 30 days prior to conducting work on
the Project site;
c) If any known San Joaquin kit fox dens are detected, implementation of the most
recent USFWS protocols (Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the
Endangered San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance
(2011)) unless protocols are issued by either CDFW or USFWS that supersede
these protocols.
d) Destruction of San Joaquin kit fox dens shall follow the monitoring and
excavation procedures in USFWS (2011).
e) If CBB individuals or nests are detected during any surveys conducted per BIO
MM-3, and the CBB remains a state candidate species or is listed under CESA,
the Project Applicant shall obtain take authorization from CDFW prior to
vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance. A CBB Mortality Reduction
Plan shall be submitted for CDFW approval no less than 30 days prior to initial
vegetation removal or ground disturbance and the Plan shall contain the
following information at a minimum:
o Active CBB nests shall be avoided by 50 feet. If CBB nests cannot be
avoided, the Plan shall include seasonal restrictions for disturbance
within 50 feet of any nest and procedures for determining when nest
impacts will be minimized.
o Vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance shall be limited to the
period when impacts to individual CBB that may be underground will
be minimized (e.g., after nests have become inactive).
o Prior to vegetation removal/initial ground disturbance, small mammal
burrows that may harbor overwintering CBB queens shall be
excavated by hand. The Plan shall include timing and excavation
methods. In addition, the Plan shall include procedures for handling
and disposition of CBB if encountered during burrow excavations.
o The Plan shall include procedures for handling and disposition of
individual CBB if they are encountered in the work limits or on
construction equipment during construction activities.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
36
f) Biological monitoring of initial ground disturbance during each phase of
grading;
g) Provision for compliance reporting to be provided to each agency as required
in respective take authorizations;
h) Compensation for habitat disturbance acceptable to CDFW (state listed
species) and/or USFWS (federal listed species) at a ratio of no less than 3:1
for permanent impacts and 1.1:1 for temporary impacts to listed species
habitat. The only existing approved conservation bank for impacts to San
Joaquin kit fox habitat in Kern County is the Kern Water Bank Authority
Conservation Bank. Lands used to mitigate for San Joaquin kit fox must be
contiguous with other potentially occupied lands, provide suitable foraging
and denning habitat for San Joaquin kit fox, and be located in the southern San
Joaquin Valley portion of Kern County below 1,500’ in elevation;
i) Compensation land shall be funded for maintenance, protection, and
management through establishment of a long-term funding mechanism such as
an endowment. The endowment must be a non-wasting account that is
acceptable to both CDFW and USFWS.
BIO MM-6. All biological monitors working on the Project site shall be required by their
contract to notify the USFWS and CDFW of the discovery of any protected species identified
on the site other that nesting birds, Crotch bumblebee, San Joaquin kit fox and American
badger which are addressed by BIO MM-1, BIO MM-2, BIO MM-3, BIO MM-4, and BIO MM-
5. Any take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately to USFWS and CDFW.
BIO MM-7 The Project Applicant shall ensure that the Project’s construction contractors
adhere to the following best management practices. Construction contractors shall be required
by their contracts to comply with these best practices and permit periodic inspection of the
construction site by City of Bakersfield staff or its designee to confirm compliance. A note that
requires compliance is required on all grading and building plans approved by the City of
Bakersfield.
a) Traffic restraints and signs shall be established to minimize temporary disturbances during
construction beyond the construction site boundaries. All construction traffic shall be
restricted to designated access roads and routes, Project site, storage areas, and staging and
parking areas. Off-road traffic outside designated Project boundaries shall be prohibited. A
15 mile-per-hour (24 kilometer-per-hour) speed limit shall be observed in all Project
construction areas, except as otherwise posted on county roads and state and federal highways.
b) All construction personnel involved in ground-disturbing construction activities shall attend a
worker orientation program. The worker orientation program shall present measures required
to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to biological resources and shall include, at a
minimum, the following subjects: A summary of the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA),
California Endangered Species Act (CESA), and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA);
biological survey results for the current construction area; life history information for the
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
37
species of concern; biological resource avoidance, minimization, and mitigation requirements;
consequences for failure to successfully implement requirements; and procedures to be
followed if dead or injured wildlife are located during Project activities. Upon completion of
the orientation, employees shall sign a form stating that they attended the program and
understand all biological resource mitigation measures. Forms verifying worker attendance
shall be filed at the Project Applicant’s office and be accessible to the City of Bakersfield,
USFWS and CDFW staff. No untrained personnel shall be allowed to work onsite with the
exception of delivery trucks that are only onsite for 1 day or less and are under the supervision
of a trained employee.
c) All equipment storage and parking during construction activities shall be confined to the
designated construction area or to previously disturbed offsite areas that are not habitat for
listed species.
d) All Project construction activities involving initial surface disturbance shall occur during
daylight hours.
e) Trenches shall be inspected for entrapped wildlife each morning prior to the onset of
construction. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall be thoroughly inspected for
entrapped animals. Any wildlife so discovered shall be allowed to escape voluntarily, without
harassment, before construction activities resume. A professional biologist may remove
wildlife from a trench, hole or other entrapment out of harm’s way if the immediate welfare of
the individual is in jeopardy. State or federal listed species may not be handled. Should any
state or federal listed species become entrapped, CDFW and USFWS shall be contacted as
appropriate.
f) All food-related trash items such as wrappers, cans, bottles and food scraps generated by
Project construction activities shall be disposed of in closed containers and removed at least
once each week from the site. Deliberate feeding of wildlife shall be prohibited.
g) To prevent harassment of special-status species, construction personnel shall not be allowed
to have firearms or pets on the Project site.
h) All equipment and work-related materials shall be contained in closed containers either in the
work area or on vehicles. Loose items (e.g. rags, hose, etc.) shall be stored within closed
containers or enclosed in vehicles when on the work site.
i) All liquids shall be in closed, covered containers. Any spills of hazardous liquids shall not be
left unattended until clean-up has been completed.
j) Use of rodenticides and herbicides on the Project shall be prohibited unless approved by the
USFWS and the CDFW. This is necessary to prevent primary or secondary poisoning of
special-status species using adjacent habitats, and to avoid the depletion of prey upon which
they depend. If rodent control must be conducted, zinc phosphide shall be used because of its
proven lower risk to SJKF.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
38
k) Any employee who inadvertently kills or injures a listed species, or who finds any such wildlife
dead, injured, or entrapped on the Project site, shall be required to report the incident
immediately to a designated site representative (e.g., foreman, project manager, environmental
inspector, etc.).
l) In the case of entrapped wildlife that are listed species, escape ramps or structures shall be
installed immediately, if possible, to allow the subject wildlife to escape unimpeded.
m) In the case of injured special-status wildlife, the CDFW shall be notified immediately. During
business hours Monday through Friday, the phone number is (559) 243-4017. For non-
business hours, report to (800) 952-5400. Notification shall include the date, time, location,
and circumstances of the incident. Instructions provided by the CDFW for the care of the
injured animal shall be followed by the contractor onsite.
n) In the case of dead wildlife that are listed as threatened or endangered, the USFWS and the
CDFW shall be immediately (within 24 hours) notified by phone or in person, and shall
document the initial notification in writing within 2 working days of the findings of any such
wildlife. Notification shall include the date, time, location, and circumstances of the incident.
o) Prior to commencement of construction, work areas not adjacent to public streets shall be
clearly marked with fencing, stakes with rope or cord, or other means of delineating the work
area boundaries.
p) If any suspected federally or State protected plant or animal species is found to be present
during Project-related construction activities, occupied areas shall be avoided and the
construction contractor shall be required by its contract to call a CDFW-approved biologist
to the site to identify the species. If the species is protected, the qualified biologist shall notify
the USFWS and CDFW of any previously unreported protected species. Any take of protected
wildlife shall be reported immediately to USFWS and CDFW.
With implementation of BIO MM-1, BIO MM-2, BIO MM-3, BIO MM-4, BIO MM-5, BIO
MM-6, and BIO MM-7, the Project’s potential impacts Crotch bumble bee, burrowing owl, SJKF, and
American badger, and all other potential impacts on biological resources, would be reduced to less
than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.3-17)
2.3.2 Cultural Resources
A. Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? (Threshold “a”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation
Facts in Support of Finding: No historical resources were identified on the Project site with
either the SSJVIC records search or during the field survey. Therefore, because no historical resources
exist on the surface of the Project site, implementation of the Project has no potential to result in a
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
39
substantial adverse change in the significance of a known historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5.
However, it is possible (although unlikely due to the disturbed nature of the site) historical resources
may be present beneath the site’s subsurface, and may be unearthed by ground-disturbing activities
associated with Project construction. If any historical resources are unearthed during Project
construction that meet the definition of a significant historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.5 and are disturbed/damaged by Project construction activities, impacts to those
resources would be significant. (DEIR, p. 4.4-7)
To ensure that Project impacts to any significant archaeological resources that may be
encountered during ground-disturbing activities associated with Project construction are mitigated to
a level of less than significant, the following mitigation measures are required.
CR MM-1. Prior to construction and as needed throughout the construction period involving
ground-disturbing construction activities, a construction worker cultural awareness training
program shall be provided to all new construction workers within one week of employment at
the project site. The training shall be prepared and conducted by a qualified cultural resources
specialist that meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards.
Workers attending the training shall sign a form that shall be kept by the Project Applicant
and made available to the City of Bakersfield upon request.
CR MM-2. If suspected historical or archaeological resources are encountered during ground
disturbance activities, the construction contractor(s) shall be required by their contract to
immediately cease work within 100 feet of the resources and have the area partitioned off until
a qualified cultural resource specialist that meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualification Standards can evaluate the resources found and make
recommendations. If the specialist determines that the discovery represents a potentially
significant cultural resource, additional investigations may be required. If cultural resources
are discovered that may have relevance to Native Americans, the specialist or Project
Applicant must provide written notice to the City of Bakersfield, Tejon Indian Tribe, Native
American Heritage Commission, and any other appropriate individuals, agencies, and/or
groups as determined by the specialist in consultation with the City of Bakersfield to receive
input regarding treatment and disposition of the resource, which may include avoidance,
testing, and/or excavation to prevent destruction of the resource and/or to allow documentation
of the resource for research potential. All reports, correspondence, and determinations
regarding the discovery shall be submitted to the California Historical Resources Information
System’s Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center at California State University
Bakersfield.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures (MMs) CR MM-1 and CR-MM-2 would ensure the
proper identification and subsequent treatment of any significant archaeological resources that may be
encountered during ground-disturbing activities associated with Project construction. With
implementation of the required mitigation, the Project’s potential impacts to important archaeological
resources would be reduced to less than significant. Cumulatively-considerable impacts would likewise
be reduced to less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.4-11)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
40
B. Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? (Threshold “b”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation
Facts in Support of Finding: Based on the cultural records search and pedestrian survey of the
Project site, no known archaeological resources are present on the Project site. Additionally, no Native
American tribes requested consultation regarding the Project. Because no archaeological resources are
known to exist on the Project site, implementation of the proposed Project would not cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5. However, it is
possible (although unlikely due to the disturbed nature of the site) that previously undiscovered
archaeological resources may be present beneath the site’s subsurface, and may be impacted by ground-
disturbing activities associated with Project construction. If any prehistoric cultural resources are
unearthed during Project construction that meet the definition of an archaeological resource pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 and are disturbed/damaged by Project construction activities,
impacts to those prehistoric cultural resources would be significant. (DEIR, p. 4.4-8)
C. Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries? (Threshold “c”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site does not contain a cemetery and no known formal
cemeteries are located within the immediate vicinity of the site. A field survey conducted on the Project
site did not identify the presence of any human remains and no human remains are known to exist
beneath the surface of the site. Nevertheless, the remote potential exists that human remains may be
unearthed during grading and excavation activities associated with Project construction. (DEIR, p. 4.4-
8)
If human remains are unearthed during Project construction, the construction contractor would
be required by law to comply with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 “Disturbance of
Human Remains.” According to Section 7050.5(b) and (c), if human remains are discovered, the
County Coroner must be contacted and if the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a
Native American, or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, the Coroner is
required to contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) by telephone within 24 hours.
Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, whenever the NAHC receives
notification of a discovery of Native American human remains from a county coroner, the NAHC is
required to immediately notify those persons it believes to be most likely descended from the deceased
Native American. The descendants may, with the permission of the owner of the land, or his or her
authorized representative, inspect the site of the discovery of the Native American human remains and
may recommend to the owner or the person responsible for the excavation work means for treatment
or disposition, with appropriate dignity, of the human remains and any associated grave goods. The
descendants shall complete their inspection and make recommendations or preferences for treatment
within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. According to Public Resources Code Section
5097.94(k), the NAHC is authorized to mediate disputes arising between landowners and known
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
41
descendants relating to the treatment and disposition of Native American human burials, skeletal
remains, and items associated with Native American burials. Notwithstanding the requirements of
California Health and Safety Code § 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code § 5097.98, due to
the potential (although unlikely due to the disturbed nature of the site) to discover buried human
remains during Project construction activities (i.e., grading), a potentially significant impact would
occur and mitigation would be required. (DEIR, pp. 4.4-8 to 4.4-9)
To ensure that the Project’s potential impacts to buried human remains are mitigated to a level
of less than significant, the following mitigation measure is required.
CR MM-3. During construction, if human remains are discovered, further ground disturbance
shall be prohibited pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. The specific
protocol, guidelines, and channels of communication outlined by the Native American Heritage
Commission, in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, Public Resources
Code 5097.97, and Senate Bill 447 shall be followed. In the event of the discovery of human
remains, at the direction of the county coroner, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(c) shall
guide Native American consultation. Unless otherwise required by law, the site of any reburial
of Native American human remains or associated grave goods shall not be disclosed and shall
not be governed by public disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act. The
coroner, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code Section
6254 (r), parties, and Lead Agencies, will be asked to withhold public disclosure information
related to such reburial, pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government
Code Section 6254 (r).
In the event that human remains are discovered during construction activities, Mitigation
Measure CR MM-3 would require compliance with the applicable provisions of California Health and
Safety Code § 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code § 5097 et. seq. Mandatory compliance
with Mitigation Measure CR MM-3, State law, and applicable regulatory requirements would reduce
the Project’s potential impacts to buried human remains to less-than-significant levels. (DEIR, p. 4.4-
11)
2.3.3 Geology and Soils
A. Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature? (Threshold “f”)
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project site does not contain any known unique geologic
features. The Project area has a very low potential for containing important fossil remains because the
area is underlain by alluvial deposits that are too young to contain significant fossil remains. However,
the possibility exists in the area that older fossiliferous alluvium may be present six feet below the
surface since the remains of Pleistocene (ice age) land animals have been collected from older alluvial
deposits in Kern County. If excavations penetrate below six (6) feet, there is a “low to moderate
potential” for the discovery of fossils. A “low to moderate potential” indicates that grading operations
may expose fossils during development. These activities could destroy any fossils present. The
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
42
destruction of such fossils could adversely impact the region’s paleontological resources. Therefore, if
any unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature are unearthed during the
Project’s construction activities and are disturbed/damaged by Project construction activities, impacts
would be significant. (DEIR, p. 4.6-11)
To ensure that the Project’s potential impacts to paleontological resources are mitigated to a
level of less than significant, the following mitigation measures and regulatory requirements are
required.
GEO MM-1. Prior to construction and as needed throughout the construction period involving
ground-disturbing construction activities, a construction worker paleontological resource
awareness training program shall be provided to all new construction workers within one week
of employment at the project site, if their work will involve ground-disturbing construction
activities greater than six feet in depth in older alluvium soils. The training shall be prepared
and conducted by a qualified professional paleontologist. Workers attending the training shall
sign a form that shall be kept by the Project Applicant and made available to the City of
Bakersfield upon request.
GEO MM-2. If paleontological resources are encountered, all work within 100 feet of the
resources shall halt until a qualified paleontologist can be called to the site to evaluate the
resources and make recommendations. Paleontological resource materials may include
fossils, plant impressions, or animal tracks that have been preserved in rock. If the qualified
paleontologist determines that the discovery represents a potentially significant
paleontological resource, additional investigations and fossil recovery may be required to
mitigate adverse impacts to less than significant levels. Construction within 100 feet of the
resources found shall not resume until the appropriate mitigation measures are implemented
or the materials are determined to be to be less than significant by the paleontologist.
GEO MM-3. Recovered specimens, if any, shall be properly prepared to a point of
identification and permanent preservation, including screen washing sediments to recover
small invertebrates and vertebrates, if necessary. Identification and curation of specimens into
a professional, accredited public museum repository with a commitment to archival
conservation and permanent retrievable storages shall be required for discoveries of
significance as determined by the paleontologist.
GEO MM-4. A final monitoring and mitigation report of findings and significance shall be
prepared, including lists of all fossils recovered, if any, and necessary maps and graphics to
accurately record the original location of the specimens. The report shall be submitted to the
City of Bakersfield prior to final building inspection.
GEO RR-5. In compliance with City of Bakersfield Municipal Code Chapter 15.05, California
Building Code, construction of the Project is required to adhere to the California Building
Standards Code and its requirement to prepare and adhere to site-specific recommendations
contained in a geotechnical report prepared for the Project site. As such, compliance with the
recommendations provided in the Project’s geotechnical study prepared by Krazan &
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
43
Associates, Inc. and dated May 6, 2019 (contained as Technical Appendix E to this EIR) is
required.
GEO RR-6. To address wind erosion, the Project construction activities are required to comply
with the provisions of Chapter 15 Section 104.12 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code to ensure
that dust abatement measures comply with the current standards set for by the San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD).
GEO RR-7. The Project Applicant is required, pursuant to the State Water Resources Control
Board, to obtain coverage under the State’s General Construction Storm Water Permit for
construction activities (NPDES permit). Compliance with the NPDES permit involves the
preparation and implementation of a SWPPP for construction-related activities. The SWPPP
will specify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that construction contractors will be
required to implement during construction activities to ensure that waterborne pollution –
including erosion/sedimentation – is prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately
treated prior to surface runoff being discharged from the subject property. Examples of BMPs
that may be utilized during construction include, but are not limited to, sandbag barriers,
geotextiles, storm drain inlet protection, sediment traps, rip rap soil stabilizers, and hydro-
seeding.
Mitigation Measures GEO MM-1, GEO MM-2, GEO MM-3, and GEO-MM-4 would ensure
the proper identification and subsequent treatment of any paleontological resources that may be
encountered during ground-disturbing activities associated with implementation of the proposed
Project. Therefore, with implementation of GEO MM-1, GEO MM-2, GEO MM-3, and GEO-MM-4,
the Project’s potential direct and cumulatively considerable impacts to a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature would be reduced to less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.6-15)
2.3.4 Tribal Cultural Resources
A. Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe,
and that is (Threshold “a”):
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native American tribe.
Finding: Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
44
Facts in Support of Finding: No prehistoric resource sites, features, places, or landscapes were
identified on the Project site that are either listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historic Places. No resources were identified on the Project site that meet any of the criteria to be
eligible for the California Register and no prehistoric resource sites or isolates were found on the
Project site based on the cultural records search and pedestrian survey of the Project site. Furthermore,
no substantial evidence was presented to or found by the City of Bakersfield that led to the
identification of any resources on the Project site that in the City’s discretion had the potential to be
considered a tribal cultural resource. (DEIR, p. 4.13-3)
Because no tribal cultural resources exist on the Project site under existing conditions,
implementation of the proposed Project would not impact such resources. However, it is possible
(although unlikely due to the disturbed nature of the site) that previously undiscovered tribal cultural
resources may be present beneath the site’s subsurface, and may be impacted by ground-disturbing
activities associated with Project construction. If any tribal cultural resources are unearthed during
Project construction that meet the definition of a significant tribal cultural resource and are
disturbed/damaged by Project construction activities, impacts to those tribal cultural resources would
be significant. (DEIR, p. 4.13-3)
To ensure proper identification and subsequent treatment of any significant tribal cultural
resources that may be encountered during ground-disturbing activities associated with Project
development, CR MM-1 through CR MM-3, previously noted herein, are required.
Implementation of CR MM-1 through CR-MM 3 would ensure the proper identification and
subsequent treatment of any significant tribal cultural resources that may be encountered during
ground-disturbing activities associated with Project development. With implementation of the required
mitigation, the Project’s potential impact to significant tribal cultural resources would be reduced to
less-than-significant. (DEIR, p. 4.13-4)
2.4 Impacts Identified in the EIR as being Significant and Unavoidable
The City Council hereby finds that, despite the incorporation of mitigation measures outlined
herein and in the EIR, the following impacts from the proposed Project and related approvals cannot
be fully mitigated to a less than significant level by any feasible mitigation measures pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines 15091(a)(2) and (a)(3), which are infeasible as a result of specific economic, legal, social,
technological, and other considerations, or are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency, including the federal government, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is
therefore included herein. For the reasons set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the
City Council finds and declares, in its independent judgment, that the Project’s significant benefits
substantially outweigh and justify the following significant and unavoidable impacts:
2.4.1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
A. Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the environment? (Threshold “a”)
Finding: Significant and Unavoidable Cumulatively-Considerable Impact
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
45
Facts in Support of Finding: The City of Bakersfield is using a highly conservative net-zero
threshold for this Project, meaning that any amount of GHG emissions from the Project is considered
a significant impact. Because the Project would result in a total gross increase of 946.85 MT CO2e
annually, or when taking into account the VA’s vacation of its existing facility to move to the new
proposed facility on the Project site, an estimated net new increase of 83.15 MT CO2e annually, the
Project’s impact is significant on a cumulatively-considerable basis. (DEIR, pp. 4.7-18 to 4.7-19)
The following mitigation measures and regulatory requirements are required to reduce the
Project-related GHG emissions.
GHG MM-1. Construction contractors shall assure that construction equipment greater than
150 horsepower achieves or is equivalent to or better than Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA)/California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 4 emissions standards, or Tier 3 standards
if Tier 4 equipment is not available at the time of construction. Prior to grading and building
permit issuance, the construction contractor(s) shall submit an equipment list to the City’s
Development Services Director confirming that the equipment used is compliant.
GHG MM-2. Construction contractors shall assure that hand tools, forklifts, and pressure
washers used for construction are electric-powered and shall designate an area of the
construction site where electric-powered construction vehicles and equipment can charge. The
City of Bakersfield shall verify the location of the designated charging area in association with
grading and building permit issuance.
GHG MM-3. Project construction contractors shall tune and maintain all construction
equipment in accordance with the equipment manufacturer’s recommended maintenance
schedule and specifications. Maintenance records for all pieces of equipment shall be kept on-
site for the duration of construction activities and shall be made available for periodic
inspection by City of Bakersfield or its designee.
GHG MM-4. The building roof shall, upon the approval of a design modification by the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), be outfitted with a solar photovoltaic system of the
maximum size feasible to provide power to the building and given the constraints of applicable
Building Code requirements, clearance requirements around roof-mounted equipment, PG&E
interconnection regulations, and other code compliance requirements. Should the VA not
approve a design modification to add a rooftop PV system, the building may be constructed
and operated without a PV system.
GHG RR-4. The building shall be constructed in compliance with Title 24 of the Uniform
Building Code to minimize total consumption of energy. The City of Bakersfield shall confirm
Title 24 compliance prior to the issuance of building permits.
Although the Project’s GHG emissions would only be a very small fraction of the global GHG
emissions that contribute to climate change, the City is using an extremely conservative net-zero
threshold. While the foregoing measures all reduce the Project’s GHG emissions to the maximum
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
46
extent feasible, unless the VA approves the rooftop solar imposed by Mitigation Measure GHG-4, the
Project would still not achieve net-zero emissions. The City cannot force the VA to approve rooftop
solar, and therefore the City must assume it will not be implemented for the purpose of disclosing,
analyzing and mitigating impacts. Because the Project would result in a net increase in GHG emissions
as compared to existing conditions even with implementation of mitigation measures, the Project’s
impacts due to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable on a cumulatively-considerable
basis. (DEIR, p. 4.7-22) It bears noting that the Project’s GHG impacts would be considered less than
significant under virtually any other numerical threshold relied on by many lead agencies throughout
the state, as described in more detail in the FEIR’s response to comments.
2.5 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Which Would Be Caused by the
Proposed Project Should It Be Implemented
The CEQA Guidelines require EIRs to address any significant irreversible environmental changes that
would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented (CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.2(c)). An environmental change would fall into this category if: a) the project would involve a
large commitment of non-renewable resources; b) the primary and secondary impacts of the project
would generally commit future generations to similar uses; c) the project involves uses in which
irreversible damage could result from any potential environmental accidents; or d) the proposed
consumption of resources is not justified (e.g., the project results in the wasteful use of energy). (DEIR,
p. 5-1)
Determining whether the proposed Project may result in significant irreversible environmental changes
requires a determination of whether key non-renewable resources would be degraded or destroyed in
such a way that there would be little possibility of restoring them. Natural resources, in the form of
construction materials and energy resources, would be used in the construction of the proposed Project,
but development of the Project site as proposed would have no measurable adverse effect on the
availability of such resources, including resources that may be non-renewable (e.g., fossil fuels).
Construction and operation of the proposed Project would not involve the use of large sums or sources
of non-renewable energy and with respect to operation, the Project would replace an existing clinic of
similar size, essentially stepping into the shoes of its existing impacts, including energy use.
Additionally, the Project is required by law to comply with the California Green Building Standards
Code (CALGreen), compliance with which reduces a building operation’s energy volume that is
produced by fossil fuels. The Project would be subject to regulations to reduce the Project’s reliance
on non-renewable energy sources. The Project also would be subject to the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007, which contains provisions designed to increase energy efficiency and availability
of renewable energy. The Project also would be subject to California Energy Code, or Title 24, which
contains measures to reduce natural gas and electrical demand, thus requiring less non-renewable
energy resources. Further, because the Project is contracted with the federal government, the following
items are required to be implemented:
• Reduction in energy cost by 30% over baseline performance rating using the following:
o Energy efficient mechanical, electrical, and plumbing equipment.
o Energy control strategies for HVAC, plumbing and lighting systems.
o Low flow plumbing fixtures and shower heads.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
47
• Natural gas is boilers over No. 2 Oil where uninterrupted natural gas supply is available.
The Project would avoid the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy during
Project construction, operation, and maintenance. With mandatory compliance to the energy efficiency
regulations as well as implementation of Project design features and mitigation measures, the Project
would not involve the use of large sums or sources of non-renewable energy. A more detailed
discussion of Project energy consumption is provided in EIR Subsection 4.5, Energy. (DEIR, pp. 5-1
to 5-2)
EIR Subsection 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, provides an analysis of the proposed Project’s
potential to transport or handle hazardous materials and biomedical waste which, if released into the
environment, could result in irreversible damage. As concluded in the analysis, compliance with
federal, State, and local regulations related to hazardous materials would be required of all contractors
working on the property. Similarly, compliance with federal, State, and local regulations related to
hazardous materials and biomedical waste would be required of the U.S Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) as the operator of the proposed VA community-based outpatient medical clinic. As such,
construction and long-term operation of the proposed Project would not have the potential to cause
significant irreversible damage to the environment, including damage that may result from upset or
accident conditions. (DEIR, p. 5-2)
2.6 Growth-Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Project
CEQA requires a discussion of the ways in which the proposed Project would be growth inducing. The
CEQA Guidelines identify a project as growth inducing if it would foster economic or population
growth or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding
environment (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d)). New employees and new residential
developments represent direct forms of growth. These direct forms of growth have a secondary effect
of expanding the size of local markets and inducing additional economic activity in the area. (DEIR,
p. 5-2)
A project could indirectly induce growth at the local level by increasing the demand for additional
goods and services associated with an increase in population or employment and thus reducing or
removing the barriers to growth. This typically occurs in suburban or rural environments where
population or employment growth results in increased demand for service and commodity markets
responding to the new population of residents or employees. The Project’s temporary construction-
related employees would purchase goods and services in the region, but any secondary increase in
employment associated with meeting these goods and services needs would be marginal,
accommodated by existing goods and service providers, and highly unlikely to result in any new
physical impacts to the environment as the construction workers are likely to already be in the local
employment pool and would not be coming from out of the region. Operation of the proposed VA
community-based outpatient medical clinic, which is already operating in the area at 1801 Westwind
Drive, also would not increase the need for secondary goods and services, because the VA would
provide medical services in the same geographic market that it already serves. A change in location of
the VA’s services from 1801 Westwind Drive to the Project site would not induce substantial new
growth in the region. (DEIR, p. 5-3)
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
48
Under CEQA, growth inducement is not considered necessarily detrimental, beneficial, or of
significance to the environment. Typically, growth-inducing potential of a project would be considered
significant if it fosters growth or a concentration of population in excess of what is assumed in pertinent
master plans, land use plans, or in projections made by regional planning agencies such as the Kern
County Association of Governments (Kern COG). Significant growth impacts also could occur if a
project provides infrastructure or service capacity to accommodate growth beyond the levels currently
permitted by local or regional plans and policies. In general, growth induced by a project is considered
a significant impact if it directly or indirectly affects the ability of agencies to provide needed public
services, or if it can be demonstrated that the potential growth significantly affects the environment in
some other way. (DEIR, p. 5-3)
According to the growth trends included in Kern COGs RTP/SCS, Metropolitan Bakersfield’s
population is projected to grow by 6,643 residents between 2020 and 2046 (approximately 1.0% annual
growth). Over this same time period, employment in Metropolitan Bakersfield is expected to add 1,077
new jobs (approximately 0.5% annual job growth). Economic growth is not reasonably expected to
take place as a result of the Project’s operation because the VA is already operating a medical clinic in
the local area, and the VA would move those services to the Project site. The move of a medical service
provider in the same geographic market has no reasonable possibility of causing a substantial increase
in population or economic growth. The purpose of the proposed VA community-based outpatient clinic
is to serve existing U.S. military veterans living in the Bakersfield area. Accordingly, because it is
anticipated that most of the VA clinic’s employees and patients would already be living in the
Bakersfield area, the relocation of the VA medical clinic to a new location at the Project site would not
induce substantial growth in the area. (DEIR, p. 5-3)
The area immediately surrounding the Project site contains a variety of uses, including vacant parcels,
and parcels developed with commercial, industrial, public facilities, and school uses. Development of
the Project site is not expected to place short-term development pressure on abutting properties because
these areas are already built-out or are planned for future development, which has no reasonable
possibility of being accelerated by the introduction of a VA community-based outpatient medical clinic
on the Project site. Furthermore, the proposed Project’s improvements to the public infrastructure,
including roads, drainage infrastructure, and other utility improvements are consistent with the City’s
General Plan and would not indirectly induce substantial and unplanned population growth in the local
area. (DEIR, pp. 5-3 to 5-4)
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in substantial, adverse growth-inducing
impacts. (DEIR, p. 5-4)
2.7 Project Alternatives
The EIR analyzed three alternatives to the Project as proposed and evaluated these alternatives
for their ability to avoid or reduce the Project’s significant environmental effects while also meeting
the majority of the Project’s objectives.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
49
2.7.1 Alternatives Considered but not Carried Forward for Detailed Analysis
A. Alternative Sites
CEQA does not require that an analysis of alternative sites be included in an EIR. However,
if the surrounding circumstances make it reasonable to consider an alternative site, then an alternative
sites analysis should be considered and analyzed in the EIR. In making the decision to include or
exclude an analysis of an alternative site, the “key question and first step in analysis is whether any of
the significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the project
in another location. Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects
of the project need to be considered for inclusion in the EIR” (CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.6(f)(2)).
The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs established the following geographic boundary as an
acceptable area for establishment of a new clinic:
• Bounded on the North (from west): East on Olive Drive, southeast on Roberts Lane, southeast
on Manor Street and then northeast on Panorama Drive to Fairfax Road.
• Bounded on the South (from east): West on E. White Lane which becomes White Lane, to
intersection with Gosford Road.
• Bounded on the West (from south): Starting at the intersection of Gosford Road and White
Lane, head north to where Gosford Road becomes Coffee Road, continue north to Olive Drive.
• Bounded on the East (from north): South on Fairfax Road to E. Brundage Lane, west on E.
Brundage Lane and then south on Cottonwood Road to E. White Lane. (DEIR, p. 6-3)
On December 9, 2019, the VA issued a Solicitation for Offers for “up to a 20-year lease for 30,100 Net
Usable Square Feet of space for use by VA for personnel, furnishings, and equipment to be operated
as a Community Based Outpatient Clinic” in the geographic area described above. The VA received
four proposals, for the following three locations:
• Renovation of the existing VA clinic at 1801 Westwind Drive (two proposals).
• A new clinic proposed by the existing landlord of the VA Clinic at 1801 Westwind Drive
(referred to as PBV, or Progress for Bakersfield Veterans, LLC), at an undisclosed location
• The Project site evaluated in this EIR. (DEIR, p. 6-4)
The VA evaluated the four proposals and selected the Project site. PBV protested the VA’s
determination in several iterations administratively, and in the United States Court of Federal Claims,
Case No. 20-1050C. All appeals and challenges were denied, as detailed in the January 7, 2021
decision by the Court of Federal Claims. (DEIR, pp. 6-4 to 6-5) Since that time additional protests have
been filed by PBV. On May 6, 2021, PBV protested the U.S. Government Accountability Office
(GAO) challenging VA’s award of the lease to the Project Applicant (SASD), and on May 24, 2021,
PBV filed a supplemental protest with GAO. Both of these protests were dismissed and denied by
GAO on August 11, 2021. On November 8, 2021, PBV effectively appealed GAO’s August 11, 2021
decision by filing a protest with the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (COFC) challenging VA’s award to
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
50
the Project Applicant (SASD). PBV also challenged VA’s elimination of PBV’s offers from the
competition even though the COFC had already considered and rejected those arguments in its
December 22, 2020 decision that denied and dismissed PBV’s August 20, 2020 protest. The COFC
dismissed and denied PBV’s November 8, 2021 protest on March 11, 2022. On May 10, 2022, PBV
filed a notice of appeal with the Federal Circuit challenging one aspect of the COFC’s March 11, 2022
ruling. On May 4, 2023, Three days after holding oral arguments, the Federal Circuit summarily denied
PBV’s appeal and affirmed the COFC’s March 11, 2022 decision.
It is beyond the jurisdictional scope and authority of the City of Bakersfield as the CEQA lead agency
to evaluate other sites that have not been offered to or selected by the VA, particularly those that have
been rejected after a long and thorough federal administrative and legal process, specifically including
remodeling and rebuilding a clinic on the existing site at 1801 Westwind Drive. As such, no alternative
sites are feasible because the VA has already selected the Project site for the Project, and an alternative
sites analysis is thus not required in this EIR. (DEIR, p. 6-5)
Furthermore, even completing setting aside the federal bid selection process, no significant effects of
the Project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the Project in another location. None
of the Project’s impacts – and in particular, its sole significant impact, GHG emissions – are due to
where the Project is located, or would be reduced in a different location. Instead, the same Project
located anywhere in the City would have identical GHG impacts to the proposed Project on the Project
Site. Thus, on this independent basis, further consideration of an alternative site was not warranted.
(See, CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(2) [“Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen
any of the significant effects of the project need to be considered for inclusion in the EIR”]).
2.7.2 Alternatives Selected for Analysis in the EIR
A. No Project Alternative
The No Project Alternative considers a scenario in which the proposed Project does not
proceed. In this circumstance, the VA clinic would continue to operate in its existing location at 1801
Westwind Drive and the Project site would remain undeveloped. (DEIR, p. 6-6)
Implementation of the No Project Alternative would result in no physical environmental
impacts to the Project site beyond those that have historically occurred on the Project site and that will
continue to occur into the future from routine activities. Almost all effects of the proposed Project
would be avoided or lessened by selection of the No Project Alternative, with the exception of long-
term erosion and sedimentation impacts, which would be increased under this alternative. The
foregoing does not take into account the fact that under the No Project Alternative, the existing VA
clinic at 1801 Westwind Drive would continue to operate indefinitely, and as a result, while avoiding
construction period and Project site-specific impacts, the No Project Alternative would have
substantially similar operational impacts to the proposed Project. The No Project Alternative, however,
would fail to meet any of the Project’s objectives. Specifically, the No Project Alternative would not
result in the establishment of a new VA community-based outpatient clinic, provide high quality
patient care for veterans, enable veterans to receive healthcare at an easily accessible facility, provide
a diverse range of consolidated outpatient services, or provide community vitality, economic growth
and employment opportunities in Bakersfield. The VA itself has already determined that the existing
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
51
facility at 1801 Westwind Drive is inadequate; it is outdated and does not provide the full suite of
services needed by the City’s veterans, who are instead currently forced to travel outside the
Bakersfield area to obtain these services. Many local veterans testified that the existing facility is
inadequate and substandard during the City’s 2021 hearings on the Project, confirmed they drive over
100 miles to Los Angeles for needed services, and others have submitted written comments and even
articles in media stating the same. As mentioned above, the VA has also already specifically rejected
a proposal to remodel the existing clinic or otherwise keep the existing clinic at the existing location.
(DEIR, p. 6-11)
B. Net Zero Alternative
The Net Zero Alternative considers the development of a VA clinic on the Project site with a
design that would achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions. To achieve this result, a smaller sized
clinic than proposed by the Project and required by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs would be
required, which does not meet the requirements of the request for proposals issued by the VA. The Net
Zero Alternative would reduce the size of the clinic by 3,648 s.f. and construct a 36,000 s.f. clinic
(approximately 9% smaller than the proposed Project at 39,648 s.f.), which would have a net usable
square footage well below 30,100 s.f. The number of parking spaces also would be concomitantly
reduced by approximately 9%. Areas not developed with the building or parking would be landscaped.
Under this alternative, the exiting clinic would no longer operate and the 36,000 s.f. new clinic built
on the Project site would operate in place of the existing VA clinic and would achieve net zero
greenhouse gas emissions. (DEIR, p. 6-11)
The Net Zero Alternative would reduce the Project’s significant and unavoidable cumulatively-
considerable GHG impacts to a less than significant level. The Net Zero Alternative would also
moderately reduce the Project’s already less than significant impacts to air quality, energy, and noise.
All other impacts from the Net Zero Alternative would be similar to the Project. (DEIR, p. 6-15)
The Net Zero Alternative would not meet Project Objective B because it does not meet the
VA’s physical design requirements and would not meet Project Objective G due to not utilizing all the
available space on the Project site to construct a larger building which would achieve operational
efficiency and create optimal space for increased patient and staff satisfaction. Additionally, the Net
Zero Alternative would not offer the full suite of services needed by veterans in the Bakersfield area.
The Net Zero Alternative would generally meet all of the Project’s other objectives, but to a less extent.
The feasibility of selecting this Alternative is outside of the jurisdictional authority of the City of
Bakersfield because the physical characteristics of a feasible Project are determined by the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs (the VA). Modifications to the Project by the City of Bakersfield are
not possible because the Project applicant is limited to the design improvements approved by the
federal government as part of the already concluded federal procurement process. As a result, the City
has no jurisdiction or ability to select this Alternative because it would conflict with the Project
approved by the VA / federal government. Further, approval of the smaller Net Zero Alternative would
likely result in some veterans traveling out of town, including to VA facilities in Los Angeles, to
receive timely services, which would then increase air quality, GHG and transportation impacts,
thereby negating the impact reductions associated with constructing and operating a smaller facility.
(DEIR, p. 6-15) The Net Zero alternative is rejected for this second reason on an independent basis, in
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
52
addition to the lack of feasibility of reducing the size of, and services offered by, the Project contrary
to the bid specifications issued by the VA. Each of these reasons, standing alone, are sufficient grounds
for rejecting this Alternative.
C. Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative
The Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative considers the development of a VA
clinic on the Project site with the same site design as proposed with the Project, but with the addition
of a solar system on the building roof, the addition of canopy covers over parking areas equipped with
solar panels, and the addition of on-site battery storage such that site operations could be powered
without connecting to the electrical grid. Under this Alternative, the exiting VA clinic located at 1801
Westwind Drive would no longer operate and the Alternative would achieve a net reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions compared to the existing condition. The total amount of energy needed to
offset the Project is approximately 371,171 kWh/year. The building itself is expected to need 341,211
kWh/year, and the remaining 29,960 kWh/year is for the parking lot operations. These values are based
on the mitigated electricity needs, which assumes a 10% improvement over Title 24 requirements.
Assuming that 1 kW of rooftop solar in Bakersfield can generate about 1,650 kWh/year, solar panels
capable of producing a total of 225 kW (207 kW for the building and 18 kW for the parking lot) would
be required. Assuming that approximately 100 square feet (sq. ft.) of surface area are needed to hold
1kW of rooftop solar, 22,500 sq. ft. of solar panel coverage would be required on the site. (DEIR, p.
6-16)
The Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative would reduce the Project’s
significant and unavoidable cumulatively-considerable GHG impacts to a less than significant level.
The Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative would also incrementally reduce the
Project’s already less than significant impacts to air quality and energy. Potential hazardous materials
impacts would increase due to the introduction of on-site battery storage, but the potential impacts
would be less than significant with mandatory regulatory compliance. All other impacts from the Net
Zero Alternative would be similar to the Project. (DEIR, p. 6-20)
The Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative would meet the Project Objectives
except for Objective B because it does not meet the VA’s physical design requirements, and therefore
could be rejected by the VA (which would have to fund any increased costs resulting from the
Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative, which could be significant). The feasibility of
selecting this Alternative is outside of the jurisdictional authority of the City of Bakersfield because
the physical characteristics of a feasible Project are determined by the VA. Modifications to the Project
by the City of Bakersfield are not possible because the Project applicant is limited to the design
improvements approved by the federal government as part of the already concluded federal
procurement process. As a result, the City has no jurisdiction or ability to select this Alternative
because it would conflict with the Project approved by the VA / federal government. (DEIR, p. 6-20)
However, it bears noting that GHG MM-4 essentially requires Renewable Energy System Project
Design Alternative, if approved by the VA.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
53
2.7.3 Environmentally Superior Alternative
CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6 requires the identification of the environmentally superior
alternative. As discussed in the DEIR, implementation of the No Project Alternative would result in
no physical environmental impacts beyond those that have historically occurred on the property, and
those that occur from the operation of the existing VA clinic at 1801 Westwind Drive. Because the No
Project Alternative would avoid most of the Project’s impacts, it warrants consideration as the
“environmentally superior alternative.” However, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(e)(2), if a
no project alternative is identified as the environmentally superior alternative, then the EIR shall also
identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. Accordingly, the Net
Zero Alternative evaluated herein is identified as the Environmentally Superior Alternative pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6. If the Net Zero Alternative is determined not feasible, then the
Renewable Energy System Project Design Alternative would become the Environmentally Superior
Alternative. (DEIR, pp. 6-20 to 6-21)
3.0 Statement of Overriding Considerations
The Planning Commission hereby declares that it has balanced the benefits of the Project
against any significant and unavoidable environmental impacts in determining whether to approve the
Project. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, if the benefits of the Project outweigh its
unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, those impacts may be considered “acceptable.”
Having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Project to the extent
feasible by adopting the Mitigation Measures contained in the EIR, the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (MMRP), and herein, having considered the entire administrative record on the
Project, and having weighed the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable adverse impacts after
implementation of all feasible mitigation, the Planning Commission has determined that each of the
following social, economic and environmental benefits of the Project separately and individually
outweigh the potential unavoidable adverse impact and render those potential adverse environmental
impacts acceptable based upon the following overriding considerations:
A. The Project provides a much needed new VA community-based outpatient medical clinic
in Bakersfield on a site that has been vetted by and selected by the U.S. Government, which
is highly desired by local veterans.
B. The Project provides a new VA community-based outpatient medical clinic that meets the
VA’s physical design requirements.
C. The Project provides high quality patient care for local veterans in a safe, advanced-care
medical facility throughout the Bakersfield area and surrounding communities.
D. The Project enables veterans to receive health care at a medical facility that is easily
accessible and nearby a State highway system to reduce out of area health trips.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
54
E. The Project provides a VA medical clinic that is capable of providing a diverse range of
consolidated outpatient services, such as audiology, mental health, telehealth, ambulatory
care, an eye clinic, physical and occupational therapy, prosthetics, dental services, a lab
and pharmacy, and ancillary and diagnostic services, which are not all currently available
in the City at the existing location, avoiding the need for veterans to travel out of the
Bakersfield area for these services.
F. The Project creates a comprehensively planned, advanced-care VA medical clinic that
provides community vitality, economic growth, and employment opportunities in the City
of Bakersfield.
G. Upon build-out, the Project provides a VA medical clinic with maximum operational
efficiency to optimize health care outcomes for veterans and create a space for increased
patient and staff satisfaction.
H. The Project enables veterans to receive a full range of services not currently available in
the City, eliminating the need for long-distance driving to Los Angeles for certain services.
I. The Project creates valuable short term construction and long term employment
opportunities for residents of the City.
J. The Project implements the City’s General Plan by developing an underutilized site that is
adjacent to urban infrastructure, with a use consistent with the City’ General Plan and
zoning code.
K. The Project implements Federal and State policy by providing needed health care to a
vulnerable community of veterans.
The Planning Commission hereby declares that the foregoing benefits provided to the public
through the approval and implementation of the Project outweigh the identified significant adverse
environmental impact of the Project that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. The
Planning Commission finds that each of the Project’s benefits separately and individually outweigh all
of the unavoidable adverse environmental effects identified in the EIR and therefore finds those
impacts to be acceptable.
4.0 Additional Facts on Record
4.1 Adoption of a Monitoring Plan for Mitigation Measures
Pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code, the City of Bakersfield hereby
adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”). The City finds that the MMRP
is designed to ensure compliance with the changes (i.e., mitigation measures) imposed on the Project
to mitigate or avoid effects on the environment during Project implementation. The MMRP is on file
with the City of Bakersfield Development Services Department, 1715 Chester Avenue, 2nd Floor,
Bakersfield, CA 93301.
Veterans Affairs Community-Based Outpatient Clinic Project
Findings of Fact SCH No. 2022080337
55
4.2 Custodian of Record
The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings
have been based are located at the City of Bakersfield Development Services Department, 1715 Chester
Avenue, 2nd Floor Bakersfield, CA 93301. The custodian for these records is Louis Ramirez, Associate
Planner II. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6.
SARDINIA DRBERGAMODRVIA MARISOL ST
STATE RD
WILSON
AVE
LUCCA
CT
BROOKDALEAVE
CHERRY
GLENCT
PEMBROKE
AVE
WASHINGTON AVE
VIA FONTENELLE DRSARBONNE DR
VARESE
CT ELTEJONAVEVICTOR STARTHUR AVESHELDON DRPEMBROKE AVETALLMANAVE CASTAICAVEWOODROW AVE
MORAGA CT BRANDONWAYRU THERFORDCTLANDCO DRO LIVE TREE CT
CARTER AVE
SANDALWOOD STROSCOMAREST
VENETO ST
BASILICATA DR
EMILIADRPRYOR STAREZZOCT
S
T
A
T
E
R
D
BENEVENTO CTSICILY CT
ATLAS CT
LOMBARDY CT LOGAN STNOMI STHANK RD
LANDCO DRR
O
B
ERTSL
NKNUDSENDR
KNUDSEN DRST
A
T
E
RDVICTOR STOLIVE DR OLIVEDRMOHAWK STHAGEMAN RD 99SPHERE OF
INFLUENCE
BEARDSLEYCANA
L
D
I
T
C
H
B
E
AR
D
SLEYCANAL
San Lauren
Elementary
School
CITY LIMIT CITY LIMITCITY LIMIT
Copyright nearmap 2015
Document Name: 2020_11_10zc
0 300 600
Feet
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
AERIAL
SPR 21-0399
Project Location
SPR 21-0399