HomeMy WebLinkAboutGPA-ZC No. 19-0342 NT:JE:PJ/S:\03_Advance Planning\01_GPAs\01_Active\2019\19-0342_McAllister Ranch\01_Hearing Documents\01_PC\Staff Report_GPA.ZC
19-0342.docx
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING DATE: October 3, 2024 AGENDA: 6.a
TO: Chair Cater and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Paul Johnson, Planning Director
DATE: September 27, 2024
WARD: 1
FILE: GPA/ZC/SPA No. 19-0342 (McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project)
STAFF PLANNER: Noeli Topete, Associate Planner
REQUEST: Buena Vista Water Storage District and Rosedale Rio Bravo Water Storage District are
proposing the following actions on 2,072 acres located at the northwest corner of the Panama Lane and
South Allen Road Intersection: (1) an amendment of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan (MBGP)
Land Use Element to change the designation from SR (Suburban Residential), LR (Low Density Residential),
LMR (Low Medium Density Residential), HMR (High Medium Density Residential), HR (High Density
Residential), and GC (General Commercial) to R-EA (Resource – Extensive); (2) an amendment of the MBGP
Circulation Element to remove all McAllister Ranch interior street alignments approved by Resolution 094-
07; (3) a change in zone classification from R-1 (One Family Dwelling), E (Estate), R-2/PUD (Limited
Multiple Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), R-3/PUD (Multiple Family Dwelling/Planned Unit
Development), C-1/PCD (Neighborhood Commercial/Precise Commercial Development), C-C-/PCD-PE
(Commercial Center/Precise Commercial Development-Petroleum Extraction Combining) and DI (Drill
Island) to A-WR (Agriculture-Water Recharge Combining); (4) a Specific Plan Amendment to rescind the
McAllister Ranch Specific Plan; and (5) CEQA findings per CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091, Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, and certification of a Final EIR.
APPLICANT/OWNER: Buena Vista Water
Storage District
ADDITIONAL OWNER: Rosedale Rio Bravo
Water Storage District
525 North Main Street 525 North Main Street
Buttonwillow, CA Buttonwillow, CA
PROJECT LOCATION: Northwest corner of the Panama Lane and South Allen Road Intersection.
APNs: 537-020-01 thru -32; 532-030-04 thru -12,-14 thru -36, -40 and -56; 537-010-42,-47,-50,-54,-59
PROJECT SIZE: 2,072 acres CEQA: Environmental Impact Report
BAKERSFIELD
THE SOUND OF S'Olllff,f/4w;, Be#.et
GPA/ZC 19-0342 Page 2
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: SR (Suburban Residential), LR (Low Density Residential), LMR
(Low Medium Density Residential), HMR (High Medium Density Residential), HR (High Density
Residential), and GC (General Commercial).
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: R-EA (Resource – Extensive)
EXISTING ZONE CLASSIFICATION: R-1 (One Family Dwelling), E (Estate), R-2/PUD (Limited Multiple Family
Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), R-3/PUD (Multiple Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), C-
1/PCD (Neighborhood Commercial/Precise Commercial Development), C-C/PCD-PE (Commercial
Center/Planned Commercial Development – Petroleum Extraction Combining), and DI (Drill Island).
PROPOSED ZONE CLASSIFICATION: A-WR (Agriculture-Water Recharge Combining);
STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends: (1) ADOPTING the Resolution adopting California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15091 Findings, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program,
and certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report; (2) APPROVING the General Plan Amendment to
the Land Use Element by changing the designation from SR (Suburban Residential), LR (Low Density
Residential), LMR (Low Medium Density Residential), HMR (High Medium Density Residential), HR (High
Density Residential), and GC (General Commercial) to R-EA (Resource – Extensive); (3) APPROVING the
General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element by removing all McAllister Ranch interior street
alignments approved by Resolution 094-07; (4) adopt Resolution; APPROVING change in zone
classification from R-1 (One Family Dwelling), E (Estate), R-2/PUD (Limited Multiple Family
Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), R-3/PUD (Multiple Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), C-
1/PCD (Neighborhood Commercial/Precise Commercial Development), C-C-/PCD-PE (Commercial
Center/Precise Commercial Development-Petroleum Extraction Combining) and DI (Drill Island) to A-WR
(Agriculture-Water Recharge Combining); and (5) APPROVING the specific plan amendment to rescind the
McAllister Ranch Specific Plan, and recommend the same to City Council.
SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The project site is mostly undeveloped but contains several active and abandoned
oil wells. Surrounding properties are primarily developed as: north- water banking operations (County
jurisdiction) and agricultural zoned for future residential (City jurisdiction); east – residential and
agricultural zoned for future residential; south - agriculture and water banking operations (County
jurisdiction); west – water banking operations (County jurisdiction).
BACKGROUND AND TIMELINE:
• December 18, 1991 – City Council approved pre-zoning classification of A-20A (Agriculture-20 Acre
Minimum Lot Size) for the project site (Ordinance No. 3425).
• November 15, 1993 – Kern County Board of Supervisors certified an EIR (State Clearinghouse No.
1993032017), adopted the McAllister Ranch Specific Plan, and amended the Metropolitan
Bakersfield 2010 General Plan to implement the McAllister Ranch project, which is a 2,000+ acre
master-planned community (Resolution 93-724). The Specific Plan proposed developing 1,160 acres
of residential land (9,000 residential units), 355 acres of commercial and office space, 290 acres of
recreational facilities (golf course and lake), fire station, library, three school sites, and a potential
high-speed rail terminal. All uses totaled to approximately 2,070 acres.
• December 20, 2006 – The project site was annexed into the City as part of McAllister Ranch
annexation (Annexation No. 518).
• July 19, 2006 – City Council approved Zone Change No. 06-0321 changing the zone classification
from A-20-A (Agriculture-20 Acre Minimum Lot Size) to E Estate – One Family Dwelling) on 143.09
acres, R-1 (One Family Dwelling) on 988.82 acres, R-2 PUD (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling
Planned Unit Development) on 303.21 acres, R-3 PUD (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling Planned
Unit Development) on 159.67 acres, C-1 PCD (Neighborhood Commercial Planned Commercial
Development) on 118.30 acres, C-C PCD PE (Commercial Center Planned Commercial Development
GPA/ZC 19-0342 Page 3
and Petroleum Extraction Combining) on 320.10 acres, and DI (Drilling Island). The purpose of the
zone change was to provide consistency with the McAllister Ranch that was approved in 1993 by
Kern County. Subsequent to those initial approvals, a Development Agreement with Kern County,
several Vesting Tentative Maps, grading permits and an Annexation Agreement with the City have
been obtained by the property owner for the McAllister Ranch project. .
PROJECT ANALYSIS:
Project Description. The project is intended to change the allowable land uses on approximately 2,072
acres from residential, commercial, office, and recreation to a groundwater recharge and recovery facility
in southwest Bakersfield (Attachment A). The project applicant is the Buena Vista Water Storage District
(BVWSD). The project will include and involve the following actions:
1. General Plan Amendment to:
a. amend the Land Use Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan (MBGP) to change the
designation of the Property from SR (Suburban Residential), LR (Low Density Residential), LMR
(Low Medium Density Residential), HMR (High Medium Density Residential), HR (High Density
Residential), and GC (General Commercial) to R-EA (Resource – Extensive); and
b. amend the Circulation Element of the MBGP to remove all McAllister Ranch interior street
alignments approved by Resolution 094-07, including McAllister Drive, Canfield Parkway, Old
Settler Road, Stetson Way, Erikson Drive, Marino Parkway, Conestoga Way, and any other
unnamed local streets within the Plan boundary with no other changes to Circulation for Panama
Lane, the West Beltway, or South Allen Road.
2. Zone Change to:
a. change the zone classification from R-1 (One Family Dwelling), E (Estate), R-2/PUD (Limited
Multiple Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), R-3/PUD (Multiple Family
Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), C-1/PCD (Neighborhood Commercial/Precise Commercial
Development), C-C-/PCD-PE (Commercial Center/Precise Commercial Development-Petroleum
Extraction Combining) and DI (Drill Island) to A-WR (Agriculture-Water Recharge Combining).
3. Specific Plan Amendment to:
a. rescind the McAllister Ranch Specific Plan, including all goals, policies, and implementation
measures.
It is relevant to recognize the Draft EIR referenced that an amendment to the Housing Element of the
MBGP may be required stating the housing units proposed with the McAllister Ranch Project were part of
the 5th Cycle Housing Element sites inventory. The 5th Cycle has subsequently expired, and City staff is
actively working with the California Department of Housing and Community Development for certification
of the 6th Cycle Housing Element. None of the housing units proposed with the McAllister Ranch Project
are included in the 6th Cycle; therefore, there is no requirement to amend the Housing Element of the
MBGP as part of the groundwater recharge and recovery facility.
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 required for the project to
adequately analyze the potential impacts of the project to the existing environment.
In accordance with CEQA 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 indicate
that an EIR would be prepared to evaluate the Project’s potential to impact the environment. The NOP
also was distributed to potential responsible and trustee agencies and other interested parties for a 30-
day public review period that commenced on June 12, 2020. The purpose of distributing the NOP was to
solicit responses to assist the Lead Agency in identifying the full scope and range of potential
GPA/ZC 19-0342 Page 4
environmental concerns associated with the project, so that these issues could be fully examined in this
EIR.
Based on the analysis contained in the Initial Study and comments received in response to the
NOP/Scoping, a Notice of Availability (“NOA”) and Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”) were
prepared for the project in accordance with CEQA (Attachment B). The NOA/DEIR was circulated for a 45-
day public and agency review period from July 18, 2022, to September 1, 2022 (State Clearinghouse No.
20220060267). The DEIR was also available on the Bakersfield City Planning Division webpage. In
response, seven comment letters were received. Please refer to the Final EIR for the letters, a summary
of the comments, and Lead Agency responses (Attachment C).
Effects Found to Have No Impact. Based on the findings of the Initial Study/Notice of Preparation and the
results of the scoping process, the project was determined to have no impact to several subject areas. The
following subject areas were therefore not analyzed in the EIR:
• Aesthetics
• Agricultural Resources and Forestry
• Transportation
• Wildfire
Less Than Significant Impacts (Including Significant Impacts That Can Be Mitigated, Avoided, or
Substantially Lessened). The EIR addresses all potentially significant environmental impacts the Lead
Agency identified during the Notice of Preparation and scoping process. After further study and
environmental review in the EIR, it was determined that threshold impacts to the following subject areas
would have no impact, be less than significant, and/or could be reduced to a less than significant level
with the incorporation of mitigation measures:
• Air Quality (Mitigation Measure)
• Biological Resources (Mitigation Measure)
• Cultural Resources (Mitigation Measure)
• Energy
• Geology, Soils, and Seismicity (Mitigation Measure)
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Mitigation Measure)
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use/Planning
• Noise and Vibration
• Population and Housing
• Public Services
• Recreation
• Tribal Cultural Resources (Mitigation Measure)
• Utilities/Service Systems (Mitigation Measure)
• Cumulative Impacts (Mitigation Measure)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The EIR contains 34 mitigation measures to reduce
significant impacts from the project to less than significant levels, and a Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (MMRP) has been included as part of this staff report (Attachment D).
Significant and Unavoidable Impacts. There were no impacts that were found to be significant and
unavoidable. Therefore, the Lead Agency does not need to adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093.
GPA/ZC 19-0342 Page 5
Findings. CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 requires written findings and a brief explanation of the
rationales for each finding for each significant and insignificant impact as identified in the EIR. (Attachment
E)
Project Objectives. CEQA Guidelines Section 15124(b) requires a statement of project objectives. Primary
water management goals of independent water storage districts, landowners, and water users within
their respective boundaries, as well as water banking partners are to provide a reliable, affordable, and
usable water supply through economic and efficient storage, distribution, and use of available water
supplies. Such districts must also facilitate programs that protect and benefit the groundwater basins that
underlie their areas, as required by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) (California
Water Code Sections 10720 et seq.).
In support of the general water management goal described above, the project would provide the
following benefits (purposes):
• Conserve available water supplies for use during below-average years or as otherwise needed for
Buena Vista Water Storage District (BVWSD) and Rosedale Rio Bravo Water Storage District’s
(RRBWSD) purposes;
• Provide water recharge, storage, and recovery capacity , which would allow for the efficient
management of water supplies in BVWSD’s and RRBWSD’s service areas; and
• Provide flexibility for implementing Conjunctive Use Programs.
The project would achieve its purpose and goal through the following objectives:
• To increase water supply reliability in the area, in a cost-effective and environmentally sound
manner, by providing a means to store water in the groundwater aquifer and provide a means to
extract and use the stored groundwater when needed;
• To reduce BVWSD’s and RRBWSD’s dependence on the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta (Delta)
through programs such as the State Water Project (SWP) and Central Valley Project (CVP), by storing
water locally in the groundwater aquifer for later extraction and use;
• Capture, recharge, and store water from the Kern River, SWP, Federal projects, and other available
sources for later use;
• Provide operating flexibility for BVWSD’s and RRBWSD’s existing and future Conjunctive Use
Programs with banking partners, exchanges, and sales;
• Assist in achieving groundwater sustainability within Kern County Sub-basin of the San Joaquin
Valley Groundwater Basin through implementation of projects consistent with California Executive
Order N-10-19 directing State agencies to develop a “water resilience portfolio”; and
• Provide ecosystem public benefits and water supply benefits for agricultural and Municipal and
Industrial refuge uses.
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 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. The alternatives were
GPA/ZC 19-0342 Page 6
analyzed in more detail in Volume 1 - Chapter 19 of the EIR. 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.
• Alternative 1 (No Project Alternative)
o Characteristics: No construction of groundwater recharge ponds, conveyance pipeline, or
infrastructure to operate groundwater recharge facility at the site of the previously approved
McAllister Ranch Specific Plan area. General plan and zoning approvals for the specific plan
would remain in effect.
o Relationship to Project Objectives: Would not achieve any of the proposed project’s objectives.
• Alternative 2 (Reduced Pumping Alternative)
o Characteristics: Additional restrictions on the timing and amount of groundwater recovery to
avoid or reduce pumping interference in non-project wells.
o Relationship to Project Objectives: Would achieve most of the proposed project’s objectives,
though to a reduced level of performance.
• Alternative 3 (Reduced Recharge Area Alternative)
o Characteristics: Reduced area operated as part of the proposed project by removing Basin 24
from the project area.
o Relationship to Project Objectives: Would achieve most of the Proposed Project’s objectives,
though to a reduced level of performance.
Environmentally Superior Alternative. An EIR must identify the environmentally superior alternative to
the proposed project. Of the alternatives evaluated , the Reduced Recharge Area Alternative is considered
the environmentally superior alternative (excluding the project), as it would reduce some of the
environmental impacts associated with implementing the project. This alternative would result in the
avoidance of impacts on some special-status plant and wildlife species and cultural and tribal cultural
resources. The Reduced Recharge Area Alternative would achieve most of the project’s objectives, but at
a reduced performance level, amount of water storage, and potentially the availability of groundwater for
recovery.
Alternative Eliminated from Further Consideration. An EIR is required to identify any alternatives that
were considered by the Lead Agency but were rejected as infeasible. During the development of the
project, five (5) alternative project feature options were considered and dismissed. These alternative
project features were rejected because either: (1) it could not accomplish the basic objectives of the
project; (2) it would not have resulted in a reduction of significant adverse environmental impacts; or (3)
it was considered infeasible to construct or operate.
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 Final 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 proposed project and environmental determination 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
GPA/ZC 19-0342 Page 7
ordinance and state law. Signs are required as part of the public notification process and must be posted
between 20 to 60 days before the public hearing date. Photographs of the posted signage and the
Declaration of Posting Public Hearing Notice signed by the applicant are on file at the Planning Division.
Comments Received. As of this writing, no comments have been received in response to the public
hearing notice.
Tribal Consultation. In accordance with Senate Bill (SB) 18, a letter was sent by staff on May 28, 2020, to
inform the American Indian Tribes about the proposed project and its site location. This notification marks
the initiation of the 90-day consultation period mandated by SB 18. One tribe, the San Manuel Band of
Mission Indians, formally responded that they did not wish to consult on the project. Two tribes, the Santa
Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe and the Tejon Indian Tribe, formally requested consultation on the
project. No responses were received from any of the other tribes contacted. In addition, both the Santa
Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe and the Tejon Indian Tribe had contacted the City in response to the
Notice of Preparation that was issued to the public on May 22, 2021. In their respective emails to the City,
both tribes requested consultation in collaboration with the other tribe.
The City held a teleconference call with the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut and Tejon Indian Tribes on
October 22, 2021, to discuss the project and the potential to impact tribal cultural resources. This was
followed by a field visit to the project site by the City and the Tejon Indian Tribe (the Santa Rosa Rancheria
Tachi Yokut Tribe deferred to the Tejon Indian Tribe for the purposes of the field review) on November 3,
2021. The known locations of Native American archaeological sites were visited and methods for
protecting the resources from ground disturbance and inundation were discussed. As of writing, no
additional tribal consultation has been requested.
CONCLUSIONS:
Consistency with Surrounding Development. Land uses surrounding the site include water banking
operations, , agriculture, and residential. The project would provide for water banking facility. Therefore,
the project would be compatible with the surrounding area.
Consistency with Zoning Ordinance. The City of Bakersfield uses zoning to establish uses and
development standards for properties. The proposed change in zone classification to A-WR (Agriculture
Water-Recharge Combining) would allow the project to be constructed consistent with the Zoning
Ordinance.
Consistency with Land Use Element. As part of the CEQA analysis, Staff has reviewed the proposal for
compatibility with the applicable goals and policies contained within the Metropolitan Bakersfield General
Plan Land Use Element. The following goals and policies in the MBGP may be applicable to the project:
• Goal 2: Accommodate new development which provides a full mix of uses to support its population.
• Goal 3: Accommodate new development which is compatible with and complements existing land
uses.
• Goal 3: Accommodate new development which capitalizes on the planning area’s natural
environmental setting, including the Kern River and the foothills.
• Goal 6: Accommodate new development that is sensitive to the natural environment, and accounts
for environmental hazards.
• Policy 52: Locate new development where infrastructure is available or can be expanded to serve
the proposed development.
The proposed change in land use designation to EA (Resource – Extensive); and removing the street
alignments within the project would further the MBGP’s objectives, policies, general land uses, and
programs related to hydrology, and sustainability.
GPA/ZC 19-0342 Page 8
Consistency with McAllister Ranch Specific Plan. The project’s uses are not consistent with the goals,
policies, and implementation measures of the existing McAllister Ranch Specific Plan. However, by
rescinding the Specific Plan, the project would no longer conflict with the goals, policies.
Recommendation. Staff recommends: (1) ADOPTING the Resolution adopting California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15091 Findings, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and certifying
the Final Environmental Impact Report; (2) APPROVING the General Plan Amendment to the Land Use
Element by changing the designation from SR (Suburban Residential), LR (Low Density Residential), LMR
(Low Medium Density Residential), HMR (High Medium Density Residential), HR (High Density
Residential), and GC (General Commercial) to R-EA (Resource – Extensive); (3) APPROVING the General
Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element by removing all McAllister Ranch interior street alignments
approved by Resolution 094-07; (4) adopt Resolution; APPROVING change in zone classification from R-1
(One Family Dwelling), E (Estate), R-2/PUD (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development),
R-3/PUD (Multiple Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), C-1/PCD (Neighborhood
Commercial/Precise Commercial Development), C-C-/PCD-PE (Commercial Center/Precise Commercial
Development-Petroleum Extraction Combining) and DI (Drill Island) to A-WR (Agriculture-Water Recharge
Combining); and (5) APPROVING the specific plan amendment to rescind the McAllister Ranch Specific
Plan, and recommend the same to City Council.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Map Set
• Aerial
• Zone Classification
• General Plan Designation
B. Resolution 094-07
C. Draft Environmental Impact Report with Appendices
D. Final Environmental Impact Report with Appendices
E. Mitigation, Monitoring, & Reporting Program
F. Draft CEQA Findings
G. Planning Commission Draft Resolutions
• CEQA Resolution with Attachments
• GPA/SPA Resolution with Attachments
• ZC Resolution with Attachments
To view Attachments B-F please visit City of Bakersfield’s Planning Division website linked here:
https://www.bakersfieldcity.us/267/Planning-Services
Alternatively, you can visit the following website to access all Planning Commission backup
materials. Select “5:30 PM Planning Commission ” on October 3, 2024, on the following link.
https://pub-bakersfield.escribemeetings.com/
Page 1 of 3
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BAKERSFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT; ADOPT SECTION 15091 FINDINGS; AND ADOPT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, FOR AN
AMENDMENT TO THE METROPOLITAN BAKERSFIELD GENERAL PLAN LAND USE, CIRCULATION , AND HOUSING ELEMENT, AN AMENDMENT
THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE ZONE CLASSIFICATION, AND RESCINDING THE MCALLISTER RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PANAMA LANE AND SOUTH ALLEN ROAD (GPA/ZC/SPA NO. 19-0342).
WHEREAS, Buena Vista Water Storage District and Rosedale Rio Bravo Water
Storage District filed applications with the City of Bakersfield proposing the following
actions on 2,072 acres located at the northwest corner of the Panama Lane and South
Allen Road Intersection: (1) an amendment of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan
(MBGP) Land Use Element to change the designation from SR (Suburban Residential), LR
(Low Density Residential), LMR (Low Medium Density Residential), HMR (High Medium
Density Residential), HR (High Density Residential), and GC (General Commercial) to R-
EA (Resource – Extensive); (2) an amendment of the MBGP Circulation Element to remove
all McAllister Ranch interior street alignments approved by Resolution 094-07; (3) a
change in zone classification from R-1 (One Family Dwelling), E (Estate), R-2/PUD (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), R-3/PUD (Multiple Family
Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), C-1/PCD (Neighborhood Commercial/Precise Commercial Development), C-C-/PCD-PE (Commercial Center/Precise Commercial
Development-Petroleum Extraction Combining) and DI (Drill Island) to A-WR (Agriculture-Water Recharge Combining); (4) a Specific Plan Amendment to rescind the McAllister
Ranch Specific Plan on 2,072 acres, generally located at the northwest corner of the Panama Lane and South Allen Road Intersection (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the Project proposes development of a water banking facility (storage
and recovery) on the Property, including water conveyance to and from the Property
and spreading and recovery facilities onsite at the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Secretary of the Planning Commission set Thursday, October 3, 2024
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 (EIR) and Project as required by
Government Code Section 65353, and notice of the public hearing was given in the
manner provided in Title 17 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, an initial study was conducted and it was determined the Project would
have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, the McAllister Ranch
Groundwater Banking Project Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No.
Page 2 of 3
20220060267) was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and adoption of
Environmental Impact Reports as set forth in CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures have been duly followed by the
Lead Agency and the Planning Commission; 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
WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield Development Services Department (1715 Chester
Avenue, Bakersfield, California) is the custodian of all documents and other materials
upon which the environmental determination is based; and
WHEREAS, the facts presented in the staff report, environmental document and
special studies, and evidence received both in writing and by verbal testimony at the above referenced public hearing 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 the 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 the
Project.
WHEREAS, the “Mitigation Measures, Monitoring and Reporting Program,”
attached as Exhibit “A,” is incorporated into the Project; and
Page 3 of 3
WHEREAS, the “Section 15091 Statement of Facts, Findings, and Mitigation
Measures,” 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 recommended for certification
by the City Council.
3. The Project is subject to mitigation, monitoring and reporting program
found in Exhibit A for the Project located on the map as shown in Exhibit C,
both of which are incorporated herein.
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
October 3, 2024 on a motion by Commissioner ________ and seconded by Commissioner
________, by the following vote.
AYES:
NOES: ABSENT:
APPROVED
____________________________________ Daniel Cater, 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
Exhibit C: Location Map
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 1
MCALLISTER RANCH GROUNDWATER BANKING PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
The following mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) summary table
includes the mitigation measures identified in the City of Bakersfield McAllister Ranch
Groundwater Banking Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). For each
mitigation measure, this table identifies monitoring and reporting actions that shall be
carried out, the party responsible for implementing these actions, and the monitoring
schedule. This table also includes a column where responsible parties can check off
monitoring and reporting actions as they are completed. It is the responsibility of the
Contractor to ensure that actions required for all of the mitigation measures listed
herein are included in the project plans and specifications. It is the responsibility of the
City to review and confirm that all of the mitigation measure actions described herein
are in the project plans and specifications.
Acronyms and Abbreviations
AST aboveground storage tanks
BMP best management practice
BNLL Blunt-nosed leopard lizard
BUOW Burrowing Owl
BVWSD Buena Vista Water Storage District
CalGreen California Green Building Standards Code
CARB California Air Resources Board
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CDPH California Department of Public Health
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CNDDB California Native Diversity Database
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
ESA Environmentally Sensitive Areas
dbh diameter at breast height
F&G Fish and Game
FESA Federal Endangered Species Act
GKR Giant Kangaroo Rat
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
ITP Incidental Take Permit
MBHCP Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MLD most likely descendent
NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 2
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Pub. Res. Code Public Resources Code
RRBWSD Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District
SJKF San Jose Kitt Fox
SVP Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
SWHA Swainson’s hawk
SWPPP stormwater pollution prevention plan
TAC Technical Advisory Committee
TCR tribal cultural resource
TKR Tipton Kangaroo Rat
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
USFS United States Forest Service
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
VFMP Valley Fever Management Plan
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 3
Air Quality
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
AQ-1. Develop and Implement a Valley Fever
Management Plan
BVWSD, RRBWSD, or their contractors shall
implement the following measures:
• Prepare a Valley Fever Management Plan
(VFMP). The VFMP shall be submitted to the
California Department of Public Health and
the Kern County Department of Public
Health for review and to the City of
Bakersfield for final approval prior to the
start of construction. The VFMP shall
include, but will not be limited to, the
following elements as currently
recommended by the California Department
of Public Health:
o Adopt site plans and work practices that
reduce workers’ exposure and which
would also help minimize primary and
secondary exposure to the community
through direct dispersal of spores or
secondary dispersal from contaminated
workers or equipment bringing spores to
the community. The site plans and work
practices may include some or all of the
following measures:
‒ Minimize the area of soil disturbed.
1. Prepare and
implement a
VFMP, along with
BVWSD and
RRBWSD and
submit to the
CDPH, Kern
County
Department of
Public Health, and
the City of
Bakersfield for
consultation prior
to the start of
construction.
2. Comply with all
measures in the
VFMP during
construction, to
measure
specifications.
1. Ensure the
preparation and
implementation of
a VFMP and
submit to the
CDPH and Kern
County
Department of
Public Health for
consultation prior
to the start of
construction.
2. Ensure the
contractor
complies with all
measures in the
VFMP during
construction.
1. Prior to the start
of construction
and during
construction.
2. During
construction.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 4
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
‒ Use water, appropriate soil
stabilizers, and/or re-vegetation to
reduce airborne dust.
‒ Stabilize all spoils piles by tarping or
other methods.
‒ Provide air-conditioned cabs for
vehicles that generate heavy dust and
make sure workers keep windows
and vents closed.
‒ Suspend work during heavy winds.
• Take measures to reduce transporting
spores offsite, such as the following:
o Clean tools, equipment, and vehicles
before transporting offsite.
o If workers’ clothing is likely to be heavily
contaminated with dust, provide coveralls
and change rooms, and showers where
possible.
• Identify a health care provider for
occupational injuries and illnesses who is
knowledgeable about the diagnosis and
treatment of Valley Fever. This helps to
ensure proper diagnosis and treatment as
well as tracking potential outbreaks that may
affect the community.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 5
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
• Train workers and supervisors about the risk
of Valley Fever, the work activities that may
increase the risk, and the measures used
onsite to reduce exposure. Also train on how
to recognize Valley Fever symptoms. This
helps to ensure proper diagnosis and
treatment as well as tracking potential
outbreaks that may affect community.
• Encourage workers to report Valley Fever
symptoms promptly to a supervisor. Not
associating these symptoms with workplace
exposures can lead to a delay in appropriate
diagnosis and treatment. This helps to
ensure proper diagnosis and treatment as
well as tracking potential outbreaks that may
affect community.
Biological Resources
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
BIO-1. Conduct a Preconstruction Survey for
Kern Mallow
If the 160-acre area of chenopod scrub habitat
onsite will be impacted by project-related
activities, an appropriately timed
preconstruction survey for Kern mallow shall be
conducted by a qualified biologist during the
1. N/A 1. Retain a qualified
biologist to conduct a
preconstruction
survey for Kern
Mallow, to measure
specifications, if it's
determined that the
area of chenopod
1. Prior to the
start of
construction.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 6
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
spring season (or when reference populations
are flowering) that precedes construction. The
distribution of the Kern mallow population shall
be marked in the field with flagging and
mapped with GPS, and population size/number
of individual Kern mallow plants will be
estimated. Within 30 days prior to construction,
a qualified biologist will ensure that all flagging
is still intact and replace flagging as necessary.
scrub habitat will be
impacted by project
activities.
BIO-2. Implement Kern Mallow Avoidance
Buffers
A minimum 50-foot avoidance buffer measured
outward from the individual plant, cluster of
plants, or mapped population boundaries shall
be maintained around populations of Kern
mallow in perpetuity. If avoidance buffers are
encroached upon, Mitigation Measure BIO-3
would be implemented.
1. Ensure workers
comply with 50-
foot avoidance
buffer during
project activities.
1. Retain a qualified
biologist to create a
50-foot avoidance
buffer for all Kern
Mallow individuals
and clusters within the
project area.
1. Prior to
ground
disturbance
or vegetation
removal.
BIO-3. Compliance with USFWS ITP/HCP
Requirements, if Applicable
If project activities result in encroachment on
Kern mallow avoidance buffers, a qualified
biologist shall evaluate and quantify the impact
to Kern mallow including identifying the
impacted number of plants and the impacted
acreage. BVWSD and its contractors shall
comply with MBHCP requirements including
1. Comply with
qualified biologist
evaluations.
2. Comply with
MBHCP
requirements and
coordinate with
USFWS, if needed,
to develop a
Salvage/Relocation
1. Retain a qualified
biologist to evaluate
and quantify the
impact to Kern
mallow, if needed,
per measure
specifications.
2. Ensure BVWSD
compliance with
MBHCP requirements
1. During
construction,
if needed.
2. During
construction,
if needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 7
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
notification requirements, and, if applicable,
coordinate with USFWS to develop a
Salvage/Relocation Plan for Kern mallow. For
example, a Relocation Plan strategy may
include:
A. Collection of seed by a biologist with
proper plant collecting permits, with
reseeding undertaken at the site
following the activity during
appropriate seasonal timeframes and
weather conditions favorable for
germination and growth.
B. In areas where mapped Kern mallow
will be impacted, stockpiling the top 6
inches of topsoil collected to preserve
the seed banks. The soil may be
redistributed in other areas of the
project site that are to be left
undisturbed (if available) or at a
protected offsite location (e.g., Kern
Water Bank land, other lands owned by
BVWSD or RRBWSD).
Plan for Kern
mallow.
and coordination
with USFWS, if
needed, for the
development of a
Salvage/Relocation
Plan for Kern mallow.
BIO-4. Prepare and Implement Environmental
Training Program
A qualified and approved Project Biologist shall
be assigned to the project who shall be
1. N/A
2. Ensure all workers
attend the
environmental
1. Retain a qualified
project biologist to
oversee
environmental
compliance and
1. Prior to the
start of
construction.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 8
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
responsible for overseeing environmental
compliance and protections for special
status/sensitive plants, animals, and habitats
during construction. The Project Biologist shall
be the main point of contact between BVWSD
and RRBWSD and regulatory agencies for
matters involving regulatory compliance for
biological resources.
The Project Biologist shall prepare a project
Environmental Training Program. Employees
and supervising staff working on the project
shall participate in an initial program session
provided by the Project Biologist prior to
initiation of construction activity. At a
minimum, the program shall cover the general
behavior and ecology of the pertinent special-
status species, legal protection, penalties for
federal and state law violations, and protective
measures. A fact sheet/brochure or PowerPoint
presentation conveying this information shall
be made available to on-site personnel,
construction workers, staff involved in
operations, and other individuals who may
enter the project site.
New employees shall receive the training prior
to working on the active site, with training
provided by the Project Biologist or a qualified
biologist/biological monitor, or by viewing a
PowerPoint presentation. Upon receiving the
training, each trainee shall sign a record sheet
training program
prior to the start of
construction
activities.
protections for
special-status species
during construction.
2. Ensure the Project
biologist prepares
and presents an
environmental
training program
prior to the start
of construction
activities.
2. Prior to the
start of
construction.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 9
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
verifying their participation in the training and
acknowledging their environmental compliance
responsibilities while working within the
project site.
BIO-5. Biological Construction Monitoring
A qualified biological monitor shall be on-site
during all earthwork activities to monitor
construction activities, monitor avoidance of
buffer areas, and ensure compliance with all
environmental requirements pertaining to
biological resources. The qualified biological
monitor will clearly understand the Project
construction and operational activities,
understand the project design plan set, and
maintain a clear and open communication line
to the Project’s construction manager to
understand the Project implementation
schedule. If there are any questions or
uncertainties regarding how the Project will be
constructed, then the biological monitor will
ask the Project construction manager for
details and status updates.
The monitoring biologist shall be contacted as
soon as possible following the release of
potentially hazardous materials into habitat. If
a release of potentially hazardous materials
occurs within special-status species habitat, the
Project Biologist and/or biological monitor will
monitor cleanup and containment. The
1. N/A
2. Follow the
direction of the
project biologist/
biological monitor
to cleanup/contain
hazardous
materials within
special-status
species habitats, if
needed.
3. N/A
4. N/A
5. Comply with all
approved biologist
requirements such
as halting any
activities that
could result in take
or injury/mortality
of special-status
species.
6. Any contractor,
employee, or third
1. Retain a qualified
biologist to monitor
construction activities,
monitor avoidance of
buffer areas, and
ensure compliance
with all environmental
requirements.
2. If needed, the project
biologist and/or
biological monitor will
monitor cleanup and
containment of
potentially hazardous
materials in special-
status species habitat.
3. Ensure that relevant
regulatory agencies
(e.g., USFWS, CDFW,
the City) are notified
of the release of
potentially hazardous
materials and the
remedial action taken
by the contractor as
1. Prior to the
start of
construction
and during
construction.
2. During
construction,
if needed.
3. During
construction,
if needed.
4. During
construction,
if needed.
5. During
construction,
if needed.
6. During
construction,
if needed.
7. During
construction,
if needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 10
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
involved regulatory agencies (e.g., USFWS,
CDFW, the City) will be notified of the release
of potentially hazardous materials and the
remedial action taken by the contractor as soon
as possible, but not later than 24 hours after
the release occurs or is discovered. Within 30
days of completing cleanup activities, a
compliance report will be submitted by the
Project Biologist/biological monitor to the
involved regulatory agencies.
Agency-approved biologists may be required to
conduct or supervise particular activities (e.g.,
burrow/den excavation, species relocation) for
federally and/or state-listed species. The
monitoring biologist shall have the authority to
halt any activities that could result in take or
injury/mortality of special-status species. Any
contractor, employee, or third party
responsible for incidentally taking a federally
and/or state-listed wildlife species shall
immediately report the incident to the Project
Biologist who will then notify the involved
regulatory agencies (e.g., USFWS, CDFW, the
City) within 24 hours by phone and email. All
non-emergency actions will cease immediately
until guidance is received from the regulatory
agencies. Notification must include the date,
time, location, and other pertinent information
of the incident or of the finding of a dead or
injured animal. Written notification will be
party responsible
for incidentally
taking a federally
and/or state-listed
wildlife species
shall immediately
report the incident
to the Project
Biologist who will
then notify the
involved regulatory
agencies (e.g.,
USFWS, CDFW, the
City) within 24
hours by phone
and email.
7. If a species is
incidentally taken,
all non-emergency
actions will cease
immediately until
guidance is
received from the
regulatory
agencies.
8. N/A
soon as possible, but
not later than 24
hours after the release
occurs or is
discovered.
4. Ensure that a
compliance report is
submitted by the
Project
Biologist/biological
monitor to the
involved regulatory
agencies within 30
days of completing
cleanup activities, if
needed.
5. Retain an agency-
approved biologist to
conduct or supervise
activities (e.g.,
burrow/den
excavation, species
relocation) for
federally and/or state-
listed species, if
needed.
6. Ensure the biologist
notifies involved
regulatory agencies if
8. During
construction
and following
construction.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 11
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
provided to the regulatory agencies within 3
working days of the incidental take and will
include the same notification information listed
above. Work shall proceed only after the
imminent threat of take has been resolved.
At minimum, weekly monitoring reports and an
Annual Compliance Report shall be prepared by
the Project Biologist and/or biological
monitor(s) documenting compliance during
construction and operations (i.e., if the
activities during operations require coverage
under a federal ITP and/or state ITP).
Monitoring/compliance reports will include
documentation of project compliance/non-
compliance, special-status species
observations, protective/corrective actions
taken, project site photographs, copies of
Environmental Training Program sign-in sheets,
and any other information considered useful or
relevant.
any contractor,
employee, or third
party incidentally
takes a federally
and/or state-listed
wildlife species shall
within 24 hours by
phone and email, and
by written notification
within 3 working days
of the incidental take.
7. Ensure contractor
halts all non-
emergency actions
until guidance is
received from the
regulatory agencies.
8. Ensure project
biologist completes
weekly monitoring
reports and an annual
compliance report
during construction
and operations (i.e., if
the activities during
operations require
coverage under a
federal ITP and/or
state ITP), per
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 12
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
measure
specifications.
BIO-6. Conduct Pre-construction Biological
Surveys
Within 30 days prior to initiation of
construction, qualified biologists shall conduct
preconstruction surveys for special-status
species in all areas that will be permanently or
temporarily impacted, plus a 200-meter buffer
in areas subject to legal access. Potential dens,
burrows, and nests of special-status species
shall be marked with flagging, mapped with
GPS, and reported to the CNDDB. Work area
boundaries shall be delineated with flagging,
temporary fencing, or other markers deemed
warranted by the Project Biologist to minimize
the potential for offsite impacts associated with
potential vehicle straying.
Avoidance buffers shall be implemented
around the areas that cannot be avoided,
similar to those described in Mitigation
Measures BIO-1 and BIO-2; the appropriate
size/radius of avoidance buffers shall be
determined by the Project Biologist based on
the species/resource and in compliance with
any agency-required standards. Dens, burrows,
and nests that cannot be avoided shall be
addressed with species-specific mitigation
measures (detailed in various mitigation
1. N/A
2. N/A
1. Retain a qualified
biologist to conduct a
pre-construction
survey(s) for special-
status species within
30 days prior to the
start of construction,
plus a 200-meter
buffer in areas subject
to legal access. Ensure
all potential habitats
are marked and
reported to CNDDB
per measure
specifications.
2. Ensure the project
biologist prepares a
preconstruction
survey report and
provides it to BVWSD,
and USFWS and
CDFW, if needed.
1. Prior to the
start of
construction.
2. Prior to the
start of
construction.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 13
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
measures below). A preconstruction survey
report shall be prepared by the Project Biologist
and provided to BVWSD. If required, the survey
report shall also be submitted to USFWS and
CDFW.
BIO-7. Develop and Implement Measures to
Avoid Take of Blunt-nosed Leopard Lizard
In the unlikely event that blunt-nosed leopard
lizards (BNLL) are observed during
preconstruction surveys or construction,
BVWSD and RRBWSD shall coordinate with the
USFWS and CDFW to develop and implement
measures to avoid take of BNLL. Such measures
may include but may not be limited to:
A. Implementation of a BNLL Avoidance
measures and/or Relocation Plan.
B. Avoidance of burrows that could
provide suitable refugia for BNLL.
C. Implementation of avoidance buffers.
D. An exclusion barrier, such as flashing or
other approved fencing material, may
be installed around the burrow
disturbance area. Protocol-level
surveys would be conducted within the
exclusion barrier and all BNLL would be
allowed to egress or would be
1. Comply with
measures A-F, if
needed.
1. Ensure BVWSD and
RRBWSD
coordination with
USFWS and CDFW if
BNLL are observed
during
preconstruction
surveys or during
construction and
implement measures
A-F to avoid take of
BNLL.
1. Before
construction,
or during
construction,
if needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 14
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
removed/relocated (i.e., by a biologist
with all necessary federal and state
permits) until a negative survey result is
achieved within the burrow
disturbance area. The negative survey
result would remain valid until removal
of the exclusion barrier.
E. Excavation of burrows that will be
impacted to verify they lack BNLL or in
a manner that allows BNLL egress away
from the disturbance area.
F. When possible, seasonal restrictions of
project activities in suitable habitat to
occur during BNLL inactivity periods.
BIO-8. Avoid or Relocate Special-Status
Reptiles
If coast horned lizard, Bakersfield legless lizard,
California legless lizard, California glossy snake,
and/or San Joaquin coachwhip are observed
during preconstruction surveys or construction,
the location(s) where they are observed shall
be marked with flagging and mapped with GPS.
To avoid the potential for injury/mortality to
these species resulting from project-related
activities:
1. Comply with
measures A and B,
if needed.
1. If coast horned lizard,
Bakersfield legless
lizard, California
legless lizard,
California glossy
snake, and/or San
Joaquin coachwhip
are observed during
preconstruction
surveys or
construction, ensure
locations where they
are observed are
marked with flagging
1. Prior to the
start of and
during
construction,
if needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 15
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
A. Minimum 50-foot avoidance buffers
shall be implemented at the point(s) of
observation; or
B. A qualified biologist shall capture and
relocate individuals of these species to
suitable habitat outside of the area of
impact per the approved Relocation
Plan as discussed in Mitigation Measure
BIO-9.
and mapped with GPS,
and measures A and B
are followed.
BIO-9. Prepare a Special-Status Species
Relocation Plan
Prior to construction, the Project Biologist shall
prepare a special-status species Relocation Plan
that allows for relocation of special-status
species encountered prior to or during
construction and operations. The Relocation
Plan shall be submitted to the involved
regulatory agencies for review/approval prior
to implementation.
1. N/A 1. Ensure that qualified
biologist prepares a
special-status species
Relocation Plan prior
to construction and
submits it to the
involved agencies for
review and approval
prior to the start of
construction.
1. Prior to the
start of
construction.
BIO-10. Conduct Pre-construction Surveys for
Swainson’s Hawk
If construction occurs between February 1 and
August 31, a qualified biologist shall conduct a
preconstruction survey of suitable nesting
habitat (e.g., potential nest trees, power line
towers, etc.) within 0.5 mile of the project site
no more than 10 days prior to initiation of
1. N/A
2. Comply with
established buffer
and pause work
activities within
the buffer, if
needed.
1. Retain a qualified
biologist to conduct
preconstruction
surveys for
Swainson’s Hawk
within 0.5 mile of the
project site no more
than 10 days prior to
the initiation of
1. Prior to the
start of
construction,
if needed
2. During
construction,
if needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 16
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
construction to ensure that no Swainson’s
hawks have begun nesting activities near the
site. If SWHA absence is reverified, project
activities can proceed providing acceptance by
CDFW of the survey results. If nesting
Swainson’s hawks are detected, buffers shall be
established around active nests in accordance
with Mitigation Measure BIO-11.
construction if it
occurs between
February 1 and
August 31.
2. If nesting Swainson’s
hawks are detected,
ensure the biologist
establishes buffers
around active nests in
accordance with
Measure BIO-11.
BIO-11. Establish Buffers to Avoid or Minimize
Impacts on Swainson’s Hawk
Buffers around active nests will be 0.5 mile
unless a qualified biologist determines, based
on site-specific evaluation, that a smaller buffer
is sufficient to avoid impacts on nesting
Swainson’s hawks. Factors to be considered
when determining buffer size include the
presence of natural buffers provided by
vegetation or topography, nest height,
locations of foraging territory, and baseline
levels of noise and human activity. Buffers shall
be maintained until a qualified biologist has
determined that the young have fledged and
are no longer reliant on the nest or parental
care for survival.
1. Comply with
biologist-
established buffer
and do not
perform activities
within the buffer
unless a qualified
biologist has
determined that
the young have
fledged and are
no longer reliant
on the nest or
parental care for
survival.
1. Ensure biologist
maintain 0.5 miles
buffer unless it is
determined that a
smaller buffer is
sufficient to avoid
impacts on nesting
Swainson’s hawks.
1. Prior to the
start of
construction
and during
construction,
if needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 17
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
In the event that an active SWHA nest is
detected during surveys and a 0.5-mile no-
disturbance buffer is not feasible, Mitigation
Measure BIO-12 shall be implemented.
BIO-12. Swainson’s Hawk Take Authorization
If SWHA are observed within 0.5 mile of the
project site during pre-construction surveys or
during construction, the applicant shall
coordinate with CDFW to determine if a State
Incidental Take Permit, in accordance with F&G
Code Section 2081 (b), is required to comply
with CESA.
1. N/A 1. If SWHA are
observed within 0.5
mile of the project
site during pre-
construction surveys
or during
construction,
coordinate with
CDFW to determine
is a State ITP is
required.
1. Prior to the
start of
construction
of during
construction,
if needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 18
BIO-13. Conduct Pre-construction Surveys for
Burrowing Owl
A qualified biologist shall conduct
preconstruction surveys of all areas of potential
habitat that will be permanently or temporarily
impacted, plus a 200-meter buffer in areas
subject to legal access, to locate active
breeding or wintering BUOW burrows. The
survey(s) shall occur no more than 14 days
prior to ground-disturbing activities (i.e.,
vegetation clearance, grading) or
decommissioning. The survey methodology
shall be consistent with the take avoidance
survey methods outlined in CDFW Staff Report
on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW 2012).
Because BUOW may re-colonize a site after
only a few days, time lapses between project
activities may trigger subsequent surveys,
including, but not limited to, a final survey
conducted within 24 hours prior to ground
disturbance to identify any additional BUOW or
burrows necessitating avoidance, minimization,
or mitigation measures. The need for additional
surveys will be at the final discretion of the
Project Biologist. If BUOW absence is reverified,
project activities can proceed providing
acceptance by CDFW of the survey results. If
burrowing owls are present, avoidance buffers
will be established as specified in Mitigation
Measure BIO-14.
1. N/A 1. Ensure a qualified
biologist conducts
preconstruction
surveys for all areas
of potential
burrowing owl
habitat that will be
permanently or
temporarily
impacted, plus a 200-
meter buffer in areas
subject to legal
access, to locate
active breeding or
wintering BUOW
burrows no more
than 14 days prior to
the start of ground-
disturbing activities.
Ensure subsequent
surveys are
conducted, if
needed, as specified
in the measure.
1. Prior to the
start of
construction.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 19
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
BIO-14. Establish Avoidance Buffers for
Burrowing Owl
If BUOW are detected onsite during
preconstruction surveys or during construction,
no ground-disturbing activities within a
minimum 200-meter avoidance buffer shall
occur around occupied burrows during the
breeding season (February 1 to August 31),
unless authorized by CDFW. During the non-
breeding season (September 1 to January 31),
no ground-disturbing activities within a
minimum 50-meter avoidance buffer shall
occur around occupied burrows, unless
authorized by CDFW.
1. Comply with
buffer
requirements.
1. If BUOW are
detected during
preconstruction
surveys or
construction, ensure
no ground-disturbing
activities occur within
a minimum 200-
meter avoidance
buffer during the
breeding season
(February 1 to August
31), unless
authorized by CDFW,
or, within a minimum
50-meter avoidance
buffer during the
non-breeding season
(September 1 to
January 31), unless
authorized by CDFW.
1. Prior to the
start of
construction
or during
construction,
if needed.
BIO-15. Develop a Burrowing Owl Exclusion
and Mitigation Plan
If burrow avoidance is infeasible during the
non-breeding season or during the breeding
season where resident owls have not yet begun
egg laying or incubation, or where the juveniles
are foraging independently and capable of
independent survival, the qualified biologist
1. Comply with
BUOW Exclusion
and Mitigation
Plan, if needed.
1. The qualified
biologist shall
coordinate with
CDFW to develop a
BUOW Exclusion and
Mitigation Plan if
burrow avoidance is
infeasible during the
1. During
construction,
if needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 20
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
shall coordinate with CDFW to develop a BUOW
Exclusion and Mitigation Plan. An Exclusion and
Mitigation Plan strategy may include:
A. Passive exclusion of BUOW from
burrows within the project site using
one-way doors.
B. Excavation of potential BUOW burrows
that are confirmed to be empty of
BUOW adults and/or young.
C. Creation of artificial BUOW burrows to
offset the loss of known occupied
BUOW burrows.
D. Acquisition of BUOW conservation
lands and/or bank credits.
non-breeding season
or during the
breeding season
where resident owls
have not yet begun
egg laying or
incubation, or where
the juveniles are
foraging
independently and
capable of
independent survival.
BIO-16. Remove Trees or Shrubs Outside of
the Nesting Season
Removal of trees or shrubs shall be scheduled
to occur in the fall and winter (between
September 1 and January 31), outside of the
typical nesting season.
1. Comply with
work window
restrictions for
the removal of
trees and shrubs.
1. Ensure that the
removal of trees or
shrubs shall be
scheduled to occur in
the fall and winter
(between September
1 and January 31),
outside of the typical
nesting season.
1. During
construction.
BIO-17. Conduct Pre-construction Nesting Bird
Surveys
If any construction activities are proposed to
occur during the typical nesting season
1. N/A 1. Ensure that a
qualified biologist
conducts a nesting
bird survey in areas
1. Prior to the
start of
construction.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 21
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
(February 1 to August 31), a nesting bird survey
in areas of suitable nesting habitat (as
determined by the Project Biologist) shall be
conducted by qualified biologists no more than
2 weeks prior to construction to determine
presence/absence of nesting birds. If absence
of nesting birds is verified, construction can
proceed.
of suitable nesting
habitat no more than
2 weeks prior to
construction to
determine
presence/absence of
nesting birds If any
construction
activities are
proposed to occur
during the typical
nesting season
(February 1 to August
31),
BIO-18. Establish Avoidance Buffers Around
Active Nests
If an active bird nest is observed during
preconstruction surveys or during construction,
at a minimum, a 500-foot avoidance buffer
surrounding the nest shall implemented for
nesting raptors and a 250-foot avoidance buffer
shall be implemented for other nesting avian
species, unless USFWS or CDFW authorize a
reduction of these buffers. Nests, eggs, or
young of birds covered by the MBTA and F&G
Code shall not be moved or disturbed until a
qualified biologist has determined that the nest
has become inactive or young have fledged and
become independent of the nest.
1. Comply with
avoidance buffers
during
construction.
1. If an active bird nest
is observed during
preconstruction
surveys or during
construction, ensure
that a 500-foot
avoidance buffer
surrounding the nest
shall implemented
for nesting raptors
and a 250-foot
avoidance buffer
shall be implemented
for other nesting
avian species, unless
1. Prior to and
during
construction,
if needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 22
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
USFWS or CDFW
authorize a reduction
of these buffers.
Ensure that nests,
eggs, or young of
birds are not moved
or disturbed until the
qualified biologist
determines the nest
has become inactive
or the young have
fledged and become
independent.
BIO-19. Avoid and Minimize Impacts to
Chenopod Scrub
If impacts to the 160-acre area of chenopod
scrub habitat onsite can be avoided, then the
project can proceed and no small mammal
trapping, agency coordination, or other
mitigation will be required for GKR, TKR, San
Joaquin pocket mouse, and Tulare grasshopper
mouse other than any applicable MBHCP
Habitat Mitigation Fees. The boundary of the
chenopod scrub habitat shall be deemed an
ESA and marked with brightly colored flagging
or equivalent to be avoided. No construction
activities or construction-related access or
staging will be authorized within the ESA. If
1. Comply with
requirements of
the chenopod
scrub habitat.
2. Comply with all
aspects of
measure if
chenopod
habitat cannot
be avoided.
1. Ensure that the
boundary of the
chenopod scrub
habitat is deemed an
ESA and marked with
brightly colored
flagging or
equivalent to be
avoided. Also, ensure
that no construction
activities or
construction-related
access or staging will
be authorized within
the ESA.
1. Prior to the
start of and
during
construction,
as needed.
2. Prior to the
start of and
during
construction,
as needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 23
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
impacts to chenopod scrub cannot be avoided,
permanent and temporary construction
disturbances to chenopod scrub shall be
minimized to the extent feasible. Areas that do
not require earthwork shall be marked with
flagging and avoided as specified above, and a
preconstruction Biological Clearance survey will
be conducted in accordance with MBHCP
requirements and as specified below in
Mitigation Measure BIO-20.
2. If impacts to
chenopod scrub
cannot be avoided,
ensure that
permanent and
temporary
construction
disturbances to
chenopod scrub shall
be minimized to the
extent feasible. This
includes a
preconstruction
Biological Clearance
survey in accordance
with MBHCP
requirements and as
specified below in
Mitigation Measure
BIO-20.
BIO-20. Conduct Pre-construction Surveys in
Chenopod Scrub Habitat
If the project will impact chenopod scrub
habitat onsite, within 30 days prior to grading
or other ground-disturbing activities, a qualified
biologist shall conduct a preconstruction
Biological Clearance Survey. The survey shall
include all areas of potential habitat to be
permanently and/or temporarily impacted, as
1. N/A
2. N/A
1. Ensure a qualified
biologist conducts a
preconstruction
Biological Clearance
Survey to measure
specifications within
30 days prior to
grading or ground-
disturbing activities
1. Prior to the
start of
ground-
disturbing
activities.
2. Prior to the
start of
ground-
disturbing
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 24
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
well as a 50-foot buffer of impacted areas. If
the Biological Clearance Survey identifies
potential small mammal burrows within the
proposed area disturbance, a qualified biologist
shall conduct a minimum of 5 consecutive
nights of live small mammal trapping following
the USFWS Sacramento Field Office Survey
Protocol for Determining Presence of San
Joaquin Kangaroo Rats (USFWS 2013). The
qualified biologist shall email a Biological
Clearance Survey Report to the proper agencies
(e.g., USFWS, CDFW, City). If no special-status
small mammals are detected during a minimum
of 5 consecutive nights of live small mammal
trapping, then the project can proceed no
additional agency coordination or other
mitigation will be required for GKR, TKR, San
Joaquin pocket mouse, and Tulare grasshopper
mouse.
if the project will
impact chenopod
scrub habitat onsite.
1. If the Biological
Clearance Survey
identifies potential
small mammal
burrows within the
proposed area
disturbance, ensure
qualified biologist
conducts a minimum
of 5 consecutive
nights of live small
mammal trapping
following the USFWS
Sacramento Field
Office Survey
Protocol for
Determining
Presence of San
Joaquin Kangaroo
Rats (USFWS 2013).
Ensure biologist
emails a Biological
Clearance Survey
Report to the proper
agencies (e.g.,
USFWS, CDFW, City).
activities, if
needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 25
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
BIO-21. Develop a Small Mammal Relocation
Plan
If special-status small mammal species are
detected during live trapping, the applicant
shall coordinate with the USFWS and/or CDFW
to obtain all necessary regulatory
authorizations and develop a Small Mammal
Relocation Plan to facilitate FESA and/or CESA
compliance, if required. This coordination may
include, but may not be limited to:
A. Acquisition of a State ITP if GKR and/or
TKR are found to occur onsite, including
any additional State ITP measures
required by CDFW.
B. Acquisition of GKR and/or TKR
conservation lands and/or bank credits
if required by CDFW.
C. Additional live trapping to capture and
relocate small mammals prior to
ground disturbance.
D. Excavation of potential small mammal
burrows and additional relocation of
small mammals encountered during
excavation.
1. Comply with
measure, if
needed.
1. If special-status small
mammal species are
detected during live
trapping, the
applicant shall
coordinate with the
USFWS and/or CDFW
to obtain all
necessary regulatory
authorizations and
develop a Small
Mammal Relocation
Plan to facilitate FESA
and/or CESA
compliance, if
required, per
measure
specifications.
1. Prior to the
start of
ground-
disturbing
activities, if
needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 26
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
BIO-22. Implement Avoidance Measures for
Natal San Joaquin Kit Fox or American Badger
Dens
If the Biological Clearance Survey results
determine that known, active, or natal SJKF or
badger dens will be impacted, then the
following mitigation measures shall be
implemented upon approval from USFWS and
CDFW:
i. A permanent minimum avoidance buffer
using fencing or flagging shall be
maintained as follows:
a. At least 100 feet around den(s);
b. At least 200 feet around natal dens
(in which young are reared); and
c. At least 500 feet around any natal
dens with observed young (i.e., SJKF
pups or badger kits) (except for any
portions of the buffer zone that are
already fully developed).
ii. Avoidance buffer zones shall be
considered Environmentally Sensitive
Areas (ESAs), and no construction
activities are allowed within a buffer
except as follows: If the work within the
buffer area will not result in the
destruction of the den, the den should be
conserved. If the den is unoccupied
1. Comply with
measures a) and
b), if needed.
1. If the Biological
Clearance Survey
results determine
that known, active,
or natal SJKF or
badger dens will be
impacted, ensure
that measures a) and
b) are implemented
upon approval from
USFWS and CDFW by
a qualified biologist.
1. Prior to the
start of
construction,
if needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 27
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
(based on the required 4 consecutive
days of monitoring), then the den can be
covered in a secure manner to prevent
access by SJKF or badgers while the work
is being conducted. After the work is
done, the den can be uncovered to allow
use by SJKF or badgers. If the den is
occupied and the SJKF/badger does not
vacate the den, then a smaller buffer
could be established, including a
barricade to prevent the SJKF/badger
from exiting the den and entering the
work site. A qualified biologist shall
monitor the den while the work is being
conducted. The City shall be notified
immediately via telephone or e-mail if
any SJKF active dens, natal dens, or
occupied atypical dens are discovered
within or immediately adjacent to any
proposed development footprint. The
applicant shall coordinate with CDFW if
any badger active dens, natal dens, or
occupied atypical dens are discovered
within or immediately adjacent to any
proposed development footprint, and no
City notice is required. BVWSD and
RRBWSD shall bear the costs of
implementing the SJKF/badger den
avoidance requirements. A reduced
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 28
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
avoidance buffer may be authorized with
regulatory agency approval.
iii. For active dens and potential dens that
exhibit signs of SJKF use or characteristics
suggestive of SJKF dens (including dens in
natural substrate and in/under manmade
structures) that cannot be avoided, and
if, after 4 consecutive days of monitoring
with tracking medium or infrared camera,
a qualified biologist has determined that
SJKF is not currently present, the den may
be excavated. Natal dens shall not be
excavated until the pups and adults have
vacated and then only after consultation
with the USFWS and CDFW. If the
excavation process reveals evidence of
current use by SJKF, then den excavation
shall cease immediately and tracking or
camera monitoring, as described above,
shall be conducted/resumed. Excavation
of the den may be completed when, in
the judgment of a qualified biologist, the
SJKF has escaped from the partially
excavated den. SJKF dens shall be
carefully excavated until it is certain no
SJKF individuals are inside. Dens shall be
fully excavated, filled with dirt, and
compacted to ensure that SJKF cannot
reenter or use the den during
construction activities. If an individual
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 29
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
SJKF does not vacate a den within the
proposed construction footprint within a
reasonable timeframe, BVWSD and
RRBWSD shall coordinate with USFWS
and CDFW and obtain written/email
guidance from both agencies prior to
proceeding with den excavation. BVWSD
and RRBWSD shall bear the costs of
implementing the SJKF den excavation
requirements.
iv. For active dens and potential dens that
exhibit signs of American badger use or
characteristics suggestive of American
badger dens, the same approach shall be
used as outlined above, except BVWSD
and RRBWSD shall coordinate with CDFW
and obtain written/email guidance from
CDFW prior to proceeding with den
excavation; no USFWS coordination is
required for American badger since it is
not a federally protected species.
BIO-23. If Active San Joaquin Kit Fox Dens are
Present, Coordinate with USFWS and/or CDFW
If active SJKF dens are detected onsite, BVWSD
and RRBWSD shall coordinate with the USFWS
and/or CDFW to obtain all necessary regulatory
authorizations to facilitate FESA and/or CESA
1. N/A 1. If active SJKF dens
are detected onsite,
BVWSD and
RRBWSD shall
coordinate with the
USFWS and/or
CDFW to obtain all
necessary
1. Prior to the
start of
construction,
if needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 30
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
compliance, if required. This coordination may
include, but may not be limited to:
A. Acquisition of a State ITP for SJKF.
B. Acquisition of SJKF conservation
lands and/or bank credits if required
by CDFW.
regulatory
authorizations to
facilitate FESA
and/or CESA
compliance, if
required, as
detailed in measure
specifications.
BIO-24. Implement Measures During
Construction and Operation to Protect San
Joaquin Kit Fox
The following construction and ongoing
operational requirements as included in the
Standardized Recommendations for Protection
of the Endangered San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to
or During Ground Disturbance (USFWS 2011)
will be implemented:
A. Project-related vehicles should
observe a daytime speed limit of 20
mph throughout the site in all
project areas, except on county
roads and federal and state
highways; this is particularly
important at night when SJKF are
most active. Nighttime construction
should be minimized to the extent
possible. However, if it does occur,
then the speed limit should be
reduced to 10 mph. Off-road traffic
1. Comply with all
listed measures
during
construction.
2. Notify City in the
case of trapped
animals.
3. Notify City in the
case of a dead,
Injured, or
entrapped SJKF.
4. Notify City
immediately of
the accidental
death or injury to
an SJKF during
project-related
activities.
5. N/A
1. Ensure contractor
compliance with
listed measures a)-j).
2. Contact USFWS in
the case of trapped
animals.
3. Contact CDFW in the
case of a dead.
Injured, or entrapped
SJKF.
4. Notify USFWS and
CDFW within 3
working days of the
accidental death or
injury to an SJKF
during project-
related activities.
5. Report SJKF siting’s
to CNDDB and to
USFWS.
1. During
construction.
2. During
construction,
if needed.
3. During
construction,
if needed.
4. During
construction,
if needed.
5. During
construction,
if needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 31
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
outside of designated project areas
should be prohibited.
B. To prevent inadvertent entrapment
of SJKF or other animals during the
construction phase of a project, all
excavated, steep-walled holes or
trenches more than 2 feet deep
should be covered at the close of
each working day by plywood or
similar materials. If the trenches
cannot be closed, one or more
escape ramps constructed of
earthen-fill or wooden planks shall
be installed. Before such holes or
trenches are filled, they should be
thoroughly inspected for trapped
animals. If at any time a trapped or
injured SJKF is discovered, the
USFWS and CDFW shall be contacted
as noted under items (k) through (n)
below.
C. SJKF are attracted to den-like
structures, such as pipes, and may
enter stored pipes and become
trapped or injured. All construction
pipes, culverts, or similar structures
with a diameter of 4 inches or
greater that are stored at a
construction site for one or more
overnight periods should be
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 32
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
thoroughly inspected for SJKF before
the pipe is subsequently buried,
capped, or otherwise used or moved
in any way. If SJKF are discovered
inside a pipe, that section of pipe
should not be moved until USFWS
has been consulted. If necessary,
and under the direct supervision of
the biological monitor, the pipe may
be moved only once to remove it
from the path of construction
activity, until the fox has escaped.
D. All food-related trash items such as
wrappers, cans, bottles, and food
scraps should be disposed of in
securely closed containers and
removed at least once a week from a
construction or project site.
E. No firearms shall be allowed on the
project site.
F. No pets, such as dogs or cats, should
be permitted on the project site to
prevent harassment, mortality of
SJKF, or destruction of dens.
G. Use of rodenticides and herbicides in
project areas should be restricted.
This is necessary to prevent primary
or secondary poisoning of SJKF and
the depletion of prey populations on
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 33
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
which they depend. All uses of such
compounds should observe label
and other restrictions mandated by
USEPA, California Department of
Food and Agriculture, and other
federal and state legislation, as well
as additional project-related
restrictions deemed necessary by
the USFWS. If rodent control must
be conducted, zinc phosphide should
be used because of a proven lower
risk to SJKF.
H. A representative shall be appointed
by BVWSD and RRBWSD who will be
the contact source for any employee
or contractor who might
inadvertently kill or injure a SJKF or
who finds a dead, injured, or
entrapped SJKF. The representative
will be identified during the
employee education program and
their name and telephone number
shall be provided to the USFWS.
I. An employee education program
should be conducted for any
project that has anticipated impacts
to SJKF or other endangered
species. The program should consist
of a brief presentation by persons
knowledgeable in SJKF biology and
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 34
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
legislative protection to explain
endangered species concerns to
contractors, their employees, and
military and/or agency personnel
involved in the project. The
program should include the
following: A description of the SJKF
and its habitat needs; a report of
the occurrence of SJKF in the
project area; an explanation of the
status of the species and its
protection under the FESA and
CESA; and a list of measures being
taken to reduce impacts to the
species during project construction
and implementation. A fact sheet
conveying this information should
be prepared for distribution to the
previously referenced people and
anyone else who may enter the
project site.
J. Upon completion of the project, all
areas subject to temporary ground
disturbances, including storage and
staging areas, temporary roads,
pipeline corridors, etc., should be re-
contoured, if necessary, and
revegetated to promote restoration
of the area to pre-project conditions.
An area subject to “temporary”
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 35
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
disturbance means any area that is
disturbed during the project, but
after project completion will not be
subject to further disturbance and
has the potential to be revegetated.
Appropriate methods and plant
species used to revegetate such
areas should be determined on a
site-specific basis in consultation
with USFWS, CDFW, and
revegetation experts.
K. In the case of trapped animals,
escape ramps or structures should
be installed immediately to allow the
animal(s) to escape, or the USFWS
should be contacted for guidance.
L. Any contractor, employee, or
military or agency personnel who
are responsible for inadvertently
killing or injuring an SJKF shall
immediately report the incident to
their representative. This
representative shall contact CDFW
immediately in the case of a dead,
injured, or entrapped SJKF.
M. USFWS and CDFW shall be notified in
writing within 3 working days of the
accidental death or injury to an SJKF
during project-related activities.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 36
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
Notification must include the date,
time, and location of the incident or
of the finding of a dead or injured
animal and any other pertinent
information.
N. New sightings of SJKF shall be
reported to the CNDDB. A copy of
the reporting form and a
topographic map clearly marked
with the location of where the SJKF
was observed should also be
provided to the USFWS.
Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
CR-1. Conduct Preconstruction Cultural
Resources Awareness Training and Construction
Monitoring.
A cultural resources awareness training program
will be provided to all construction personnel
active on the Project site during earth moving
activities. The training will be provided prior to
the initiation of ground disturbing activities, and
as needed throughout the duration of project
construction to ensure that all construction
personnel receive the training. The training will
1. Attend cultural
resources
awareness
training.
2. If any cultural
resources are
discovered, halt
construction
immediately
within 100 feet of
1. Retain a qualified
archaeologist.
2. Confirm that any
discoveries of
archaeological
finds are
evaluated and
addressed
properly in
accordance with
1. Prior to
construction
2. During
construction, if
necessary
3. Following any
cultural resource
discovery.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 37
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
be developed and conducted in coordination with
a qualified archaeologist meeting the U.S.
Secretary of Interior guidelines for professional
archaeologists and a representative or
representatives from culturally affiliated Native
American tribe(s) who have participated in
consultations with the City. The program will
include relevant information regarding sensitive
cultural resources, including applicable
regulations, protocols for avoidance, and
consequences of violating State laws and
regulations. The worker cultural resources
awareness program will also describe appropriate
avoidance and minimization measures for
resources that have the potential to be located
on the Project site and will outline what to do and
whom to contact if any potential archaeological
resources or artifacts are encountered.
Furthermore, the program will underscore the
requirement for confidentiality and culturally
appropriate treatment of any finds of significance
to Native Americans, consistent with Native
American tribal values.
All ground disturbing activities will be monitored
by a qualified archaeologist meeting the U.S.
Secretary of Interior guidelines for professional
archaeologists and a representative from a
culturally affiliated Native American tribe who has
participated in consultations with the City on the
Project. The Native American tribe will be
the find, and
contact the City
3. Do not resume
construction in
the vicinity of the
finds until
clearance is given
by the State.
the mitigation
measure.
3. Provide clearance
for construction
activities to
resume once
appropriate.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 38
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
provided at least seven days’ notice prior to the
initiation of ground disturbing activities. The
archaeological monitor will record activities daily
and provide a weekly summary to BVWSD. A
monitoring report will be prepared archaeological
monitor at the end of excavation activities and
submitted to BVWSD, who, in turn, shall provide a
copy to the City. The Native American monitor
will follow the documentation protocols defined
by their tribe.
If any cultural resources, including but not limited
to structural features, bone or shell, flaked or
ground stone artifacts, historic-era artifacts,
human remains, or architectural remains, are
encountered during any project construction
activities, the archaeological monitor, in
consultation with the Native American monitor,
as appropriate, shall have the authority to stop
work in the vicinity of the finds and implement
the Unanticipated Discovery Plan and other
actions identified in Mitigation Measure CR-2.
CR-2. Prepare an Unanticipated Discovery Plan,
Immediately Halt Construction if Cultural
Resources Are Discovered, Evaluate All
Identified Cultural Resources for Eligibility for
Inclusion in the NRHP/CRHR, and Implement
Appropriate Mitigation Measures for Eligible
Resources
1. N/A
2. N/A
3. Stop work
immediately if
any cultural
resources, such
as structural
features, unusual
1. Ensure that
BVWSD prepares
an Unanticipated
Discovery Plan and
approve plan in
consultation with
consulting tribes.
1. Prior to the start
of construction
2. Prior to the start
of construction
3. During
construction, if
needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 39
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
Prior to initiating construction, an Unanticipated
Discovery Plan shall be developed by BVWSD and
approved by the City in consultation with
consulting tribes. The Unanticipated Discovery
Plan will detail the protocols for monitoring, as
well as for stopping work if buried resources are
discovered during construction; the evaluation of
discovered resources for NRHP/CRHR eligibility,
as warranted; and the implementation of
mitigation measures for eligible resources.
Protocols for addressing the discovery of Native
American archaeological resources and tribal
cultural resources shall be prepared by BVWSD
and approved by the City in consultation with
culturally affiliated Native American tribes who
have participated in consultations with the City
on the Project.
If any cultural resources, such as structural
features, unusual amounts of bone or shell,
flaked or ground stone artifacts, historic-era
artifacts, human remains, or architectural
remains, are encountered during any project
construction activities, work shall be suspended
immediately at the location of the find and within
a radius of at least 100 feet and the City will be
contacted. Tribal cultural resources will be
treated in accordance with Mitigation Measure
TCR-1.
All cultural resources accidentally uncovered
during construction within the project site shall
amounts of bone
or shell, flaked or
ground stone
artifacts, historic-
era artifacts,
human remains,
or architectural
remains, are
encountered
during any
project
construction
activities within a
radius of at least
100 feet and
contact the City.
4. N/A
5. N/A
6. Comply with City
direction and
stop work until
mitigation
measures are
developed, if
necessary.
2. Ensure that
BVWSD prepares
protocols for
addressing the
discovery of
Native American
archaeological
resources and
tribal cultural
resources and
approve them in
consultation with
culturally affiliated
Native American
tribes who have
participated in
consultations with
the City on the
Project.
3. Ensure work is
stopped
immediately
within a radious of
at least 100 feet in
the case of a
cultural resource
discovery.
4. Ensure all cultural
resources
accidentally
4. During
construction, if
needed.
5. During
construction, if
needed.
6. During
construction, if
needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 40
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
be evaluated for eligibility for inclusion in the
NRHP/CRHR. Resource evaluations will be
conducted by individuals who meet the U.S.
Secretary of the Interior’s professional standards
in archaeology, history, or architectural history, as
appropriate. For finds that are of Native American
concerns, local Native American tribes will be
notified, if they have requested notification. If
any of the resources meet the eligibility criteria
identified in Pub. Res. Code Section 5024.1 or
CEQA Section 21083.2(g), mitigation measures
will be developed and implemented in
accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.4(b) or 21083.2(b), respectively, before
construction resumes.
The disposition of materials related to tribal
cultural resources and Native American burials
will be determined according to Mitigation
Measure TCR-1. The disposition of historic era
artifacts will be outlined in the Unanticipated
Discovery Plan.
uncovered during
construction
within the project
site are evaluated
for eligibility for
inclusion in the
NRHP/CRHR.
5. Notify local Native
American tribes
for finds that are
of Native
American concern,
if they have
requested
notification.
6. If resources meet
the eligibility
criteria identified
in Pub. Res. Code
Section 5024.1 or
CEQA Section
21083.2(g), ensure
that mitigation
measures are
developed and
implemented in
accordance with
CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.4(b)
or 21083.2(b),
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 41
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
respectively,
before
construction
resumes.
CR-3. Comply with Required Response Protocol
for the Unanticipated Discovery of Human
Remains
Consistent with the California Health and Safety
Code and the California Native American
Historical, Cultural, and Sacred Sites Act, if
suspected human remains are found during
project construction, all work shall be halted
within 100 feet of the finds, and the Kern County
coroner shall be notified to determine the nature
of the remains. The coroner shall examine all
discoveries of suspected human remains within
48 hours of receiving notice of a discovery on
private or State lands (Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5[b]). If the coroner determines that
the remains are those of a Native American, they
shall contact the NAHC by phone within 24 hours
of making that determination (Health and Safety
Code Section 7050[c]). The NAHC shall then
assign a most likely descendant (MLD) to serve as
the main point of Native American contact and
consultation. Following the coroner’s findings, the
MLD, in consultation with the City, shall
determine the ultimate treatment and disposition
of the remains.
1. Halt excavation
on the project
site within a
minimum radius
of 100 feet of the
remains if human
remains are
discovered and
contact the
County coroner.
2. N/A
3. N/A
1. Confirm that any
discoveries of
archaeo-logical
finds are
evaluated and
addressed
properly in
accordance with
the mitigation
measure.
2. Provide clearance
for construction
activities to
resume once
appropriate.
3. Work with the
MLD to ensure
that remains are
removed to a
protected
location and
treated with
dignity and
respect, if
encountered.
1. During
construction, if
necessary.
2. During
construction, if
necessary
3. Following any
human remains
discovery
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 42
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
Native American human remains and associated
grave items shall be reinterred at the location
designated for reburial that will be determined
through Project design, as described in Chapter 2,
Project Description.
Energy
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
None required
Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
GEO-1. Halt Construction if Paleontological
Resources Are Discovered, Evaluate Discoveries
for Uniqueness, and Implement Appropriate
Mitigation Measures for Unique Resources.
BVWSD and RRBWSD and their contractors shall
implement the following procedures if
paleontological resources are discovered during
construction activities:
• Stop work immediately within 50 feet.
1. Comply with all
listed procedures
if paleontological
discoveries are
made during
work activities
including stop
work within 50
feet, contact
BVWSD and the
City, and protect
1. If paleontological
resources are
discovered
during
construction
activities, ensure
BVWSD and
RRBWSD and
their contractors
comply with
measure
specifications
1. During
construction, if
needed.
2. During
construction, if
needed.
3. During
construction, if
needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 43
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
• Contact BVWSD and the City
immediately.
• Protect the site from further impacts,
including looting, erosion, or other
human or natural damage.
• A paleontological resources principal
investigator who meets the standards set
forth by the Society of Vertebrate
Paleontology will be retained to evaluate
the discovery and make a
recommendation to BVWSD and the City
as to whether or not it is a unique
paleontological resource.
• If the resource is not a unique
paleontological resource, then it will be
documented appropriately, and no
further measures will be required.
• If the resource is a unique
paleontological resource, the principal
investigator, in consultation with
BVWSD, will recommend resource-
specific measures to protect and
document the paleontological resource,
such as photo documentation and
avoidance or collection.
• If collection is necessary, the fossil
material will be properly prepared in
accordance with SVP guidelines and/or
the site from
further impacts.
2. N/A
3. N/A
including
stopping work
within 50 feet,
protecting the
site from further
impacts,
retaining a
paleontological
resources
principal
investigator who
meets the
standards set
forth by the
Society of
Vertebrate
Paleontology,
and if needed,
ensuring fossil
material will be
properly
prepared in
accordance with
SVP guidelines
and/or curation
at a recognized
museum
repository.
2. Retain a qualified
paleontological
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 44
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
curation at a recognized museum
repository. Appropriate documentation
will be included with all curated
materials.
specialist to
evaluate the
discovery and
recommend
protection
measures, if
needed.
3. Ensure any
resource
collection is
handled and
prepared
properly in
accordance with
SVP guidelines
and is correctly
documented.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
None required
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 45
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
HAZ-1. Abatement of Airborne Insects
BVWSD shall coordinate with Kern County
Department of Public Health and the Kern
Mosquito and Vector Control District to ensure
application of appropriate insect control
measures that utilize abatement methods
appropriate for recharge basins, such that
groundwater quality is also protected.
Appropriate measures may include maintaining
water quality in recharge ponds to avoid creating
breeding habitat for airborne insects; adding
mosquito fish or a USEPA-registered bacterial
larvicide to eliminate mosquito larvae; and other
integrated pest management measures. BVWSD
and RRBWSD will implement such measures as
required.
1. Comply with all
listed measures.
1. Ensure BVWSD
coordination with
the Kern County
DPH and the Kern
Mosquito and
Vector Control
District to ensure
the application of
appropriate insect
control measures
that utilize
abatement
methods
appropriate for
recharge basins,
such that
groundwater
quality is also
protected.
1. Prior to the start
of construction
and during
construction.
HAZ-2. Collection of Soil Samples
Prior to commencement of Project construction,
BVWSD, RRBWSD, and/or their contractors shall
collect representative samples of soil from the
project site. Soil samples should be collected
every 1,000 cubic yards of excavated/moved
earth from all areas where current and historic oil
wells are located as well as all areas where ASTs,
1. Collect
representative
samples of soil
from the project
site, per measure
specifications.
1. Ensure that
BCWSD, RRBWSD
and contractors
collect
representative
samples of soil
from the project
1. Prior to the start
of construction.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 46
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
oilfield features, sump/reservoirs, and crude oil
pipelines are mapped/depicted. Collected soil
samples should be tested for total petroleum
hydrocarbons in the gasoline (TPHg), diesel fuel
(TPHd), and motor oil (TPHm) ranges, and if
present, the extent of contamination should be
defined both laterally and vertically. If
concentrations of TPH are found exceeding
regulatory thresholds, they should be removed
from the site under regulatory oversight and
disposed offsite in accordance with applicable
rules and regulations.
site, per measure
specifications.
HAZ-3. Management of Unknown Hazardous
Materials
If hazardous materials, wastes, or suspected soil
contamination is encountered during
construction of the Proposed Project, project
activities in that area shall stop until appropriate
health and safety procedures are implemented.
BVWSD, RRBWSD, and/or their contractors shall
be required to conduct an investigation to
determine the composition of the encountered
material, including sampling by an OSHA-trained
individual and testing at a certified laboratory. In
the event that soils to be excavated are found to
be contaminated, the excavated soil shall be
treated as hazardous materials and properly
managed, removed, reported, and disposed of in
compliance with state and federal regulations.
1. If hazardous
materials,
wastes, or
suspected soil
contamination is
encountered
during
construction of
the Proposed
Project, project
activities in that
area shall stop
until appropriate
health and safety
procedures are
implemented.
1. Ensure activities
are halted if
hazardous
materials,
wastes, or
suspected soil
contamination is
encountered
during
construction of
the Proposed
Project.
2. Ensure that
BVWSD,
RRBWSD, and/or
their contractors
conduct an
1. During
construction, if
needed.
2. During
construction, if
needed.
3. During
construction, if
needed.
4. During
construction, if
needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 47
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
Workers will be provided with adequate personal
protective equipment to prevent unsafe exposure
during handling and disposal. Effective dust
suppression procedures will be used in the
immediate construction area to reduce airborne
emissions of contaminants and reduce the risk of
exposure to workers and the public.
2. Work with
BVWSD and
RRBWSD to to
conduct an
investigation to
determine the
composition of
the encountered
material,
including
sampling by an
OSHA-trained
individual and
testing at a
certified
laboratory.
3. If soil is found to
be hazardous,
treat hazardous
materials and
properly
manage,
remove, report,
and dispose of it
in compliance
with state and
federal
regulations.
4. Wear proper
PPE when
investigation to
determine the
composition of
the encountered
material,
including
sampling by an
OSHA-trained
individual and
testing at a
certified
laboratory.
3. If soil is found to
be hazardous,
ensure that
BVWSD,
RRBWSD, and/or
their contractors
treat hazardous
materials and
properly manage,
remove, report,
and dispose of it
in compliance
with state and
federal
regulations.
4. Ensure workers
have proper PPE.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 48
Hydrology and Water Quality
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
None required
Land Use and Planning
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
None required
Noise
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
None required
Population and Housing
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
dealing with
suspected
hazardous
materials or
soils.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 49
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
None required
Public Services
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
None required
Recreation
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
None required.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
CR-1. Conduct Preconstruction Cultural
Resources Awareness Training and Construction
Monitoring.
See “Cultural Resources” above.
CR-2. Prepare an Unanticipated Discovery Plan,
Immediately Halt Construction if Cultural
Resources Are Discovered, Evaluate All
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 50
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
Identified Cultural Resources for Eligibility for
Inclusion in the NRHP/CRHR, and Implement
Appropriate Mitigation Measures for Eligible
Resources.
See “Cultural Resources” above.
CR-3. Comply with Required Response Protocol
for the Unanticipated Discovery of Human
Remains.
See “Cultural Resources” above.
TCR-1. Implement Mitigation Measures
Recommended in Public Resources Code Section
21084.3 to Avoid Damaging Effects on Tribal
Cultural Resources.
Public Resources Code Section 21084.3 identifies
the following treatments as possible mitigation
measures of significant impacts to tribal cultural
resources:
1. Avoidance and preservation of the
resources in place, including, but not
limited to, planning and construction to
avoid the resources and protect the
cultural and natural context, or planning
greenspace, parks, or other open space, to
incorporate the resources with culturally
appropriate protection and management
criteria.
1. Notify the City
of any TCRs that
are discovered
during Project
activities.
1. If any TCRs are
discovered during
project construction,
the City shall consider
application of
measures 1-3 in
consultation with
consulting tribes.
1. During
construction,
if needed.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 51
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
2. Treating the resource with culturally
appropriate dignity, taking into account
the tribal cultural values and meaning of
the resource, including, but not limited to,
the following:
A. Protecting the cultural character and
integrity of the resource.
B. Protecting the traditional use of the
resource.
C. Protecting the confidentiality of the
resource.
3. Permanent conservation easements or
other interests in real property, with
culturally appropriate management
criteria for the purposes of preserving or
utilizing the resources or places.
The City shall consider application of these
measures, in consultation with consulting tribes,
for the treatment of any tribal cultural resources
discovered during project construction. The City
and the tribes shall collaborate on determining
and implementing the appropriate treatment.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 52
Utilities and Service Systems
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility
Monitoring
Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
UTL-1. Comply with CALGreen Waste Diversion
Requirements to the Extent Feasible.
BVWSD and RRBWSD or their contractors shall
comply with the following CALGreen waste
diversion requirements to the extent feasible,
recognizing that the requirements are targeted
primarily at residential and commercial projects:
• Submit a Construction Waste
Management Plan prior to construction
for approval by the City Building
Department.
• Recycle and/or reuse a minimum of 65
percent of construction and demolition
waste.
• Recycle or Reuse 100 percent of tree
stumps, rocks, and associated vegetation
and soils resulting from land clearing.
1. Comply with
the listed
CALGreen
waste diversion
requirements
to the extent
feasible.
1. Ensure that BVWSD
and RRBWSD or their
contractors comply
with the listed
CALGreen waste
diversion requirements
to the extent feasible.
1. During
construction.
Cumulative Impacts
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
BIO-1 through BIO-13, BIO-23 through BIO-25
See “Biological Resources” above.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 53
Mitigation Measures
Contractor
Responsibility City Responsibility Monitoring Schedule
Completion
Date and
Initials
CR-1 through CR-3, TCR-1
See “Cultural Resources” and “Tribal Cultural
Resources” above.
City of Bakersfield Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project September 2024 | Page 54
This page intentionally left blank
FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15090 AND 15091
McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project
Specific Plan Amendment-General Plan Amendment/
Zone Change No. 19-0342
SCH No. 2020060267
September 2024
CEQA Findings
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 1
I. INTRODUCTION
The City Council (Council) of the City of Bakersfield (City) hereby certifies that the Council has reviewed
and considered the information contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), identified
below, for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project (Project or Proposed Project). The Council
further certifies that the FEIR has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code §§21000 et seq., the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of
Regulations, Title 14, §§15000 et seq. (CEQA Guidelines), and City requirements, and that the FEIR reflects
the independent judgment of the Council. (Pub. Resources Code § 21082.1(c)(3).) In certifying the FEIR as
adequate under CEQA, the Council hereby adopts these CEQA Findings.
These findings address the environmental effects associated with the Project, which is a change in land
use of approximately 2,072 acres of undeveloped land, commonly known as McAllister Ranch (Property),
located in western Bakersfield, to enable the construction and operation of a groundwater recharge and
recovery facility. This statement is made pursuant to CEQA, specifically Public Resources Code sections
21081, 21081.5, and 21081.6; and the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §§15000 et seq.),
specifically sections 15091 and 15093. The potentially significant effects of the Project were identified in
the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project Draft EIR (July 2022), and FEIR (November 2024).
Public Resources Code section 21081 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15091 require that the lead
agency, in this case the City of Bakersfield, prepare written findings for identified significant impacts,
accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. Specifically, State CEQA Guidelines
section 15091 states, in part, that:
(a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which
identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency
makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects accompanied by a brief
explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the final EIR.
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other
agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation
measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
If significant impacts cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels, the decision-making agency is
required to balance, as applicable, the benefits of the proposed project against its significant unavoidable
environmental impacts when determining whether to approve the project. (Pub. Resources Code, §
21081, CEQA Guidelines § 15093.) If the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the significant
unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, the adverse effects may be considered “acceptable.”
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 2
The FEIR for the project identified potentially significant effects that could result from Project
implementation. However, the Council finds that the inclusion of certain specified mitigation measures as
part of the Project approval will reduce all of those effects to less-than-significant levels.
Therefore, in accordance with CEQA, Pub. Resources Code, § 21081, and the CEQA Guidelines, sections
15091 and 15092, the Council certifies the FEIR for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project,
adopts these findings, and the attached Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP), and approves
the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project. In adopting the MMRP for the Project, the Council
finds that the MMRP meets the requirements of Public Resources Code section 21081.6 by providing for
the implementation and monitoring of measures intended to mitigate potentially significant effects of the
Project.
The Council further adopts the following related Project approvals to facilitate implementation and
development of the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project: (i) Specific Plan Amendment-General
Plan Amendment, including amendments to Land Use Element, Circulation Element, and Housing Element
(SPA-GPA No. 19-0342), and (ii) Zone Change (ZC No. 19-0342).
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Project Location
The project site, known locally as McAllister Ranch, is located in the City of Bakersfield, Kern County,
California, north of Panama Lane and west of South Allen Road, within Sections 16, 21, 22, and 23,
Township 30 South, Range 26 East, Mount Diablo Meridian. The property is located on the Kern River
alluvial fan, which is well suited for groundwater banking operations.
The site was formerly a planned residential development that was in the early stages of construction. Due
to the downturn in the real estate market, development was discontinued, and the property was sold in
a bankruptcy proceeding. Buena Vista Water Storage District (BVWSD), the project applicant, and
Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District (RRBWSD) jointly purchased the property in 2011.
The McAllister Ranch property is located in the western area of Bakersfield and encompasses
approximately 2,070 acres. The property has been disturbed and continues to be disturbed; most of the
site had been used for agricultural purposes before it was extensively graded for development.
Additionally, the property contains several active and abandoned oil wells and several reserved drill
islands. The drill islands are areas zoned for drilling (by others) for the purpose of extracting subsurface
oil or gas resources, the rights to which are owned by private parties.
B. Summary of Project Description
The McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project consists of the construction and operation of a water
banking project on approximately 2,070 acres of undeveloped real property located in Bakersfield,
California. Water supplies available to BVWSD and RRBWSD (collectively, the Districts) would be diverted
from the Kern River, recharged, and stored at the project site and would later be recovered for irrigation
and municipal and industrial (M&I) uses when needed. The Proposed Project would include constructing
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 3
several shallow percolation ponds to facilitate the recharge activities, as well as other features to enable
the storage, recovery, and transport of water. At full buildout, up to approximately 200,000 acre-feet per
year (AFY) of water could be diverted and recharged to the groundwater basin in any one year. The
maximum recovery of stored water in a single year would be approximately 56,000 AF.
C. Project Components Overview
1. Intake/Conveyance Facilities. To convey water to the project site, a new head
gate and gravity turnout would be constructed at the southeast corner of Basin 1 of the City’s 2800 Acre
Groundwater Recharge Facility, where the conveyance channel would enter the Pioneer Project Water
Bank (Pioneer Project), which is owned and operated by the Kern County Water Agency (KCWA). This
facility would have a capacity of approximately 500 cubic feet per second (cfs).
An unlined canal would be constructed from Basin 1 along the east side of the Central and South Pioneer
Project recharge ponds.1The canal would be approximately eight feet deep and is anticipated to carry
water to a depth of six feet to facilitate flows of 500 cfs. The canal would cross a bike path/roadway
immediately adjacent to the Basin 1 turnout, an area with multiple pipelines, the Kern River Canal, and
the UPRR Railroad tracks. Accordingly, new siphon crossings would be required at each of these locations.
Approximate ranges of pipe sizes for the new siphon crossings have been estimated based on the required
capacity; however, the final sizing of the siphon crossings would be determined once a final hydraulic
analysis is performed.
The intake structure where the unlined canal enters the project site would include a canal-side pumping
plant sized to fill Ponds 1 through 9, which would have a combined delivery capacity of about 100 cfs. A
gravity component would also be included with pipeline and turnouts sized to fill Ponds 10 through 24,
which would have a combined delivery capacity of about 400 cfs.
2. Recharge Basins and Interbasin Flow Control Structures. The Proposed Project
would consist of 24 individual recharge ponds with perimeter and contour levees. All levees would have
a trapezoidal cross section, with a top width of 16 feet, a bottom width ranging from 28 to 40 feet, and a
height ranging from 3 to 6 feet above the original grade. The perimeter levees would be located along the
outer edges of the project site and would be offset about 15 feet inside the property line. The contour
levees would be internal to the site and would generally follow the existing ground contours.
Recharge basins were designed based on the following considerations: (1) levees were located to avoid
existing, permanent, aboveground facilities, the petroleum extraction area, and locations of protected
cultural and biological resources; (2) the height of the perimeter and contour levees was limited to 6 feet;
and (3) the minimum allowance for freeboard was 2 feet.
1 The portion of the canal crossing the Pioneer Project area would be constructed separately from the
Proposed Project and has previously been analyzed by KCWA in prior CEQA documents (SCH#96111037, 1996, 2005,
2009).
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 4
To assist in the layout of the recharge basins, the Districts retained Aerial Photomapping Services (APS) to
prepare an aerial survey map of the project site showing the property boundary, ground elevation
contours at 2-foot intervals, all visible features (including aboveground permanent facilities), and spot
ground elevations. This aerial survey map was used to design the layout of the recharge basins, determine
levee elevations, and project water surface elevations for the recharge basins.
The total recharge basin area comprises 24 individual recharge basins. The gross area for each basin was
estimated by scaling from the topographic survey map. The net basin area was assumed to be 85 percent
of the gross area to account for levees, well pads, and other areas that would not be wetted during
recharge operations. In all, the recharge basin area would cover 1,898 gross acres (1,613 net acres).
The individual recharge basins would be connected by a series of interbasin flow control structures, which
would convey water from basin to basin. At least one interbasin structure would be located at every levee;
larger recharge basins with longer levees would have two interbasin structures. The size of each interbasin
structure has not yet been determined, but capacity in each would range from 5 cfs to 83 cfs.
D. Proposed Project Operations
The Proposed Project would be operated and managed by BVWSD and RRBWSD, although day-to-day
operations or portions thereof may be contracted to other parties. Operation of the Proposed Project
would include conveying water to the Project site, recharging that water in the basins, storing that water
in an underground aquifer, and recovering water from the aquifer for transport to beneficial uses offsite.
The Proposed Project would be in active operation primarily when sufficient water is available to allow
conveyance to the Project site (i.e., during wet seasons in wet years) and when water is needed to meet
demand within the Districts’ service areas (i.e., during irrigation seasons in extremely dry years).
It is expected that up to 200,000 AF of water could be stored by the Proposed Project during any given
year. The most likely period when water would be conveyed to the project site would be December
through July. In an exceptionally wet year, however, water could be diverted to the project site
throughout the year. It is anticipated that up to 56,000 AF of stored water could be extracted from the
aquifer in any given year. Of that amount, approximately 75 percent is expected to be recovered from
wells within the project site; the remaining 25 percent is expected to be recovered from existing offsite
facilities within the Districts’ service areas and used for irrigation and M&I uses and consistent with the
Districts’ Conjunctive Use Programs, all of which are existing points of use.
Pumps, wells, pipelines, levees, basins, and unlined canals would be constructed at the Project site to
accommodate water delivery, groundwater recharge, and groundwater recovery. In addition, a small field
office would be constructed to provide a working space for staff and equipment storage. Because one to
two employees would visit the site only briefly during periods of inactivity, the field office would not
contain restroom or kitchen facilities. Internet, telecommunications, and climate control would be
provided.
The Proposed Project would operate continuously seven days per week when in operation. The number
of employees on site would be one to two daily, with occasional (less than one per day) deliveries. It is
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 5
anticipated that the Project site would be inactive approximately 85 percent of the time, fenced and
maintained as dry ponds.
Operation of the Project is expected to include the following activities:
Conveyance of water to percolation ponds from an intake structure constructed through
the Pioneer Project area;
Percolation and storage of water in the groundwater aquifer via up to 24 proposed
percolation ponds;
Operational exchanges of water with other entities to optimize project operations
(although such actions would be evaluated more specifically, as necessary, for their
potential environmental effects when such exchanges are identified and planned for
implementation);
Recovery of stored water from the groundwater aquifer through operation of up to
14 onsite and offsite groundwater recovery wells, and conveyance of the recovered water
offsite through the Kern River Canal and other facilities to its ultimate place of use;
Monitoring of groundwater levels and groundwater quality in the area through proposed
groundwater monitoring wells;
Banking of water for other entities, if and when capacity is available, to expand the
benefits of the Proposed Project (although such actions would be evaluated more
specifically, as necessary, for their potential environmental effects when such
partnerships are identified and planned for implementation); and
Transfers of banked supplies for other entities located within Kern County.
All Kern River water stored at the Proposed Project site would remain in Kern County.
1. Water Conveyance to the Project Site
Water to fill the recharge basins would be conveyed through a new head gate at the southeast corner of
Basin 1 on the City’s 2800 Acre Groundwater Recharge Facility to a new, unlined canal built along the
eastern boundary of the Pioneer Project site. The canal would be gravity fed with pumps and siphons
installed at several crossing locations. The anticipated capacity of the canal is sufficient to provide 500 cfs
to the project site.
2. Groundwater Recharge
Long-term recharge rates are expected to be in the range of 0.2-0.3 foot per day. Initial rates are
anticipated to be higher but, as soil moisture content increases, the infiltration rate is anticipated to
decrease. To facilitate initial filling of the recharge basins, the conveyance facilities (i.e., pumping plants,
pipelines, and turnouts) were designed to accommodate an infiltration rate of 0.6 foot per day (twice the
maximum expected long-term rate, but more representative of initial higher infiltration rates).
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 6
Up to four pumping plants would be located on the Project site, equipped with pumps ranging from 75
cfs to 200 cfs in capacity. The Districts could cycle these pumps to allow for maximum efficiency at varying
flow rates over time.
3. Groundwater Recovery
Water banked and stored as part of the Proposed Project would be recovered through both onsite and
existing offsite facilities. It is expected that up to 56,000 AF of stored water could be extracted from the
aquifer in any given year. Of that amount, approximately 75 percent is expected to be recovered from
wells within the project site; the remaining 25 percent is expected to be recovered from existing offsite
facilities within the Districts’ service areas. Offsite recovery would not involve any new construction and
would continue using existing programs already in operation, including integration with the Districts’
Conjunctive Use Programs and other projects by means of existing recovery facilities, as described in more
detail below.
Recovery operations would be generally consistent with the McAllister Ranch Use of Facilities and
Mitigation Agreement (Mitigation Joint Use Agreement) between the Districts and the City, as well as the
MOUs and the Operations Plans described below. Banking and recovery would be monitored for potential
groundwater level impacts resulting from operation of the Proposed Project on neighboring agricultural,
municipal, and domestic wells, and significant impacts would be avoided, eliminated, or mitigated by
implementing one or more of the corrective actions listed therein. As required by the Sustainable
Groundwater Management Agency (SGMA), the Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Agency (KRGSA)
will also monitor operation of the Proposed Project to ensure consistency with its Groundwater
Sustainability Plan (GSP).
Operation of onsite and offsite recovery facilities is described below, following Memoranda of
Understanding and Operations Plans.
a) Memoranda of Understanding and Operations Plans
The Districts have entered into Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) regarding groundwater banking
programs with adjoining entities in the Kern Fan area, including Semitropic Water Storage District, Henry
Miller Water Storage District, Berrenda Mesa Water Storage District, Kern Water Bank Authority (KWBA),
Improvement District No. 4, and West Kern Water District. The MOUs provide guidelines for operation
and monitoring of groundwater banking programs. The Proposed Project would be subject to and
consistent with the conditions of these MOUs, which are provided in FEIR Appendix B.
The MOUs allow groundwater banking operations to achieve maximum water storage and withdrawal
benefits, while also avoiding, eliminating, or mitigating adverse impacts to the groundwater basin and the
operation of other groundwater banking programs in the Kern Fan area. The operating objectives defined
in the MOUs include the following:
Maintain or, if possible, enhance the quality of the groundwater in the area. For example, the
Districts will attempt to implement recovery operations in such a manner that total dissolved
solids (TDS) in recovery waters will exceed TDS of recharge waters.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 7
Control the migration of poor quality water. For example, the Districts could increase water
recharge in areas with favorable groundwater gradients.
Operate recharge and recovery facilities in such a manner to “prevent, eliminate, or mitigate
significant adverse impacts.” Mitigation measures to avoid adverse impacts could include, but
would not be limited to, the following:
o if necessary, provide buffer areas between recovery wells and neighboring districts /
entities;
o limit monthly or annual recovery rates;
o provide redundancy in recovery wells and rotate pumping from recovery wells;
o provide adequate well spacing;
o adjust or stop pumping if necessary to reduce impacts; and
o use recharge water that otherwise is not recharging the Kern Fan area.
The MOUs also establish a Monitoring Committee, which includes the Districts and all Adjoining Entities.
The Monitoring Committee is collectively responsible for monitoring groundwater levels and water quality
in the Kern Fan area. Operation of the Proposed Project would be coordinated with the Districts’ other
banking programs, and this EIR would satisfy the CEQA requirements as indicated in the MOUs.
b) Long-Term Operations Plan
The Proposed Project would be subject to the terms of a Long-Term Project Recovery Operations Plan
substantially similar to the Long-Term Project Recovery Operations Plan Regarding Kern Water Bank
Authority Project, which implements the provisions of the MOUs and is provided in Appendix B. This Long-
Term Operations Plan is based on the Project Recovery Operations Plan Regarding Pioneer Project,
Rosedale-Rio Bravo Water Storage District, and Kern Water Bank Authority Projects (Project Recovery
Operations Plan), under which RRBWSD and other adjoining banking projects are currently required to
operate.2 The Proposed Project would be operated in accordance with the Long-Term Operations Plan,
the purpose of which is to designate specific measures to be employed to “prevent, eliminate or mitigate
2 The Project Recovery Operations Plan is a voluntary agreement entered into by RRBWSD, KWB, and KCWA. It
governs the operations of various banking projects, including RRBWSD’s projects that are subject to an MOU, the
Kern Water Bank Project, and the Pioneer Project (which is operated by KCWA). The purpose of the Project Recovery
Operations Plan is to designate specific measures to be employed to “prevent, eliminate or mitigate significant
adverse impacts” resulting from project operations. The intent of the parties to the Project Recovery Operations
Plan is to mitigate and/or compensate for legitimate project impacts. The initial term of the Project Recovery
Operations Plan expired on January 31, 2019. It is understood that the parties have agreed to extend the term to
January 31, 2025. The Districts will agree to a further extension of the term. The Proposed Project would be subject
to and consistent with the conditions of the Project Recovery Operations Plan during the effective term of that agreement. The Project Recovery Operations Plan is included in Appendix B. The Long-Term Operations Plan and the
Project Recovery Operations Plan are collectively referred to as the “Operations Plans.”
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 8
significant adverse impacts” resulting from project operations. A general description of the primary
components of the Long-Term Operations Plan is provided below.
A. Establish a Protocol for Monitoring and Reporting Groundwater
Conditions
Conduct monitoring of groundwater conditions during years when recovery is expected from a
groundwater banking project, in addition to the monitoring conducted by the Kern Fan
Monitoring Committee; report current groundwater levels monthly to the Districts’ Boards of
Directors; and make reports available to the public on the Districts’ websites.
Regularly update the groundwater model to actual conditions; use the model to predict future
groundwater conditions; report modeling results to the Boards of Directors; and make modeling
results available to the public on the Districts’ websites.
Recovery in any calendar year shall not commence until the model has been run for projected
operations.
B. Implement Proactive Measures
A groundwater model will be used to predict the contribution of the Proposed Project to
groundwater level declines in the area. The model will be used to simulate and compare the No-
Project Condition to the Project Condition. The No-Project Condition is the water level that would
have been at any particular well location absent the Proposed Project.
The model will be periodically run and updated as recovery plans become known or change in any
given year.
The model will be used to identify a negative project impact (NPI) based on the comparison of No-
Project Conditions and Project Conditions, and to identify the wells at risk of impact during
recovery operations.
C. Establish Triggers and Mitigation Actions
An NPI is triggered when the model results predict that groundwater levels under Project
Conditions are 30 feet deeper than No-Project Conditions at a nearby existing and operative well,
and the well has experienced (or is expected to experience) mechanical failure or other
operational problems due to declining water levels. Given historical fluctuations in groundwater
levels in the area when other nearby groundwater banking projects are recovering, it is expected
that additional declines attributable to the Proposed Project beyond historic low groundwater
levels could result in operational problems at some existing wells.
Agricultural Wells. The following measures would be implemented when an NPI is triggered for
an operational agricultural well:
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 9
o When the model predicts an NPI outside the current operating range of the pump but
within the potential operating range of the well, then the Districts will provide
compensation to lower the well pump to meet the landowner’s needs.
o When the model predicts an NPI outside the current and potential operating range of the
well, then the Districts will supply an equivalent water supply to the affected landowner
from an alternate source at no greater cost; provide other acceptable mitigation to the
landowner; or reduce or adjust pumping as necessary to prevent, avoid, or eliminate the
NPI.
Domestic Wells. The following measures would be implemented when an NPI is triggered for a
domestic well:
o When the model predicts an NPI such that production ceases or is likely to cease, then
the Districts will provide compensation to implement one of the following: lower the
domestic submersible pump bowl setting sufficient to restore and maintain service;
provide a one-time permanent connection to the nearest water service provider; or drill
and equip a new domestic well. If necessary, the Districts will provide interim in-home
water supplies until one of these actions is completed.
E. Recovery Facilities
1. Onsite Recovery Facilities
Onsite recovery would include the development of a well field, including new and existing recovery wells,
a system of collector pipelines to convey water away from the recovery wells, and an outflow structure at
the Kern River Canal. These facilities are described below.
a) Well Field and Collector Pipelines
The well field would consist of a network of wells and collector pipelines to facilitate recovery and
conveyance of stored water. Up to 14 recovery wells and up to eight monitoring wells would comprise the
well field, six of which are existing. Each well would be located a minimum of one-third of a mile from any
existing wells, in accordance with the Kern Fan Operation and Monitoring Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU). Each recovery well would be plumbed to the recovery pipeline.
The recovery pipeline would be constructed as a branching system of buried polyvinyl chloride (PVC), high-
density polyethylene (HDPP), and reinforced concrete (RCP) pipelines that would collect stored water
being pumped from the recovery wells and convey it to the Kern River Canal outflow structure. The well
spacing would determine the exact location and alignment of the recovery pipeline. Based on the
conceptual layout of the well field, approximately 35,450 linear feet of pipeline would be required, ranging
in diameter from 15 inches to 96 inches. The size of each segment of the recovery pipeline was determined
based on the number of wells plumbed to that segment and assuming that all wells would be operated
simultaneously at their design discharge rate of approximately 6.2 cfs. The pipeline would also serve a
recharge conveyance role, however, certain segments were sized based on recharge conveyance
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 10
requirements rather than recovery requirements. The collector pipe was sized to maintain a maximum
flow rate of approximately 5-6 feet per second (ft/sec). Power lines would be installed at the project site
to convey electricity to each of the wells.
b) Outflow Structure
Recovered groundwater would be pumped from the well field and conveyed through the collector
pipeline to the outlet structure at the northwestern corner of the project site for discharge into the Kern
River Canal. The outlet structure was sized under the assumption that all recovery wells could be operated
simultaneously and could convey the full 87 cfs (14 wells x 6.2 cfs per well) of design recovery capacity.
2. Offsite Recovery Facilities
Offsite recovery would rely on existing recovery wells and extraction facilities owned or operated by
BVWSD and RRBWSD, and their landowners. Recovery activities would be integrated with recovery
operations of the Districts’ existing conjunctive use programs. No new construction would be required for
offsite recovery. The Proposed Project would provide flexibility for the Districts in the management of
surface water and groundwater to improve overall reliability of water supply. Water banked on the project
site (less losses) could be recovered from any combination of the Proposed Project’s wells and other
existing extraction facilities owned by BVWSD, and within RRBWSD’s service area by means of offsite
private wells and existing RRBWSD wells. Recovery would occur to meet the Districts’ existing recovery
obligations, for themselves and their banking partners, for agricultural, domestic, and industrial uses.
Extraction for the Proposed Project would be limited to the amount previously recharged less losses and
would be subject to the applicable MOUs, operations plans, and mitigation agreements. Under SGMA, the
Districts would be required to coordinate with KRGSA to ensure consistency with the KRGSA’s GSP and
the Districts’ respective GSPs. In-lieu recovery by exchange could also take place in addition to direct
recovery through extraction. An exchange in-lieu of recovery may be accomplished through the use of
SWP, Kern River, or other supplies through various water management programs and/or other available
surface supplies. The exchange of surface supplies would be subject to the approval of those entities with
discretionary authority over such supplies, as well as any necessary CEQA review by those entities.
The Districts could recover water from the Proposed Project as needed to meet existing or future
commitments under their Conjunctive Use Program. It is expected that banked supplies would be
recovered in the event of a water shortage, for improved reliability and redundancy, and to diversify
recovery locations. If recharged water is sold to other agencies that choose to recover the water from
their service areas, those activities would be evaluated more specifically, as necessary, for their potential
environmental effects when such partnerships are identified and planned for implementation.
Water recharged as part of the Proposed Project would be used by the Districts to supplement existing
uses. The operation of the offsite recovery facilities has been subject to prior CEQA review when the
facilities were constructed and would not require additional environmental approval (BVWSD 2002, 2006,
2009; Kern Fan Authority 2020; RRBWSD 2001, 2003, 2008, 2009, 2011; RRBWSD and Irvine Ranch Water
District 2015, 2022).
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 11
F. Water Sources
Recharge water for the Proposed Project would be secured and acquired by the Districts from various
sources, potentially including federal, state, and local supplies. Water would be acquired through
transfers, balanced and unbalanced exchange agreements, purchase or temporary transfers, or other
means as available. Potential sources of water for recharge and storage during operation of the Proposed
Project include water from the Kern River, State Water Project (SWP), and the Central Valley Project (CVP),
depending on annual availability and appropriative (pre-1914 and post-1914) water rights; Friant-Kern
Canal; floodwater; and possibly other sources that may be available to the Districts from time to time.
1. Central Valley Project Water
The CVP is a network of dams, power plants, and canals operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
(Reclamation) that provides water supply reliability to the Central Valley in periods of drought. Under
Section 215 of the federal Reclamation Reform Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-293), which authorized the CVP,
Reclamation can make excess, non-storable floodwater available during wet years.
RRBWSD is a fourth-priority non-CVP contractor that can take CVP water under certain conditions. If
conveyance capacity is available, this surplus CVP water could be delivered to the project site from the
Friant-Kern Canal through the Cross Valley Canal (CVC).
2. State Water Project Water
As part of the SWP system, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) delivers water through
the California Aqueduct to 29 contractors, including 21 contractors located south of the Sacramento–San
Joaquin River Delta (known as “South of Delta” contractors). These contracts are with both M&I and
agricultural water users. The foundation allocation of water to each contractor is based on their respective
“Table A” entitlement, which is the maximum amount of water delivered to them by the SWP on an annual
basis. SWP contractors can order water up to their Table A allocation even if the water is not needed in
that year, and this excess water can be stored outside the contractor’s place of service for future use.
RRBWSD and BVWSD currently receive SWP water for their Conjunctive Use Programs through a water
supply contract with KCWA, one of the 29 SWP contractors.
Article 21 of the long-term SWP water supply contract establishes an interruptible supply of uncontrolled
water that cannot be stored in state-operated reservoirs. During wet hydrologic years, DWR may declare
Article 21 water available; these supplies are available in short duration, and, if conveyance capacity exists,
can be purchased and stored for future use. The Districts may purchase excess Article 21 water through
KCWA for delivery to the Proposed Project’s recharge facilities using the CVC when such water is available.
Under certain contracts and/or guidelines, DWR allows for the exchange of stored water on either an even
or unbalanced basis. Even exchanges are “one-for-one” in that an equal amount of water is exchanged,
less losses. In an unbalanced exchange, in return for storage, the original water contractor only receives
a percentage or pro ration of the original amount of water being stored. For example, for every two acre-
feet of water recharged, the water supplier will only receive one acre-foot, less losses. SWP water
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 12
available for exchange could be acquired for the Project. Water banking through the execution of even or
unbalanced exchanges or other transactions approved by DWR would require the cooperation and
agreement of the exchange contractor, DWR, and KCWA.
Under any of these scenarios, SWP water would be conveyed to the project site through the CVC, which
conveys water to the Kern River, or any other conveyance facility (i.e., pipeline or canal) available to the
Districts, subject to any necessary approvals or agreements.
3. Appropriative Kern River Water Rights
RRBWSD currently receives Kern River water when it is available for groundwater recharge through a 1961
water service agreement with the City, as amended, as well as from BVWSD and other Kern River interests
through banking and temporary water service agreements.
BVWSD owns pre-1914 Kern River rights associated with its “Second Point Right,” or the water to which
the district is entitled, from the Second Point of Measurement allocation under the Miller-Haggin
Agreement of July 28, 1888, and as subsequently amended. This Second Point Right provides BVWSD with
an average entitlement of approximately 150,000 acre-feet per year of surface water from the Kern River.
The Kern River Watermaster, in coordination with the City Water Department’s daily management of Kern
River flows, records the amount of water released daily from the Isabella Reservoir into the Kern River.
Because of BVWSD’s pre-1914 rights on the Kern River, the District has access to large quantities of high-
flow Kern River water supplies in wet years. BVWSD and its predecessor-in-interest Miller & Lux have long
realized the value of capturing and storing its Second Point Right entitlement, especially in high-flow years
for later use when supplies are not available. Accordingly, aquifer storage and recovery programs and
surface storage have, and continue to be, utilized to maximize the use of surplus wet-year water supplies.
During periods of mandatory release on the Kern River, water released from the Isabella Reservoir may
be available for diversion to the Proposed Project by BVWSD and/or RRBWSD.
Kern River water would be conveyed to the project site through the 2800 Acre Basin 1 head gate to the
canal through the Pioneer Project as described above.
G. Proposed Bicycle Path
The Districts propose to dedicate an easement to the City for use as a bicycle path that would connect
trails in the western suburban area of Bakersfield with the Kern River Canal and, from there, across the
canal to the Kern River Parkway Trail. The proposed bicycle path is conceptual in nature at this time. The
City Recreation and Parks Department would design, construct, and maintain the trail, which would be
located in such a way that users would not have access to the Proposed Project site. General
characteristics of the trail would conform to bicycle path requirements in the City of Bakersfield Recreation
and Parks Master Plan (City of Bakersfield 2007) and the City of Bakersfield Bicycle Transportation Plan
(City of Bakersfield 2013). When funding is available and design of the trail is more developed, the City
would determine whether additional CEQA review is required.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 13
H. Best Management Practices
The Districts and their contractors would implement standard housekeeping best management practices
(BMPs) to protect wildlife in the project area from being injured or otherwise harmed during construction
and operation of the Proposed Project. These BMPs, described in more detail below, would be
implemented during all phases of project construction and during operation of the recharge facilities:
BMP-1: Remove Trash. Trash and food items shall be contained in closed, wildlife-proof containers and
removed weekly at a minimum from the project site.
BMP-2: Prohibit Firearms and Pets. Firearms and pets shall be prohibited from the project site. Wildlife-
friendly fencing will be installed along the bike trail to prevent pets from accessing sensitive habitat areas.
BMP-3: Limit Vehicle Use to Existing Roads and Minimize Vehicle Speed. Existing roads/routes of travel
shall be used to the maximum extent feasible. Off-road/cross-country travel by construction equipment
and vehicles is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Project Biologist.
Project employees shall exercise caution when traveling or working within listed species’ habitats. To
minimize wildlife injury/mortality, the daytime speed limit on unpaved roads shall be a maximum of 20
miles per hour (mph). If conditions warrant, the maximum speed may be lowered to 10 mph, for example
along a narrow road in highly sensitive habitat; this determination shall be made by the biological monitor.
The maximum speed shall be posted in the project area.
BMP-4: Check for Wildlife Under Vehicles and Equipment: All vehicle/equipment operators shall check
for wildlife under vehicles and equipment prior to operation. If animals are observed, vehicles and
equipment will not be moved until observed wildlife move away on their own so that they are not under
threat of injury/mortality, or the Project Biologist has relocated the wildlife out of harm’s way (if such
relocation is authorized by the involved regulatory agencies).
I. Project Approvals
The Applicant is requesting a change to the land use designation of approximately 2,070 acres of
undeveloped land, commonly known as McAllister Ranch, in western Bakersfield to enable the
construction and operation of the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would include the following
actions and approvals:
Specific Plan Amendment/General Plan Amendment (SPA-GPA) to:
rescind the McAllister Ranch Specific Plan, including all goals, policies, and
implementation measures;
amend the Land Use Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan (MBGP)
to change the designation of the Property from SR (Suburban Residential), LR (Low
Density Residential), LMR (Low Medium Density Residential), HMR (High Medium
Density Residential), HR (High Density Residential), and GC (General Commercial) to
R-EA (Resource – Extensive);
0
0
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 14
amend the Circulation Element of the MBGP to remove all McAllister Ranch interior
street alignments approved by Resolution 094-07, including McAllister Drive, Canfield
Parkway, Old Settler Road, Stetson Way, Erikson Drive, Marino Parkway, Conestoga
Way, and any other unnamed local streets within the Plan boundary with no other
changes to Circulation for Panama Lane, the West Beltway, or South Allen Road; and
amend the Housing Element of the MBGP to remove the housing units approved with
the McAllister Ranch Specific Plan from the City’s Vacant Land Inventory.
Zone Change (ZC) for the Property from R-1 (One Family Dwelling), E (Estate), R-2/PUD
(Limited Multiple Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), R-3/PUD (Multiple Family
Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), C-1/PCD (Neighborhood Commercial/Precise
Commercial Development), C-C/PCD-PE (Commercial Center/Precise Commercial
Development – Petroleum Extraction Combining) and DI (Drill Island) to A-WR (Agriculture
– Water Recharge Combining); and
Design, construction, and operation of a water banking facility (storage and recovery) on
the Property, including water conveyance to and from the site and spreading and
recovery facilities on site at the project site.
Under CEQA, a responsible agency is a public agency, other than the lead agency, that has responsibility
for carrying out or approving a project (Public Resources Code [Pub. Res. Code] section 21069).
Responsible agencies for the Proposed Project are BVWSD and RRBWSD.
CEQA defines a trustee agency as a state agency that has jurisdiction by law over natural resources
affected by a project, that are held in trust for the people of the State of California (Pub. Res. Code section
21070). CDFW is a trustee agency for the Proposed Project, for the purposes of the FEIR.
Other permits and approvals, which are known to be needed, or may be needed, in order to implement
various Project components in the future, are identified in Table 2-7, Anticipated Regulatory Permits,
Approvals, and Consultations, of the FEIR’s Project Description (Section 2).
J. Purpose and Objectives
The CEQA Guidelines call for an EIR to identify objectives sought by a proposed project (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15124[b]). A statement of objectives helps convey the reasons for considering approval of the
project, including its intended benefits, and guides the development of a reasonable range of alternatives
to evaluate in the EIR.
Primary water management goals of independent water storage districts such as BVWSD (the Applicant)
and RRBWSD are to benefit the lands, landowners, and water users within their respective boundaries, as
well as water banking partners, by providing a reliable, affordable, and usable water supply through
economic and efficient storage, distribution, and use of available water supplies. Such districts must also
facilitate programs that protect and benefit the groundwater basins that underlie their areas, as required
by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) (California Water Code Sections 10720 et seq.).
0
0
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 15
The Proposed Project site is within the jurisdictional boundary of the Kern River Groundwater
Sustainability Agency (KRGSA. The KRGSA would have an interest in monitoring operation of the Proposed
Project and coordinating with the Districts to ensure consistency with their groundwater sustainability
plan (GSP).
In support of the general water management goal described above, the Proposed Project would provide
the following benefits (purposes):
Conserve available water supplies for use during below-average years or as otherwise needed
for the Districts’ purposes;
Provide water recharge, storage and recovery capacity for the Districts, which would allow for
the efficient management of water supplies in the Districts’ service areas; and
Provide flexibility for the Districts in implementing their Conjunctive Use Programs.
More specific objectives of the Proposed Project include the following:
To increase water supply reliability in the area, in a cost-effective and environmentally sound
manner, by providing a means to store water in the groundwater aquifer and provide a means
to extract and use the stored groundwater when needed;
To reduce the Districts’ dependence on the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta (Delta)
through programs such as the State Water Project (SWP) and Central Valley Project (CVP), by
storing water locally in the groundwater aquifer for later extraction and use;
Capture, recharge, and store water from the Kern River, SWP, Federal projects, and other
available sources for later use;
Provide operating flexibility for the Districts’ existing and future Conjunctive Use Programs
with banking partners, exchanges, and sales;
Assist in achieving groundwater sustainability within Kern County Sub-basin of the San
Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin through implementation of projects consistent with
California Executive Order N-10-19 directing State agencies to develop a “water resilience
portfolio”; and
Provide ecosystem public benefits and water supply benefits for agricultural, M&I, and
wildlife refuge uses.
III. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
A. Initial Study and Notice of Preparation
Preliminary environmental review of the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project was conducted
by the City’s Development Services Department by way of the Notice of Preparation/Initial Study (NOP/IS),
notifying the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and each responsible and trustee agency
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 16
of the City’s plan to prepare an EIR for the project. In the NOP/IS, the City listed the following subject
areas to be analyzed in the EIR:
1. Air Quality
2. Biological Resources
3. Cultural Resources
4. Energy
5. Geology/Soils
6. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
7. Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
8. Hydrology/Water Quality
9. Land Use/Planning
10. Mineral Resources
11. Noise
12. Public Services
13. Recreation
14. Transportation
15. Tribal Cultural Resources
16. Utilities/Service Systems
17. Mandatory Findings of
Significance
On June 12, 2020, the City circulated the NOP/IS to responsible agencies, trustee agencies, regional
agencies, and other agencies, organizations, and interested persons for the 30-day review period required
under CEQA. The NOP requested that the agencies, organizations, and others provide the City with
specific details about the scope and content of the environmental information to be contained in this
Draft EIR.
In addition, to facilitate local participation, the City held a scoping meeting on June 29, 2020 at the City of
Bakersfield’s Council Chambers, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA, to present the project and to solicit
suggestions from the public and other agencies on the scope and content of the Draft EIR.
While no areas of controversy were made known to the lead agency, several aspects of the Proposed
Project and its potential effects were raised during the scoping period, which were subsequently
addressed in the EIR. See, FEIR at Section ES.9, Areas of Controversy.
B. Environmental Impact
Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15105, the City was required to provide a 45-day public review period on
the Draft EIR. The McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project Draft EIR (July 2022) was made available
for public comment beginning July 18, 2022 and ending September 1, 2022. On August 30, 2022, the City
extended the public comment period an additional 21 days to September 22, 2022. The Draft EIR and
supporting documents were made available for download from the City’s website:
https://www.bakersfieldcity.us/279/Environmental-Documents.
In November 2024, the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project FEIR was completed. The FEIR
included all comments and responses to comments received on the Draft EIR, an additional technical
appendix, and other information and clarifications. On September 20, 2024, City staff made the draft Final
EIR available for public review by posting it on the City’s website.
Following release of the draft Final EIR, on October 3, 2024, the Planning Commission held a public hearing
on the Project, associated entitlements, and the draft Final EIR. Specific concerns raised by Planning
Commissioners included:
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 17
A public hearing was scheduled before the City Council for November 20, 2024.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE CATEGORIES FOUND TO HAVE NO IMPACT OR A LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
The City finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, the McAllister Groundwater Banking
Project would either have no impact or impacts would be less than significant relative to the following
environmental resource categories and, therefore, no mitigation is required pursuant to Public Resources
Code Section 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a).
Environmental Resource Category No Impact or Less than Significant Environmental Impact
Air Quality
(EIR Chapter 4)
• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of an applicable air quality plan – less than significant impact (Impact AQ-1).
• 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 – less than significant impact (Impact AQ-2).
• Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations – less than significant impact (Impact AQ-3).
• Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people – less than significant impact (Impact AQ-5).
Biological Resources
(EIR Chapter 5)
• Impact on State or Federally Protected Wetlands or Waters of the U.S. – no impact (Impact BIO-3).
• Impact on Movement of Resident or Migratory Fish or Wildlife Species, Established Native Resident or Migratory Wildlife Corridors, or Native Wildlife Nursery Sites – no impact (Impact BIO-4).
• Conflict with Local Policies or Ordinances Protecting Biological Resources – no impact (Impact BIO-5).
• Conflicts with Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or Other Approved Conservation Plans – no impact (Impact BIO-6).
Cultural Resources
(EIR Chapter 6)
• Adverse change in the significance of a historical resource – no impact (Impact CR-1).
Energy
(EIR Chapter 7)
• Result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation – less than significant impact (Impact ENR-1).
• Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency – less than significant impact (Impact ENR-2).
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 18
Environmental Resource Category No Impact or Less than Significant Environmental Impact
Geology, Soils and Seismicity
(EIR Chapter 8)
• Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction – less than significant impact (Impact GEO-1).
• Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving landslides – less than significant impact (Impact GEO-2).
• Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil – less than significant impact (Impact GEO-3).
• 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 – less than significant impact (Impact GEO-4).
• Result in risk to property and life from expansive soils – less than significant impact (Impact GEO-5).
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
(EIR Chapter 9)
• Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment – less than significant impact (Impact GHG-1).
• Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing emissions of GHGs – less than significant impact (Impact GHG-2).
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
(EIR Chapter 10)
• Emit hazardous emissions or involve handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school – no impact (Impact HAZ-3).
• Located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to California Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment – no impact (Impact HAZ-4).
• Result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area if the project is within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public-use airport – no impact (Impact HAZ-5).
• Impair implementation of or physically interfering with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan – less than significant impact (Impact HAZ-6).
• Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires – no impact (Impact HAZ-7).
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 19
Environmental Resource Category No Impact or Less than Significant Environmental Impact
Hydrology and Water Quality – Hydrology
(EIR Chapter 11)
• Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality – less than significant impact (Impact WQ-1). As explained in the Responses to Comments, there was evidence of potential soil contamination at the site due to historic oil extraction and related activities. (See Response to Comment No. D-16, which is incorporated herein by this reference.) To address this issue, Haro Engineering was retained to assess the vertical and lateral extent of such contamination and recommend corrective action if needed to ensure the project would not cause the contamination to spread or make contact with groundwater. (Response to Comment No. D-16.) Haro determined that while most of the soil samples analyzed did not show contaminant concentrations above their established screening levels, a few of the samples from a trenched area did exhibit hydrocarbon concentrations (PAH and VOCs) above screening levels. Based on this information, Haro recommended that prior to commencement of the Project, the Districts remove approximately 266 cubic yards of hydrocarbon-impacted soil and dispose of it offsite. (Ibid.) The City will require that the District’s implement this recommendation as a condition of Project approval. The EIR’s determination that the Project will not result in significant impacts on water quality is supported by additional Responses to Comments, including but not limited to the following: Responses to Comment Nos. A-7, D-14, D-16, F-10, F-11, F-46, F-47, F-48, F-49, F-52, F-53, F-54, and F-55, all of which are incorporated by this reference into these Findings.
• Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin – less than significant impact (Impact WQ-2). The Project’s potential to affect existing groundwater supplies and/or interfere with groundwater recharge operations and management is analyzed extensively in the EIR, including but not limited to the following Responses to Comments:
o A-4, A-5, A-6, A-9, A-11, A-13, A-14, A-15, A-17, A-19, A-20, A-21;
o D-4, D-5, D-6, D-7, D-9, D-10, D-11, D-17, D-18, D-19, D-20, D-25, D-26, D-27;
o F-4, F-5, F-6, F-7, F-8, F-9, F-13, F-14, F-15, F-16, F-17, F-21, F-36, F-36, F-38, F-39, F-40, F-43, F-44, F-45, F-50, F-57, F-58, F-59, F-63, and F-68.
These Responses to Comments, which are incorporated by this reference into these Findings, further support the City’s determination that the Project would have less than significant
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 20
Environmental Resource Category No Impact or Less than Significant Environmental Impact
impacts on groundwater supplies, groundwater recharge, and groundwater management.
• 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:
o result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site – less than significant impact (WQ-3).
o substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off- site – less than significant impact (WQ-3).
o create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff – less than significant impact (WQ-3).
o impede or redirect flood flows – less than significant impact (Impact WQ-3).
• Result in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation – less than significant impact (Impact WQ-4).
• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan – less than significant impact (Impact WQ-5). The EIR examined the Project’s potential to conflict with or obstruct implementation of water control plans and/or sustainable groundwater management plans. In addition, these issues were discussed in the following Responses to Comments:
o Water Quality: A-7, D-14, D-16, F-10, F-11, F-46, F-47, F-48, F-49, F-52, F-53, F-54, and F-55.
o Groundwater Management: A-4, A-5, A-6, A-9, A-11, A-13, A-14, A-15, A-17, A-19, A-20, A-21;D-4, D-5, D-6, D-7, D-9, D-10, D-11, D-17, D-18, D-19, D-20, D-25, D-26, D-27; F-4, F-5, F-6, F-7, F-8, F-9, F-13, F-14, F-15, F-16, F-17, F-21, F-36, F-36, F-38, F-39, F-40, F-43, F-44, F-45, F-50, F-57, F-58, F-59, F-63, and F-68.
These Responses to Comments, which are incorporated by this reference into these Findings, further support the City’s determination that the Project would not significantly affect implementation of water quality control plans and/or sustainable groundwater management plans.have less than
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 21
Environmental Resource Category No Impact or Less than Significant Environmental Impact
significant impacts on groundwater supplies, groundwater recharge, and groundwater management.
Land Use/Planning
(EIR Chapter 12)
• Potential to physically divide an established community – no impact (Impact LU-1).
• Conflict with applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect – less than significant impact (Impact LU-2).
Noise and Vibration
(EIR Chapter 13)
• Substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the proposed maintenance area in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, state or federal standards – less than significant impact (Impact NOI-1).
• Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels – less than significant impact (Impact NOI-2).
• Location in the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use area, or within 2 miles of a public airport, and exposure of people residing or working in the area to excessive noise levels – no impact (Impact NOI-3).
Population and Housing
(EIR Section Chapter 14)
• Potential to induce population growth within the City of Bakersfield – less than significant impact (Impact POP-1).
• Potential effects to existing housing stock within the City of Bakersfield – less than significant impact (Impact POP-2).
Public Services
(EIR Chapter 15)
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives relating to the following public services:
o Fire Protection – less than significant impact (Impact PS-1);
o Police Protection – less than significant impact (Impact PS-1).
Recreation
(EIR Chapter 16)
Include recreational facilities that would have an adverse physical effect on the environment – less than significant impact (Impact REC-1).
Increase the use of existing recreational facilities – no impact (Impact REC-2).
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 22
Environmental Resource Category No Impact or Less than Significant Environmental Impact
Utilities and Service Systems
(EIR Chapter 18)
Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects – less than significant impact (Impact UTL-1).
Have insufficient water supplies to supply the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years – less than significant impact (Impact UTL-2).
Cumulative Impacts
(EIR Chapter 20)
Energy: The Proposed Project would have less-than-significant impacts regarding wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy and would not conflict with state or local renewable energy plans. Energy use is largely a project-specific issue, and compliance with state and local plans is typically required of all projects. Therefore, there would be no potential for a significant cumulative impact.
Geology, Soils, and Seismicity: Extensive previous excavation at the project site has not identified geological, soils, or seismic concerns. With implementation of erosion control BMPs and SWPPP compliance, impacts of the Proposed Project would be less than significant. Paleontological resources could be affected during construction, and Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would reduce that impact to a less-than-significant level. Geology and soils are, by nature, site specific; therefore, there would be no potential for a significant cumulative impact.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Once in operation, the Proposed Project may require the use of insect control measures for mosquito abatement in the percolation basins. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Small quantities of hazardous substances were observed on the Proposed Project site during the site reconnaissance, including near some of the active oil wells within and near the site. If contamination is present, then soil excavation activities could expose construction workers to existing on-site hazardous materials. Mitigation Measures HAZ-2 and HAZ-3 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Cumulative projects would have similar potential for insect control issues and hazardous materials onsite. Because these issues are site specific, there would be no potential for a significant cumulative impact.
Hydrology and Water Quality: The Proposed Project would not result in substantial degradation of water quality or drawdown of groundwater supplies; rather, the Proposed
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 23
Environmental Resource Category No Impact or Less than Significant Environmental Impact
Project would likely have a beneficial overall effect on water quality and groundwater levels. Using available surface water supplies to recharge groundwater would benefit groundwater supplies/levels in the subbasin, which is currently in “critical overdraft.” Improving storage of water supplies in the aquifer would likely improve groundwater quality as well, since some naturally occurring pollutants (e.g., arsenic) are more closely associated with deeper subsurface materials. In this respect, the Proposed Project would further progress towards achievement and maintenance of groundwater beneficial uses identified in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins.
During very low groundwater conditions, the Proposed Project could interfere with nearby non-project wells as a result of the Proposed Project’s recovery operations; however, the Draft Mitigation Joint Use Agreement describes project operations under all pumping scenarios and establishes limitations that would minimize or mitigate for any significant effects (Appendix B). Likewise, the Proposed Project will be subject to the conditions of the MOU and Operations Plans (Appendix B). Notably, operation of the Proposed Project, on its own, would not cause groundwater levels to drop below the thresholds identified in the KRGSA GSP. This conclusion was confirmed by an updated hydrogeological analysis prepared in response to comments received on the Draft EIR and included in the FEIR. (See Response to Comment A-4, which is incorporated by reference into this Finding. This conclusion is further supported by the following Responses to Comments: A-4, A-5, A-6, A-9, A-11, A-13, A-14, A-15, A-17, A-19, A-20, A-21;D-4, D-5, D-6, D-7, D-9, D-10, D-11, D-17, D-18, D-19, D-20, D-25, D-26, D-27; F-4, F-5, F-6, F-7, F-8, F-9, F-13, F-14, F-15, F-16, F-17, F-21, F-36, F-36, F-38, F-39, F-40, F-43, F-44, F-45, F-50, F-57, F-58, F-59, F-63, and F-68. These Responses to Comments are incorporated by reference herein.
The overall effect of the Proposed Project on groundwater supplies and sustainable management of the basin would be beneficial. As noted above, storage and later utilization of excess surface water supplies (e.g., floodwater) that cannot otherwise be stored would have a positive effect on the region’s groundwater balance. The project would store substantially more water than it would recover in any given year. As such, the Proposed Project would have a beneficial impact on hydrology and water quality.
The Proposed Project would be one of many actions and projects being implemented by water agencies in the Kern County Subbasin and KRGSA Plan Area to address the current
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 24
Environmental Resource Category No Impact or Less than Significant Environmental Impact
water supply situation and ongoing groundwater basin impacts. The identified cumulative projects are similarly intended to address these same impacts. Both the future cumulative projects and existing local groundwater banking programs would operate under strict guidelines from the applicable GSAs, the California Department of Water Resources, and the State Water Resources Control Board, as well as MOUs and Operations Plans similar to those that will be required of the Proposed Project. Overall, these projects would improve groundwater and water supply conditions in the Kern River Subbasin. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not contribute substantially to a significant cumulative impact on hydrology or water quality – less than significant cumulative impact (Impact CUM-3).
Land Use and Planning: Because the project site is located at the western edge of development in Bakersfield, the Proposed Project would not physically divide an existing community. The Proposed Project would involve rescinding approval of the McAllister Ranch Specific Plan, eliminating the potential for a conflict with the policies contained in that plan. In addition, the Proposed Project would be consistent with policies and objectives of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) and the groundwater sustainability plans of the Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Agency and Kern Groundwater Authority. Cumulative projects would similarly be consistent with those policies and objectives. Therefore, there would be no potential for a significant cumulative impact.
Noise and Vibration: Noise modeling shows that construction activities for the Proposed Project would not result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels. Implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would ensure that project operations and routine maintenance would not result in substantial increases in ambient noise levels. Thus, the Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts related to noise would not be considerable.
Population and Housing: The Proposed Project would increase groundwater storage in the Kern River Subbasin but would not involve construction of new facilities that would directly induce growth. Rescinding approval of the McAllister Ranch Specific Plan and the corresponding 9,000 housing units would result in a vacant unit potential that exceeds the remaining RHNA allocation need by approximately 523 percent. Therefore, the City would have sufficient capacity to accommodate the remaining unmet RHNA allocation in each income level and would be in compliance with SB 166. Similarly, the cumulative projects would not directly induce growth or affect existing housing stock. Therefore, the
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 25
Environmental Resource Category No Impact or Less than Significant Environmental Impact
Proposed Project would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact.
Public Services: The site is located in a primarily rural area. As a groundwater recharge facility, the site would be inactive during approximately 85 percent of the year (the dry season) and would be maintained as dry ponds. Regular project operations would require minimal employees, would not induce population growth, and would not involve high fire hazard activities. As a result, the Proposed Project would not increase the need for fire or police protection services. Similarly, the cumulative projects would have no potential to increase the need for public services. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact.
Recreation: The Proposed Project would include construction of a bicycle path connecting suburban Bakersfield development to the Kern River Parkway. Impacts on recreation would be less than significant. The cumulative projects would, in a conservative assessment, have no impact on recreation; at best, additional recreational facilities could be added to the area. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact.
Utilities and Service Systems: The Proposed Project would not require new or expanded entitlements or utility infrastructure to serve the facility. Water, wastewater, electricity, and other service systems have availability to serve the project. Storm drainage would be retained on site. During construction, approximately 70-100 truckloads of steel rebar, plastic, and conduit would be disposed of offsite; asphalt and concrete removed during demolition would be ground and used onsite for roadways and levee protection; and excavated dirt would be used to construct levees separating the recharge basins. Mitigation Measure UTL-1 would require compliance with CALGreen waste diversion requirements to the extent feasible. The cumulative projects would, for the most part, involve little to no solid waste removal aside from domestic waste. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact.
V. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT CAN BE MITIGATED TO A LEVEL BELOW
SIGNIFICANT (CEQA GUIDELINES § 15091(A)(1))
Pursuant to Section 21081(a) of the Public Resources Code and Section 15091(a)(1) of the State CEQA
Guidelines, the City Council finds that, for each of the following significant effects identified in the FEIR,
changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 26
the identified significant effects on the environment to less than significant levels. The significant effects
and mitigation measures are stated fully in the FEIR. These findings are explained below and are supported
by substantial evidence in the record of proceedings.
A. Air Quality
Impact AQ-4. Expose Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants
Description of Significant Effect: As part of ground disturbing activities associated with project
construction, Valley Fever spores found in the top few inches of soil may be stirred up. Even after
implementation of Cal/OSHA regulations and the SJVAPCD’s Regulation VIII fugitive dust mitigation
measures, the potential exists for spores to reach nearby sensitive receptors and result in cases of Valley
Fever. As such, the potential for an increase in incidence of Valley Fever is high given that Kern County has
one of the highest incidence rates in the state. This would be a potentially significant impact during
project construction.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measure:
Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Develop and Implement a Valley Fever Management Plan.
The Districts or their contractors shall implement the following measures:
Prepare a Valley Fever Management Plan (VFMP). The VFMP shall be submitted to the California
Department of Public Health and the Kern County Department of Public Health for review and to
the City of Bakersfield for final approval prior to the start of construction. The VFMP shall include,
but will not be limited to, the following elements as currently recommended by the California
Department of Public Health:
o Adopt site plans and work practices that reduce workers’ exposure and which would also
help minimize primary and secondary exposure to the community through direct
dispersal of spores or secondary dispersal from contaminated workers or equipment
bringing spores to the community. The site plans and work practices may include some or
all of the following measures:
Minimize the area of soil disturbed.
Use water, appropriate soil stabilizers, and/or re-vegetation to reduce airborne
dust.
Stabilize all spoils piles by tarping or other methods.
Provide air-conditioned cabs for vehicles that generate heavy dust and make sure
workers keep windows and vents closed.
Suspend work during heavy winds.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 27
Take measures to reduce transporting spores offsite, such as the following:
o Clean tools, equipment, and vehicles before transporting offsite.
o If workers’ clothing is likely to be heavily contaminated with dust, provide coveralls and
change rooms, and showers where possible.
Identify a health care provider for occupational injuries and illnesses who is knowledgeable
about the diagnosis and treatment of Valley Fever. This helps to ensure proper diagnosis and
treatment as well as tracking potential outbreaks that may affect the community.
Train workers and supervisors about the risk of Valley Fever, the work activities that may
increase the risk, and the measures used onsite to reduce exposure. Also train on how to
recognize Valley Fever symptoms. This helps to ensure proper diagnosis and treatment as well
as tracking potential outbreaks that may affect community.
Encourage workers to report Valley Fever symptoms promptly to a supervisor. Not associating
these symptoms with workplace exposures can lead to a delay in appropriate diagnosis and
treatment. This helps to ensure proper diagnosis and treatment as well as tracking potential
outbreaks that may affect community.
Rationale: Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would reduce the risk of potential exposure
to Valley Fever and the related impacts to less than significant because this mitigation measure would
ensure that construction activities at the site comply with applicable public health guidance and, thereby,
substantially reduce the risk of exposure during project construction.
B. Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1. Impacts to Special Status Species
i) Description of Significant Effect: Surveys for special-status plant species in the area detected Kern
mallow, a federally endangered species. If percolation pond #24 remains within the Proposed Project
footprint, the entire population of these species on-site could be impacted as the area would be converted
to percolation pond #24. Impacts include physical removal of the individuals due to trampling or vehicle
access, and removal of their habitat, which would be a significant impact.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Conduct a Preconstruction Survey for Kern Mallow
If the 160-acre area of chenopod scrub habitat onsite will be impacted by project-related activities,
an appropriately timed preconstruction survey for Kern mallow shall be conducted by a qualified
biologist during the spring season (or when reference populations are flowering) that precedes
construction. The distribution of the Kern mallow population shall be marked in the field with flagging
and mapped with GPS, and population size/number of individual Kern mallow plants will be estimated.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 28
Within 30 days prior to construction, a qualified biologist will ensure that all flagging is still intact and
replace flagging as necessary.
Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Implement Kern Mallow Avoidance Buffers
A minimum 50-foot avoidance buffer measured outward from the individual plant, cluster of plants,
or mapped population boundaries shall be maintained around populations of Kern mallow in
perpetuity. If avoidance buffers are encroached upon, Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would be
implemented.
Mitigation Measure BIO-3: Compliance with USFWS ITP/HCP Requirements, if Applicable
If project activities result in encroachment on Kern mallow avoidance buffers, a qualified biologist
shall evaluate and quantify the impact to Kern mallow including identifying the impacted number of
plants and the impacted acreage. The Districts shall comply with USFWS approved protocol
requirements including notification requirements, and, if applicable, coordinate with USFWS to
develop a Salvage/Relocation Plan for Kern mallow. For example, a Relocation Plan strategy may
include:
a. Collection of seed by a biologist with proper plant collecting permits, with reseeding
undertaken at the site following the activity during appropriate seasonal timeframes and
weather conditions favorable for germination and growth.
b. In areas where mapped Kern mallow will be impacted, stockpiling the top 6 inches of topsoil
collected to preserve the seed banks. The soil may be redistributed in other areas of the
project site that are to be left undisturbed (if available) or at a protected offsite location (e.g.,
Kern Water Bank land, other lands owned by BVWSD or RRBWSD).
Mitigation Measure BIO-4: Prepare and Implement Environmental Training Program
A qualified and approved Project Biologist shall be assigned to the project who shall be responsible
for overseeing environmental compliance and protections for special-status/sensitive plants, animals,
and habitats during construction. The Project Biologist shall be the main point of contact between the
Districts and regulatory agencies for matters involving regulatory compliance for biological resources.
The Project Biologist shall prepare a project Environmental Training Program. Employees and
supervising staff working on the project shall participate in an initial program session provided by the
Project Biologist prior to initiation of construction activity. At a minimum, the program shall cover the
general behavior and ecology of the pertinent special-status species, legal protection, penalties for
federal and state law violations, and protective measures. A fact sheet/brochure or PowerPoint
presentation conveying this information shall be made available to on-site personnel, construction
workers, staff involved in operations, and other individuals who may enter the project site.
New employees shall receive the training prior to working on the active site, with training provided
by the Project Biologist or a qualified biologist/biological monitor, or by viewing a PowerPoint
presentation. Upon receiving the training, each trainee shall sign a record sheet verifying their
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 29
participation in the training and acknowledging their environmental compliance responsibilities while
working within the project site.
Mitigation Measure BIO-5: Biological Construction Monitoring
A qualified biological monitor shall be on-site during all earthwork activities to monitor construction
activities, monitor avoidance of buffer areas, and ensure compliance with all environmental
requirements pertaining to biological resources. The qualified biological monitor will clearly
understand the Project construction and operational activities, understand the project design plan
set, and maintain a clear and open communication line to the Project’s construction manager to
understand the Project implementation schedule. If there are any questions or uncertainties
regarding how the Project will be constructed, then the biological monitor will ask the Project
construction manager for details and status updates.
The monitoring biologist shall be contacted as soon as possible following the release of potentially
hazardous materials into habitat. If a release of potentially hazardous materials occurs within special-
status species habitat, the Project Biologist and/or biological monitor will monitor cleanup and
containment. The involved regulatory agencies (e.g., USFWS, CDFW, the City) will be notified of the
release of potentially hazardous materials and the remedial action taken by the contractor as soon as
possible, but not later than 24 hours after the release occurs or is discovered. Within 30 days of
completing cleanup activities, a compliance report will be submitted by the Project
Biologist/biological monitor to the involved regulatory agencies.
Agency-approved biologists may be required to conduct or supervise particular activities (e.g.,
burrow/den excavation, species relocation) for federally and/or state-listed species. The monitoring
biologist shall have the authority to halt any activities that could result in take or injury/mortality of
special-status species. Any contractor, employee, or third party responsible for incidentally taking a
federally and/or state-listed wildlife species shall immediately report the incident to the Project
Biologist who will then notify the involved regulatory agencies (e.g., USFWS, CDFW, the City) within
24 hours by phone and email. All non-emergency actions will cease immediately until guidance is
received from the regulatory agencies. Notification must include the date, time, location, and other
pertinent information of the incident or of the finding of a dead or injured animal. Written notification
will be provided to the regulatory agencies within 3 working days of the incidental take and will
include the same notification information listed above. Work shall proceed only after the imminent
threat of take has been resolved.
At minimum, weekly monitoring reports and an Annual Compliance Report shall be prepared by the
Project Biologist and/or biological monitor(s) documenting compliance during construction and
operations (i.e., if the activities during operations require coverage under a federal ITP and/or state
ITP). Monitoring/compliance reports will include documentation of project compliance/non-
compliance, special-status species observations, protective/corrective actions taken, project site
photographs, copies of Environmental Training Program sign-in sheets, and any other information
considered useful or relevant.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 30
Rationale: Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, and BIO-3, which require pre-
construction surveys, the establishment of buffers as appropriate, and potential development of a
relocation plan if applicable, respectively, would reduce direct and indirect impacts to the Kern mallow to
less than significant. Additionally, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-4, which requires that a
qualified Project Biologist responsible for overseeing environmental compliance and protections for
special-status species during project construction be assigned to the Project, and BIO-5, which requires
that a qualified biological monitor be on-site to monitor construction activities, monitor avoidance of
buffer areas, and ensure compliance with all environmental requirements pertaining to biological
resources, will further ensure that potential impacts to the Kern mallow be reduced to less than significant
with mitigation.
ii) Description of Significant Effect: Implementation of the Proposed Project potentially would result
in significant impacts to the Blunt-nosed Leopard Lizard (BNLL), coast horned lizard, Bakersfield legless
lizard, California legless lizard, California glossy snake, and San Joaquin coachwhip, if they are present on-
site.
The BNLL, a federal and state-listed endangered species, was last observed on the site in 1991 and the
Project site contains potential habitat, although, based on protocol surveys, BNLL are not anticipated to
occur on-site. The coast horned lizard, Bakersfield legless lizard, California glossy snake, and San Joaquin
coachwhip are California Species of Special Concern. Potential habitat for these species occurs on the
Project site, although none of these species were observed onsite during surveys conducted in 2013, 2020,
and 2021.
If present on-site, construction and operation within the Project site could impact these species through
direct injury or mortality and/or entombment in burrows from construction equipment. Injury or
mortality could also be caused by vehicle traffic or exposure to chemicals from equipment leaks.
Moreover, operation of percolation ponds #17 and #24 would permanently alter/eliminate potential
habitat for these species.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures BIO-4 [Prepare and Implement Environmental Training
Program] and BIO-5 [Biological Construction Monitoring]. See discussion of impacts associated with Kern
mallow for text of Mitigation Measures BIO-4 and BIO-5.
Mitigation Measure BIO-6: Conduct Pre-construction Biological Surveys
Within 30 days prior to initiation of construction, qualified biologists shall conduct preconstruction
surveys for special-status species in all areas that will be permanently or temporarily impacted, plus
a 200-meter buffer in areas subject to legal access. Potential dens, burrows, and nests of special-
status species shall be marked with flagging, mapped with GPS, and reported to the CNDDB. Work
area boundaries shall be delineated with flagging, temporary fencing, or other markers deemed
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 31
warranted by the Project Biologist to minimize the potential for offsite impacts associated with
potential vehicle straying.
Avoidance buffers shall be implemented around the areas that cannot be avoided, similar to those
described in Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-2; the appropriate size/radius of avoidance buffers
shall be determined by the Project Biologist based on the species/resource and in compliance with
any agency-required standards. Dens, burrows, and nests that cannot be avoided shall be addressed
with species-specific mitigation measures (detailed in various mitigation measures below). A
preconstruction survey report shall be prepared by the Project Biologist and provided to the Districts.
If required, the survey report shall also be submitted to USFWS and CDFW.
Mitigation Measure BIO-7: Develop and Implement Measures to Avoid Take of BNLL
In the unlikely event that BNLL are observed during preconstruction surveys or construction, BVWSD
and RRBWSD shall coordinate with the USFWS and CDFW to develop and implement measures to
avoid take of BNLL. Such measures may include but may not be limited to:
a. Implementation of a BNLL Avoidance measures and/or Relocation Plan.
b. Avoidance of burrows that could provide suitable refugia for BNLL.
c. Implementation of avoidance buffers.
d. An exclusion barrier, such as flashing or other approved fencing material, may be installed
around the burrow disturbance area. Protocol-level surveys would be conducted within the
exclusion barrier and all BNLL would be allowed to egress or would be removed/relocated
(i.e., by a biologist with all necessary federal and state permits) until a negative survey result
is achieved within the burrow disturbance area. The negative survey result would remain valid
until removal of the exclusion barrier.
e. Excavation of burrows that will be impacted to verify they lack BNLL or in a manner that allows
BNLL egress away from the disturbance area.
f. When possible, seasonal restrictions of project activities in suitable habitat to occur during
BNLL inactivity periods.
Mitigation Measure BIO-8: Avoid or Relocate Special-Status Reptiles
If coast horned lizard, Bakersfield legless lizard, California legless lizard, California glossy snake, and/or
San Joaquin coachwhip are observed during preconstruction surveys or construction, the location(s)
where they are observed shall be marked with flagging and mapped with GPS. To avoid the potential
for injury/mortality to these species resulting from project-related activities:
a. Minimum 50-foot avoidance buffers shall be implemented at the point(s) of observation; or
b. A qualified biologist shall capture and relocate individuals of these species to suitable habitat
outside of the area of impact per the approved Relocation Plan as discussed in Mitigation Measure
BIO-9.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 32
Mitigation Measure BIO-9: Prepare a Special-Status Species Relocation Plan
Prior to construction, the Project Biologist shall prepare a special-status species Relocation Plan that
allows for relocation of special-status species encountered prior to or during construction and
operations. The Relocation Plan shall be submitted to the involved regulatory agencies for
review/approval prior to implementation.
Rationale: As discussed above for special-status plants, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-4 and
BIO-5 would reduce impacts on special-status reptiles through preconstruction training and construction
monitoring. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-6 through BIO-9 would require pre-construction
surveys, avoidance if possible, and relocation (if necessary). Implementation of these mitigation measures
would reduce impacts to the BNLL, Coast horned lizard, Bakersfield legless lizard, California legless lizard,
California glossy snake, and San Joaquin coachwhip to less than significant with mitigation.
iii) Description of Significant Effect: Project construction could result in potentially significant
impacts to the Swainson’s Hawk. While no hawks were observed during protocol surveys conducted in
2020, if the hawk nest within one-half mile of the Proposed Project site during construction, the hawk
could be impacted by the loss of foraging habitat or disturbances leading to nest abandonment.
Construction in the vicinity of the nest sites could disturb breeding through generation of noise and visual
distraction. Impacts on raptor nesting sites that result in nest abandonment, nest failure, or reduced
health or vigor of nestlings would be significant.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure BIO-10: Conduct Pre-construction Surveys for Swainson’s Hawk
If construction occurs between February 1 and August 31, a qualified biologist shall conduct a
preconstruction survey of suitable nesting habitat (e.g., potential nest trees, power line towers, etc.)
within 0.5 mile of the project site no more than 10 days prior to initiation of construction to ensure
that no Swainson’s hawks have begun nesting activities near the site. If SWHA absence is reverified,
project activities can proceed providing acceptance by CDFW of the survey results. If nesting
Swainson’s hawks are detected, buffers shall be established around active nests in accordance with
Mitigation Measure BIO-11.
Mitigation Measure BIO-11: Establish Buffers to Avoid or Minimize Impacts on Swainson’s Hawk
Buffers around active nests will be 0.5 mile unless a qualified biologist determines, based on site-
specific evaluation, that a smaller buffer is sufficient to avoid impacts on nesting Swainson’s hawks.
Factors to be considered when determining buffer size include the presence of natural buffers
provided by vegetation or topography, nest height, locations of foraging territory, and baseline levels
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 33
of noise and human activity. Buffers shall be maintained until a qualified biologist has determined that
the young have fledged and are no longer reliant on the nest or parental care for survival.
In the event that an active SWHA nest is detected during surveys and a 0.5-mile no-disturbance buffer
is not feasible, Mitigation Measure BIO-12 shall be implemented.
Mitigation Measure BIO-12. Swainson’s Hawk Take Authorization
If SWHA are observed within 0.5 mile of the project site during pre-construction surveys or during
construction, the applicant shall coordinate with CDFW to determine if a State Incidental Take Permit,
in accordance with F&G Code Section 2081 (b), is required to comply with CESA.
Rationale: Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-10 through BIO-12 would require pre-
construction surveys, avoidance buffers, and take authorization (if necessary). Implementation of these
mitigation measures would ensure that potential impacts to the Swainson’s Hawk would be less than
significant.
iv) Description of Significant Effect: Based on the results of protocol surveys, Burrowing Owl, a
California Species of Special Concern, is not anticipated to occur within the Proposed Project site, although
suitable habitat does occur on the site. If Burrowing Owl are found to occupy the Project site, construction
and operation within potential habitat could impact the owl through direct injury or mortality,
entombment in burrows, abandonment of next and/or wintering sites, and or loss of foraging habitat.
Such effects could affect reproduction or fitness of individuals and, consequently, impacts would be
significant.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure BIO-13: Conduct Pre-construction Surveys for Burrowing Owl
A qualified biologist shall conduct preconstruction surveys of all areas of potential habitat that will be
permanently or temporarily impacted, plus a 200-meter buffer in areas subject to legal access, to
locate active breeding or wintering BUOW burrows. The survey(s) shall occur no more than 14 days
prior to ground-disturbing activities (i.e., vegetation clearance, grading) or decommissioning. The
survey methodology shall be consistent with the take avoidance survey methods outlined in CDFW
Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFW 2012). Because BUOW may re-colonize a site after
only a few days, time lapses between project activities may trigger subsequent surveys, including, but
not limited to, a final survey conducted within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance to identify any
additional BUOW or burrows necessitating avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures. The
need for additional surveys will be at the final discretion of the Project Biologist. If BUOW absence is
reverified, project activities can proceed providing acceptance by CDFW of the survey results. If
burrowing owls are present, avoidance buffers will be established as specified below in Mitigation
Measure BIO-18.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 34
Mitigation Measure BIO-14: Establish Avoidance Buffers for Burrowing Owl
If BUOW are detected onsite during preconstruction surveys or during construction, no ground-
disturbing activities within a minimum 200-meter avoidance buffer shall occur around occupied
burrows during the breeding season (February 1 to August 31), unless authorized by CDFW. During
the non-breeding season (September 1 to January 31), no ground-disturbing activities within a
minimum 50-meter avoidance buffer shall occur around occupied burrows, unless authorized by
CDFW.
Mitigation Measure BIO-15: Develop a Burrowing Owl Exclusion and Mitigation Plan
If burrow avoidance is infeasible during the non-breeding season or during the breeding season where
resident owls have not yet begun egg laying or incubation, or where the juveniles are foraging
independently and capable of independent survival, the qualified biologist shall coordinate with
CDFW to develop a BUOW Exclusion and Mitigation Plan. An Exclusion and Mitigation Plan strategy
may include:
a. Passive exclusion of BUOW from burrows within the project site using one-way doors.
b. Excavation of potential BUOW burrows that are confirmed to be empty of BUOW adults
and/or young.
c. Creation of artificial BUOW burrows to offset the loss of known occupied BUOW burrows.
d. Acquisition of BUOW conservation lands and/or bank credits.
Rationale: Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-13 (Conduct Pre-construction Surveys for
Burrowing Owl) would ensure that preconstruction surveys are conducted in all areas where there will be
construction impacts. If burrowing owls are found present at the project site, Mitigation Measure BIO-14
(Establish Avoidance Buffers for Burrowing Owl) would require implementation of avoidance buffers
around occupied burrows. If burrows cannot be avoided, the qualified biologist shall coordinate with
CDFW to develop a Burrowing Owl Exclusion and Mitigation Plan as specified in Mitigation Measure BIO-
15 (Develop a Burrowing Owl Exclusion and Mitigation Plan). Implementation of these mitigation
measures would ensure that impacts on Burrowing Owl would be less than significant with mitigation.
v) Description of Significant Effect: Suitable nesting habitat occurs on the Project site for California
horned lark, LeConte’s thrasher, and other nesting birds, including the common raven, which are special-
status birds. During protocol surveys, California horned lark were observed flying through the Project site,
and power lines that traverse the property support common raven nests. If nesting birds are found to be
occupying the Project site, construction and operation within potential habitat could impact nesting birds
by altering foraging and nest behaviors, potentially causing nest abandonment, which are significant
impacts.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures:
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 35
Mitigation Measure BIO-16: Remove Trees or Shrubs Outside of the Nesting Season
Removal of trees or shrubs shall be scheduled to occur in the fall and winter (between September 1
and January 31), outside of the typical nesting season.
Mitigation Measure BIO-17: Conduct Pre-construction Nesting Bird Surveys
If any construction activities are proposed to occur during the typical nesting season (February 1 to
August 31), a nesting bird survey in areas of suitable nesting habitat (as determined by the Project
Biologist) shall be conducted by qualified biologists no more than 2 weeks prior to construction to
determine presence/absence of nesting birds. If absence of nesting birds is verified, construction can
proceed.
Mitigation Measure BIO-18: Establish Avoidance Buffers Around Active Nests
If an active bird nest is observed during preconstruction surveys or during construction, at a minimum,
a 500-foot avoidance buffer surrounding the nest shall be implemented for nesting raptors and a 250-
foot avoidance buffer shall be implemented for other nesting avian species, unless USFWS or CDFW
authorize a reduction of these buffers. Nests, eggs, or young of birds covered by the MBTA and F&G
Code shall not be moved or disturbed until a qualified biologist has determined that the nest has
become inactive or young have fledged and become independent of the nest.
Rationale: Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-16 (Remove Trees or Shrubs Outside of Nesting
Season) and BIO-17 (Conduct Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Surveys) would reduce the likelihood that
nesting birds would be nesting on the Project site and ensure that preconstruction surveys are conducted
in all areas where there will be construction impacts. If an active bird nest is observed, Mitigation Measure
BIO-18 (Establish Avoidance Buffers Around Active Nests) would require implementation of avoidance
buffers around such nests. Implementation of these mitigation measures would ensure that impacts to
nesting birds would be less than significant with mitigation.
vi) Description of Significant Effect: Giant kangaroo rat (GKR), Tipton kangaroo rat (TKR), San Joaquin
pocket mouse, and Tulare grasshopper mouse are special-status small mammals that could be impacted
by the Project. The GKR and TKR are each federally and state endangered species, and San Joaquin pocket
mouse and Tulare grasshopper mouse are California Species of Special Concern and considered rare
species under CEQA. The TKR has been observed on the Project site, and the site contains suitable habitat
for GKR, TKR, San Joaquin pocket mouse, and Tulare grasshopper in chenopod scrub habitat within the
southwestern corner of the BSA. Construction and operation within this area could impact special-status
small mammal species through direct injury or mortality and/or entombment in burrows from
construction equipment conducting earthwork. Injury or mortality could also be caused by vehicle traffic
and worker foot traffic or exposure to chemicals from equipment leaks. Injury or mortality of these species
would be a significant impact. Additionally, operation of percolation pond #24 would permanently
alter/eliminate potential habitat for special-status small mammal species, which would also be a
significant impact.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 36
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures BIO-4 [Prepare and Implement Environmental Training
Program], BIO-5 [Biological Construction Monitoring], BIO-6 [Conduct Pre-construction Surveys], BIO-7
[Develop and Implement Measures to Avoid Take of BNLL], BIO-8 [Avoid or Relocate Special-Status
Reptiles], and BIO-9 [Prepare a Special-Status Species Relocation Plan]. See above for discussion of
impacts associated with Kern mallow for text of Mitigation Measures BIO-4 and BIO-5, and see impacts
associated with special-status reptiles for text of Mitigation Measures BIO-6 through BIO-9. [DPH Note:
DEIR p. 5-36 [PDF 162/437] relies on BIO Mitigation Measures BIO-4 through BIO-9 to mitigate impacts to
the GKR, et al. However, Mitigation Measures BIO-7 and BIO-8 are specific to reptiles. Please check
confirm whether reliance on these 2 measures is correct or in error.]
Mitigation Measure BIO-19: Avoid and Minimize Impacts to Chenopod Scrub
If impacts to the 160-acre area of chenopod scrub habitat onsite can be avoided, then the project can
proceed and no small mammal trapping, agency coordination, or other mitigation will be required for
GKR, TKR, San Joaquin pocket mouse, and Tulare grasshopper mouse. The boundary of the chenopod
scrub habitat shall be deemed an ESA and marked with brightly colored flagging or equivalent to be
avoided. No construction activities or construction-related access or staging will be authorized within
the ESA. If impacts to chenopod scrub cannot be avoided, permanent and temporary construction
disturbances to chenopod scrub shall be minimized to the extent feasible. Areas that do not require
earthwork shall be marked with flagging and avoided as specified above, and a preconstruction
Biological Clearance survey will be conducted and as specified below in Mitigation Measure BIO-20.
Mitigation Measure BIO-20: Conduct Pre-construction Surveys in Chenopod Scrub Habitat
If the project will impact chenopod scrub habitat onsite, within 30 days prior to grading or other
ground-disturbing activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction Biological Clearance
Survey. The survey shall include all areas of potential habitat to be permanently and/or temporarily
impacted, as well as a 50-foot buffer of impacted areas. If the Biological Clearance Survey identifies
potential small mammal burrows within the proposed area disturbance, a qualified biologist shall
conduct a minimum of 5 consecutive nights of live small mammal trapping following the USFWS
Sacramento Field Office Survey Protocol for Determining Presence of San Joaquin Kangaroo Rats
(USFWS 2013). The qualified biologist shall email a Biological Clearance Survey Report to the proper
agencies (e.g., USFWS, CDFW, City). If no special-status small mammals are detected during a
minimum of 5 consecutive nights of live small mammal trapping, then the project can proceed with
no additional agency coordination or other mitigation required for GKR, TKR, San Joaquin pocket
mouse, and Tulare grasshopper mouse.
Mitigation Measure BIO-21: Develop a Small Mammal Relocation Plan
If special-status small mammal species are detected during live trapping, the applicant shall
coordinate with the USFWS and/or CDFW to obtain all necessary regulatory authorizations and
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 37
develop a Small Mammal Relocation Plan to facilitate FESA and/or CESA compliance, if required. This
coordination may include, but may not be limited to:
a. Acquisition of a State ITP if GKR and/or TKR are found to occur onsite, including any additional
State ITP measures required by CDFW.
b. Acquisition of GKR and/or TKR conservation lands and/or bank credits if required by CDFW.
c. Additional live trapping to capture and relocate small mammals prior to ground disturbance.
d. Excavation of potential small mammal burrows and additional relocation of small mammals
encountered during excavation.
Rationale: BVWSD would implement BMPs 1 through 4 during construction and operations at the project
site. These standard housekeeping measures would protect wildlife in the project area from being injured
or otherwise harmed during construction and operation of the Proposed Project; however, they would
not fully reduce impacts on these species to a less-than-significant level. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures BIO-4 and BIO-5, previously discussed, would reduce impacts by ensuring that a qualified
biologist prepares and conducts an environmental training program session prior to construction, and that
a biological monitor would be present on-site to monitor construction activities and cleanup of hazardous
materials. Additionally, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-6, also previously discussed, would
ensure that a qualified biologist conducts preconstruction surveys for special-status species and
implements avoidance buffers, if necessary. [DPH Note: See prior Note regarding BIO-7 and BIO-8 and if
appropriate add reference to the 2 measures here if appropriate.] And, Mitigation Measure BIO-9, also
previously discussed, would require preparation of a relocation plan for special-status species that are
encountered prior to or during construction and operations.
Further, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-19 (Avoid and Minimize Impacts to Chenopod Scrub)
would minimize impacts by avoiding suitable habitat for small mammal species. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure BIO-20 (Conduct Pre-construction Surveys in Chenopod Scrub Habitat) would ensure
that pre-construction surveys and live small mammals trapping (if needed) are conducted in the chenopod
scrub habitat present on site. And, if special-status small mammals are observed, a Small Mammal
Relocation Plan would be prepared as detailed in Mitigation Measure BIO-25 (Develop a Small Mammal
Relocation Plan). Therefore, impacts to special-status small mammal species would be less than significant
with mitigation.
vii) Description of Significant Effect: The San Joaquin Kit Fox (SJKF; federally listed as endangered and
state listed as threatened) and the American badger (California Species of Special Concern and a rare
species under CEQA) are highly mobile species with large home ranges that potentially would be impacted
by the Project. Although no SJKF or badgers were observed in suitable habitat onsite during recent
protocol surveys, a SJKF was observed on the Project site in 1991, and the Project site contains potential
SJKF and badger habitat. Construction and operation within these areas could impact SJKF or badgers
through direct injury or mortality and/or entombment in dens from construction equipment conducting
earthwork if SJKF or badgers are found to be present onsite. Construction activities could also disrupt SJKF
and badger foraging behaviors. These impacts would be significant.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 38
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures BIO-4 [Prepare and Implement Environmental Training
Program], BIO-5 [Biological Construction Monitoring], and BIO-6 [Conduct Pre-construction Surveys]. See
above for discussion of impacts associated with Kern mallow for text of Mitigation Measures BIO-4 and
BIO-5, and see impacts associated with special-status reptiles for text of Mitigation Measure BIO-6.
Mitigation Measure BIO-22: Implement Avoidance Measures for Natal San Joaquin Kit Fox or
American Badger Dens
If the Biological Clearance Survey results determine that known, active, or natal SJKF or badger dens
will be impacted, then the following mitigation measures shall be implemented upon approval from
USFWS and CDFW:
a. A permanent minimum avoidance buffer using fencing or flagging shall be maintained as
follows:
i. At least 100 feet around den(s);
ii. At least 200 feet around natal dens (in which young are reared); and
iii. At least 500 feet around any natal dens with observed young (i.e., SJKF pups or badger
kits) (except for any portions of the buffer zone that are already fully developed).
b. Avoidance buffer zones shall be considered Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs), and no
construction activities are allowed within a buffer except as follows: If the work within the buffer
area will not result in the destruction of the den, the den should be conserved. If the den is
unoccupied (based on the required 4 consecutive days of monitoring), then the den can be
covered in a secure manner to prevent access by SJKF or badgers while the work is being
conducted. After the work is done, the den can be uncovered to allow use by SJKF or badgers. If
the den is occupied and the SJKF/badger does not vacate the den, then a smaller buffer could be
established, including a barricade to prevent the SJKF/badger from exiting the den and entering
the work site. A qualified biologist shall monitor the den while the work is being conducted. The
City shall be notified immediately via telephone or e-mail if any SJKF active dens, natal dens, or
occupied atypical dens are discovered within or immediately adjacent to any proposed
development footprint. The applicant shall coordinate with CDFW if any badger active dens, natal
dens, or occupied atypical dens are discovered within or immediately adjacent to any proposed
development footprint, and no City notice is required. BVWSD and RRBWSD shall bear the costs
of implementing the SJKF/badger den avoidance requirements. A reduced avoidance buffer may
be authorized with regulatory agency approval.
c. For active dens and potential dens that exhibit signs of SJKF use or characteristics suggestive of
SJKF dens (including dens in natural substrate and in/under manmade structures) that cannot be
avoided, and if, after 4 consecutive days of monitoring with tracking medium or infrared camera,
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 39
a qualified biologist has determined that SJKF is not currently present, the den may be excavated.
Natal dens shall not be excavated until the pups and adults have vacated and then only after
consultation with the USFWS and CDFW. If the excavation process reveals evidence of current use
by SJKF, then den excavation shall cease immediately and tracking or camera monitoring, as
described above, shall be conducted/resumed. Excavation of the den may be completed when, in
the judgment of a qualified biologist, the SJKF has escaped from the partially excavated den. SJKF
dens shall be carefully excavated until it is certain no SJKF individuals are inside. Dens shall be fully
excavated, filled with dirt, and compacted to ensure that SJKF cannot reenter or use the den
during construction activities. If an individual SJKF does not vacate a den within the proposed
construction footprint within a reasonable timeframe, BVWSD and RRBWSD shall coordinate with
USFWS and CDFW and obtain written/email guidance from both agencies prior to proceeding with
den excavation. BVWSD and RRBWSD shall bear the costs of implementing the SJKF den
excavation requirements.
d. For active dens and potential dens that exhibit signs of American badger use or characteristics
suggestive of American badger dens, the same approach shall be used as outlined above, except
BVWSD and RRBWSD shall coordinate with CDFW and obtain written/email guidance from CDFW
prior to proceeding with den excavation; no USFWS coordination is required for American badger
since it is not a federally protected species.
Mitigation Measure BIO-23: If Active San Joaquin Kit Fox Dens are Present, Coordinate with
USFWS and/or CDFW
If active SJKF dens are detected onsite, BVWSD and RRBWSD shall coordinate with the USFWS and/or
CDFW to obtain all necessary regulatory authorizations to facilitate FESA and/or CESA compliance, if
required. This coordination may include, but may not be limited to:
a. Acquisition of a State ITP for SJKF.
b. Acquisition of SJKF conservation lands and/or bank credits if required by CDFW.
Mitigation Measure BIO-24: Implement Measures During Construction and Operation to Protect
San Joaquin Kit Fox
The following construction and ongoing operational requirements as included in the Standardized
Recommendations for Protection of the Endangered San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground
Disturbance (USFWS 2011) will be implemented:
a. Project-related vehicles should observe a daytime speed limit of 20 mph throughout the
site in all project areas, except on county roads and federal and state highways; this is
particularly important at night when SJKF are most active. Nighttime construction should
be minimized to the extent possible. However, if it does occur, then the speed limit should
be reduced to 10 mph. Off-road traffic outside of designated project areas should be
prohibited.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 40
b. To prevent inadvertent entrapment of SJKF or other animals during the construction
phase of a project, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than 2 feet deep
should be covered at the close of each working day by plywood or similar materials. If the
trenches cannot be closed, one or more escape ramps constructed of earthen-fill or
wooden planks shall be installed. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they should be
thoroughly inspected for trapped animals. If at any time a trapped or injured SJKF is
discovered, the USFWS and CDFW shall be contacted as noted under items (k) through
(n) below.
c. SJKF are attracted to den-like structures, such as pipes, and may enter stored pipes and
become trapped or injured. All construction pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a
diameter of 4 inches or greater that are stored at a construction site for one or more
overnight periods should be thoroughly inspected for SJKF before the pipe is subsequently
buried, capped, or otherwise used or moved in any way. If SJKF are discovered inside a
pipe, that section of pipe should not be moved until USFWS has been consulted. If
necessary, and under the direct supervision of the biological monitor, the pipe may be
moved only once to remove it from the path of construction activity, until the fox has
escaped.
d. All food-related trash items such as wrappers, cans, bottles, and food scraps should be
disposed of in securely closed containers and removed at least once a week from a
construction or project site.
e. No firearms shall be allowed on the project site.
f. No pets, such as dogs or cats, should be permitted on the project site to prevent
harassment, mortality of SJKF, or destruction of dens.
g. Use of rodenticides and herbicides in project areas should be restricted. This is necessary
to prevent primary or secondary poisoning of SJKF and the depletion of prey populations
on which they depend. All uses of such compounds should observe label and other
restrictions mandated by USEPA, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and
other federal and state legislation, as well as additional project-related restrictions
deemed necessary by the USFWS. If rodent control must be conducted, zinc phosphide
should be used because of a proven lower risk to SJKF.
h. A representative shall be appointed by BVWSD and RRBWSD who will be the contact
source for any employee or contractor who might inadvertently kill or injure a SJKF or
who finds a dead, injured, or entrapped SJKF. The representative will be identified during
the employee education program and their name and telephone number shall be
provided to the USFWS.
i. An employee education program should be conducted for any project that has anticipated
impacts to SJKF or other endangered species. The program should consist of a brief
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 41
presentation by persons knowledgeable in SJKF biology and legislative protection to
explain endangered species concerns to contractors, their employees, and military and/or
agency personnel involved in the project. The program should include the following: A
description of the SJKF and its habitat needs; a report of the occurrence of SJKF in the
project area; an explanation of the status of the species and its protection under the FESA
and CESA; and a list of measures being taken to reduce impacts to the species during
project construction and implementation. A fact sheet conveying this information should
be prepared for distribution to the previously referenced people and anyone else who
may enter the project site.
j. Upon completion of the project, all areas subject to temporary ground disturbances,
including storage and staging areas, temporary roads, pipeline corridors, etc., should be
re-contoured, if necessary, and revegetated to promote restoration of the area to pre-
project conditions. An area subject to “temporary” disturbance means any area that is
disturbed during the project, but after project completion will not be subject to further
disturbance and has the potential to be revegetated. Appropriate methods and plant
species used to revegetate such areas should be determined on a site-specific basis in
consultation with USFWS, CDFW, and revegetation experts.
k. In the case of trapped animals, escape ramps or structures should be installed
immediately to allow the animal(s) to escape, or the USFWS should be contacted for
guidance.
l. Any contractor, employee, or military or agency personnel who are responsible for
inadvertently killing or injuring an SJKF shall immediately report the incident to their
representative. This representative shall contact CDFW immediately in the case of a dead,
injured, or entrapped SJKF.
m. USFWS and CDFW shall be notified in writing within 3 working days of the accidental
death or injury to an SJKF during project-related activities. Notification must include the
date, time, and location of the incident or of the finding of a dead or injured animal and
any other pertinent information.
n. New sightings of SJKF shall be reported to the CNDDB. A copy of the reporting form and
a topographic map clearly marked with the location of where the SJKF was observed
should also be provided to the USFWS.
Rationale: BVWSD would implement BMPs 1 through 4 during construction and operations at the project
site. These standard housekeeping measures would protect wildlife in the project area from being injured
or otherwise harmed during construction and operation of the Proposed Project; however, they would
not fully reduce impacts on these species to a less-than-significant level.
Additional protective measures for special-status mammals would include, as described above,
implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-4 and BIO-5, which would further reduce impacts by ensuring
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 42
that a qualified biologist prepares and conducts an environmental training program session prior to
construction, and that a biological monitor would be present on-site to monitor construction activities
and cleanup of hazardous materials. Additionally, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-6, also
previously discussed, would ensure that a qualified biologist conducts preconstruction surveys for special-
status species and implements avoidance buffers, if necessary.
If preconstruction biological clearance survey results determine that SJKF or badger dens would be
impacted, then avoidance measures for these species would be implemented through Mitigation
Measures BIO-22, BIO-23, and BIO-24, which would further reduce impacts to SKJF and American badger,
if they are present onsite. Mitigation Measures BIO-22 through BIO-24 would require avoidance
measures, coordination with USFWS and CDFW, and protection measures as included in the Standardized
Recommendations for Protection of the Endangered San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground
Disturbance (USFWS 2011). Implementation of these mitigation measures would ensure that impacts to
SJKF and American badger would be less than significant with mitigation.
Impact BIO-2. Impacts to Sensitive Natural Communities
Description of Significant Effect: Approximately 160 acres of chenopod scrub habitat, which is included
on the CDFW California Natural Community List (CDFW 2020b) and considered sensitive under CEQA,
could be impacted or otherwise permanently altered if percolation pond #24 remains a part of the
Proposed Project footprint. This vegetation supports suitable shelter and foraging habitat for a variety of
regional special-status species and, therefore, impacts to chenopod scrub would be significant.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures BIO-4 [Prepare and Implement Environmental Training
Program], BIO-5 [Biological Construction Monitoring], BIO-19 [Avoid and Minimize Impacts to Chenopod
Scrub]; and BIO-20 [Conduct Pre-Construction Surveys in Chenopod Scrub Habitat]. See above discussion
of Kern mallow for text of Mitigation Measures BIO-4 and BIO-5, and discussion of special-status mammals
for text of Mitigation Measures BIO-19 and BIO-20.
Rationale: Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-4, BIO-5, BIO-19, and BIO-20 would reduce
impacts to chenopod scrub habitat to less than significant with mitigation.
C. Cultural Resources
Impact CR-2. Impacts to Archaeological Resources
Description of Significant Effect: The presence of known archaeological sites within the Proposed Project
boundaries, coupled with geoarchaeological information, underscores the sensitivity of the area to
contain buried Native American pre-contact archaeological remains. Even though the project will be
designed to avoid known resources and will include a buffer around those areas, ground disturbance
activities associated with Project construction have the potential to uncover archaeological remains, both
Pre-contact Native American and historic era, that are eligible for listing on both the National and
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 43
California historic resource indices (NRHP/CRHR). As a result, implementation of the Project could have a
significant impact on archaeological resources.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure CR-1: Conduct Preconstruction Cultural Resources Awareness Training and
Construction Monitoring.
A cultural resources awareness training program will be provided to all construction personnel active
on the Project site during earth moving activities. The training will be provided prior to the initiation
of ground disturbing activities, and as needed throughout the duration of project construction to
ensure that all construction personnel receive the training. The training will be developed and
conducted in coordination with a qualified archaeologist meeting the U.S. Secretary of Interior
guidelines for professional archaeologists and a representative or representatives from culturally
affiliated Native American tribe(s) who have participated in consultations with the City of Bakersfield
(City). The program will include relevant information regarding sensitive cultural resources, including
applicable regulations, protocols for avoidance, and consequences of violating State laws and
regulations. The worker cultural resources awareness program will also describe appropriate
avoidance and minimization measures for resources that have the potential to be located on the
Project site and will outline what to do and whom to contact if any potential archaeological resources
or artifacts are encountered. Furthermore, the program will underscore the requirement for
confidentiality and culturally appropriate treatment of any finds of significance to Native Americans,
consistent with Native American tribal values.
All ground disturbing activities will be monitored by a qualified archaeologist meeting the U.S.
Secretary of Interior guidelines for professional archaeologists and a representative from a culturally
affiliated Native American tribe who has participated in consultations with the City on the Project.
The Native American tribe will be provided at least seven days’ notice prior to the initiation of ground
disturbing activities. The archaeological monitor will record activities daily and a weekly summary will
be provided to Buena Vista Water Storage District (BVWSD). A monitoring report will be prepared by
the archaeological monitor at the end of excavation activities and submitted to BVWSD who, in-turn,
shall provide a copy to the City. The Native American monitor will follow the documentation protocols
defined by their tribe.
If any cultural resources, including but not limited to structural features, bone or shell, flaked or
ground stone artifacts, historic-era artifacts, human remains, or architectural remains, are
encountered during any project construction activities, the archaeological monitor, in consultation
with the Native American monitor, as appropriate, shall have the authority to stop work in the vicinity
of the finds and implement the Unanticipated Discovery Plan and other actions identified in Mitigation
Measure CR-2.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 44
Mitigation Measure CR-2: Prepare an Unanticipated Discovery Plan, Immediately Halt Construction
if Cultural Resources Are Discovered, Evaluate All Identified Cultural Resources for Eligibility for
Inclusion in the NRHP/CRHR, and Implement Appropriate Mitigation Measures for Eligible
Resources.
Prior to initiating construction, an Unanticipated Discovery Plan shall be developed by Buena Vista
Water Storage District (BVWSD) and approved by the City in consultation with consulting tribes. The
Unanticipated Discovery Plan will detail the protocols for monitoring, as well as for stopping work if
buried resources are discovered during construction; the evaluation of discovered resources for
NRHP/CRHR eligibility, as warranted; and the implementation of mitigation measures for eligible
resources. Protocols for addressing the discovery of Native American archaeological resources and
tribal cultural resources shall be prepared by BVWSD and approved by the City in consultation with
culturally affiliated Native American tribes who have participated in consultations with the City on the
Project.
If any cultural resources, such as structural features, unusual amounts of bone or shell, flaked or
ground stone artifacts, historic-era artifacts, human remains, or architectural remains, are
encountered during any project construction activities, work shall be suspended immediately at the
location of the find and within a radius of at least 100 feet and the City will be contacted. Tribal cultural
resources will be treated in accordance with Mitigation Measure TCR-1.
All cultural resources accidentally uncovered during construction within the project site shall be
evaluated for eligibility for inclusion in the NRHP/CRHR. Resource evaluations will be conducted by
individuals who meet the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s professional standards in archaeology,
history, or architectural history, as appropriate. For finds that are of Native American concerns, local
Native American tribes will be notified, if they have requested notification. If any of the resources
meet the eligibility criteria identified in Pub. Res. Code Section 5024.1 or CEQA Section 21083.2(g),
mitigation measures will be developed and implemented in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.4(b) or 21083.2(b), respectively, before construction resumes.
The disposition of materials related to tribal cultural resources and Native American burials will be
determined according to Mitigation Measure TCR-1. The disposition of historic era artifacts will be
outlined in the Unanticipated Discovery Plan.
Rationale: Implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 will reduce potential impacts to
archaeological resources by requiring worker awareness training, monitoring of all ground disturbances,
preparation of an Unanticipated Discovery Plan, and work stoppage in order to evaluate unanticipated finds
for CRHR/NRHP eligibility. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 would reduce impacts
related to currently unknown archaeological resources to a level that is less than significant with mitigation.
Impact CR-3. Disturbance of Any Human Remains, Including Those Interred Outside of Formal
Cemeteries
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 45
Description of Significant Effect: Human remains are known to exist within the Proposed Project area;
thus, the area is considered sensitive for the presence of human remains at unknown locations within the
Project boundaries. Native American human remains are significant tribal cultural resources and are,
therefore, significant resources under CEQA. As noted under Impact CR-2, ground-disturbing activities
have the potential to uncover significant archaeological resources; these same actions would also have
the potential to uncover human remains, which would be a significant impact.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure CR-1 [Conduct Preconstruction Cultural Resources Awareness
Training and Construction Monitoring], MM CR-2 [Prepare an Unanticipated Discovery Plan relative to
Cultural Resources] and the following mitigation measure:
Mitigation Measure CR-3: Comply with Required Response Protocol for the Unanticipated Discovery
of Human Remains.
Consistent with the California Health and Safety Code and the California Native American Historical,
Cultural, and Sacred Sites Act, if suspected human remains are found during project construction, all
work shall be halted within 100 feet of the finds, and the Kern County coroner shall be notified to
determine the nature of the remains. The coroner shall examine all discoveries of suspected human
remains within 48 hours of receiving notice of a discovery on private or State lands (Health and Safety
Code Section 7050.5[b]). If the coroner determines that the remains are those of a Native American,
they shall contact the NAHC by phone within 24 hours of making that determination (Health and
Safety Code Section 7050[c]). The NAHC shall then assign a most likely descendant (MLD) to serve as
the main point of Native American contact and consultation. Following the coroner’s findings, the
MLD, in consultation with the City, shall determine the ultimate treatment and disposition of the
remains.
Native American human remains and associated grave items, shall be reinterred at the location
designated for reburial that will be determined through Project design, as described in Chapter 2,
Project Description.
Rationale: Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2, previously discussed, would reduce potential impacts to
human remains during Project construction activities by providing worker awareness training for
construction personnel, monitoring of all ground disturbance activities, preparing an Unanticipated
Discovery Plan, and stopping work when sites are discovered during construction. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure CR-2 would further reduce impacts by requiring that the specific requirements of
Health and Safety Code Section 7050 regarding the discovery of Native American human remains are
followed. With implementation of these measures, impacts to human remains would be less than
significant with mitigation.
D. Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
Impact GEO-6. Impacts to Paleontological or Unique Geologic Sites or Features
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 46
Description of Significant Effect: While no paleontological resources are known to exist at the Project site,
given the proximity of important fossil discoveries previously made near the project area, the potential
exists for fossils to occur in soils underlying the Proposed Project site or for construction-related activities
to encounter geological rock units, which would be a significant impact.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measure:
Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Halt Construction if Paleontological Resources Are Discovered, Evaluate
Discoveries for Uniqueness, and Implement Appropriate Mitigation Measures for Unique
Resources.
BVWSD and RRBWSD and their contractors shall implement the following procedures if
paleontological resources are discovered during construction activities:
Stop work immediately within 50 feet.
Contact BVWSD and the City immediately.
Protect the site from further impacts, including looting, erosion, or other human or natural
damage.
A paleontological resources principal investigator who meets the standards set forth by the
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology will be retained to evaluate the discovery and make a
recommendation to BVWSD and the City as to whether or not it is a unique paleontological
resource.
If the resource is not a unique paleontological resource, then it will be documented
appropriately, and no further measures will be required.
If the resource is a unique paleontological resource, the principal investigator, in consultation
with BVWSD, will recommend resource-specific measures to protect and document the
paleontological resource, such as photo documentation and avoidance or collection.
If collection is necessary, the fossil material will be properly prepared in accordance with
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology guidelines and/or curation at a recognized museum
repository. Appropriate documentation will be included with all curated materials.
Rationale: Implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would require BVWSD and RRBWSD or their
contractors to stop construction and appropriately investigate any inadvertent paleontological discoveries.
Therefore, the potential for the Proposed Project to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.
E. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact HAZ-1. Impacts Via Routine Transport, Use, or Disposal of Hazardous Materials.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 47
Description of Significant Effect: Once operational, the Proposed Project may require the use of insect
control measures for mosquito abatement in the percolation basins. Airborne insects may pose a risk to
human health and related abatement methods could potentially affect groundwater quality, which would
be a significant impact.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Abatement of Airborne Insects.
BVWSD shall coordinate with Kern County Department of Public Health and the Kern Mosquito and
Vector Control District to ensure application of appropriate insect control measures that utilize
abatement methods appropriate for recharge basins, such that groundwater quality is also protected.
Appropriate measures may include maintaining water quality in recharge ponds to avoid creating
breeding habitat for airborne insects; adding mosquito fish or a USEPA-registered bacterial larvicide
to eliminate mosquito larvae; and other integrated pest management measures. BVWSD and RRBWSD
will implement such measures as required.
Rationale: Implementation of the identified Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would reduce potential impacts
associated with the use of airborne insect abatement methods to less than significant because HAZ-1
requires coordination with applicable health officials to ensure appropriate insect control measures are
in place to protect groundwater.
Impact HAZ-2. Significant Hazard Through Potential Exposure of Construction Workers to
Existing On-Site Hazardous Materials.
Description of Significant Effect: An environmental site assessment conducted on the site of the Proposed
Project found that small quantities of hazardous substances were observed on the site during site
reconnaissance, including corrosive inhibitor chemicals near some of the active oil wells located within
and near the site. The assessment also determined that volatile components of crude oil may be present
in soil vapor beneath the project site, that contamination of groundwater in the areas of former
sumps/reservoirs is possible, and because the site previously may have been used for agriculture, residual
concentrations of agricultural chemicals could persist in the soils at the site.
Construction activities associated with the Proposed Project, including demolition, clearing, grubbing,
grading, and soil excavation, have the potential to come into contact with existing sources of soil
contamination if any are present. If contamination is present, then soil excavation activities could have
the potential to expose construction workers to existing on-site hazardous materials. The hazard risk
would increase if contaminated excavated soil materials are spilled accidentally or otherwise placed or
disposed in an erratic or unplanned matter that threatens workers. Such a situation would result in a
significant impact.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 48
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: Collection of Soil Samples.
Prior to commencement of Project construction, BVWSD, RRBWSD, and/or their contractors shall
collect representative samples of soil from the project site. Soil samples should be collected every
1,000 cubic yards of excavated/moved earth from all areas where current and historic oil wells are
located as well as all areas where ASTs, oilfield features, sump/reservoirs, and crude oil pipelines are
mapped/depicted. Collected soil samples should be tested for total petroleum hydrocarbons in the
gasoline (TPHg), diesel fuel (TPHd), and motor oil (TPHm) ranges, and if present, the extent of
contamination should be defined both laterally and vertically. If concentrations of TPH are found
exceeding regulatory thresholds, they should be removed from the site under regulatory oversight
and disposed offsite in accordance with applicable rules and regulations. See Response to Comment
D-16, incorporated by reference herein.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-3: Management of Unknown Hazardous Materials.
If hazardous materials, wastes, or suspected soil contamination is encountered during construction
of the Proposed Project, project activities in that area shall stop until appropriate health and safety
procedures are implemented. BVWSD, RRBWSD, and/or their contractors shall be required to conduct
an investigation to determine the composition of the encountered material, including sampling by an
OSHA-trained individual and testing at a certified laboratory. In the event that soils to be excavated
are found to be contaminated, the excavated soil shall be treated as hazardous materials and properly
managed, removed, reported, and disposed of in compliance with state and federal regulations.
Workers will be provided with adequate personal protective equipment to prevent unsafe exposure
during handling and disposal. Effective dust suppression procedures will be used in the immediate
construction area to reduce airborne emissions of contaminants and reduce the risk of exposure to
workers and the public.
Rationale: Implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-2 And HAZ-3 would reduce impacts related to the
potential exposure of construction workers to existing on-site hazardous materials to less than significant.
F. Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact TCR-1. Impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources as defined in California Public Resources
Code Sections 21074 or 5024.1(c)
Description of Significant Effect: The Project area has the potential to contain buried archaeological sites
and is classified as having Very High sensitivity for subsurface sites. As a result, despite the City’s
commitment to avoid known tribal cultural resources through project design, undetected buried
archaeological resources, including human remains that are also tribal cultural resources, could be
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 49
discovered during project construction activities. Impacts to tribal cultural resources due to ground
disturbing construction activities would be a significant impact.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures CR-1 [Conduct Preconstruction Cultural Resources Awareness
Training and Construction Monitoring], CR-2 [Prepare an Unanticipated Discovery Plan relative to Cultural
Resources], CR-3 [Comply with Required Response Protocol for the Unanticipated Discovery of Human
Remains], and the following mitigation measure:
Mitigation Measure TCR-1: Implement Mitigation Measures Recommended in Public Resources
Code Section 21084.3 to Avoid Damaging Effects on Tribal Cultural Resources.
Public Resources Code Section 21084.3 identifies the following treatments as possible mitigation
measures of significant impacts to tribal cultural resources:
(1) Avoidance and preservation of the resources in place, including, but not limited to, planning
and construction to avoid the resources and protect the cultural and natural context, or
planning greenspace, parks, or other open space, to incorporate the resources with
culturally appropriate protection and management criteria.
(2) Treating the resource with culturally appropriate dignity, taking into account the tribal
cultural values and meaning of the resource, including, but not limited to, the following:
(A) Protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource.
(B) Protecting the traditional use of the resource.
(C) Protecting the confidentiality of the resource.
(3) Permanent conservation easements or other interests in real property, with culturally
appropriate management criteria for the purposes of preserving or utilizing the resources
or places.
The City shall consider application of these measures, in consultation with consulting tribes, for the
treatment of any tribal cultural resources discovered during project construction. The City and the
tribes shall collaborate on determining and implementing the appropriate treatment.
Rationale: Mitigation measure CR-1 requires monitoring of all construction-related ground disturbance by a
representative from a culturally affiliated Native American tribe and a qualified archaeologist. Mitigation
measure CR-2 requires preparation and implementation of an Unanticipated Discovery Plan in consultation
with consulting tribes. Mitigation measure CR-3 requires that work stop if human remains are discovered and
that the requirements of Health and Safety Code section 7050 be followed. Mitigation measure TCR-1 would
ensure protection of tribal cultural resources in accordance with California law. Taken together, these
mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts to tribal cultural resources to less than significant.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 50
G. Utilities and Service Systems
Impact UTL-3. Impair the Attainment of Solid Waste Reduction Goals.
Description of Significant Effect: Construction of the Proposed Project involves the demolition and
removal of existing features on the site, including all remaining aboveground infrastructure components
from the McAllister Ranch development project (e.g., street pavement, curbs, sidewalks, and the
foundation of a burned building). Approximately 70-100 truckloads of steel rebar, plastic, and conduit
would be disposed of offsite. Although the nearest landfill, Bena, has sufficient capacity to accommodate
this amount of disposal, CALGreen requires that contractors and developers reuse and recycle 65 percent
of construction and demolition waste. In addition, local policies encourage recycling and waste reduction
where possible. Therefore, the impact of construction-generated solid waste disposal would be
potentially significant.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measure:
Mitigation Measure UTL-1: Comply with CALGreen Waste Diversion Requirements to the Extent
Feasible.
BVWSD and RRBWSD or their contractors shall comply with the following CALGreen waste diversion
requirements to the extent feasible, recognizing that the requirements are targeted primarily at
residential and commercial projects:
Submit a Construction Waste Management Plan prior to construction for approval by
the City Building Department.
Recycle and/or reuse a minimum of 65 percent of construction and demolition waste.
Recycle or Reuse 100 percent of tree stumps, rocks, and associated vegetation and soils
resulting from land clearing.
Rationale: The City and the County have programs to assist contractors and businesses in meeting waste
reduction goals. Mitigation measure UTL-1 would require BVWSD and RRBWSD or their contractors to
comply with CALGreen construction waste diversion requirements to the extent feasible. With
implementation of Mitigation Measure UTL-1, the Proposed Project would comply with waste reduction
goals and impacts would be less than significant.
Impact UTL-4. Compliance with Management and Reduction Requirements Related to Solid
Waste.
Description of Significant Effect: As previously noted, construction-related impacts associated with solid
waste diversion would be mitigated to a less than significant level with implementation of Mitigation
Measure UTL-1, which requires compliance with CALGreen waste diversion requirements. Operation of
the Proposed Project would generate minimal domestic waste through occupancy by 1-2 employees
during period of active operation. Therefore, while operation of the Proposed Project would generate
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 51
minimal domestic waste, because project construction operations potentially would not meet waste
diversion requirements, impacts associated with solid waste management and reduction requirements
are considered potentially significant.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measure: Mitigation Measure UTL-1 [Comply with CALGreen Waste Diversion Requirements
to the Extent Feasible]. See, above, for text of MM-UTL-1.
Rationale: By requiring compliance with CALGreen waste diversion requirements, implementation of
Mitigation Measure UTL-1 would reduce potential impacts related to federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste to less than significant with
mitigation.
H. Cumulative Impacts
Impact CUM-1. Effects on Biological Resources.
Description of Significant Effect: The Proposed Project would have significant impacts on multiple special-
status plant and wildlife species and sensitive natural communities, including 160 acres of chenopod
scrub. Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-13 and BIO-23 through BIO-25, identified above, include a
Kern mallow avoidance buffer, take authorization from USFWS if applicable, and avoidance of chenopod
scrub to the extent feasible. Implementation of these measures would reduce the identified impacts to
less than significant.
Identified cumulative projects would involve ground disturbance to construct groundwater recharge
ponds. Because many of these projects are in the same types of habitat as the Proposed Project, the
potential exists for similar impacts on biological resources to result. The loss of multiple special-status
plant and wildlife species and sensitive natural communities would be a significant cumulative impact.
The Proposed Project would mitigate impacts on special-status species and sensitive natural communities
and obtain take authorization if applicable, ensuring that impacts on these species would be less than
significant with mitigation. Therefore, with mitigation, the Proposed Project would not contribute
substantially to the significant cumulative impact on biological resources.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures BIO-1 [Conduct a Preconstruction Survey for Kern Mallow],
BIO-2 [Implement Kern Mallow Avoidance Buffers], BIO-3 [Compliance with USFWS ITP/HCP
Requirements, if Applicable], BIO-4 [Prepare and Implement Environmental Training Program], BIO-5
[Biological Construction Monitoring], BIO-6 [Conduct Pre-Construction Biological Surveys], BIO-7 [Develop
and Implement Measures to Avoid Take of Blunt-nosed Leopard Lizard], BIO-8 [Avoid or Relocate Special-
Status Reptiles], BIO-9 [Prepare a Special-Status Species Relocation Plan], BIO-10 [Conduct Pre-
Construction Surveys for Swainson’s Hawk], BIO-11 [Establish Buffers to Avoid or Minimize Impacts on
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 52
Swainson’s Hawk], BIO-12 [Swainson’s Hawk Take Authorization], BIO-13 [Conduct Pre-Construction
Surveys for Burrowing Owl], BIO-22 [Implement Avoidance Measures for Natal San Joaquin Kit Fox or
American Badger Dens], BIO-23 [If Active San Joaquin Kit Fox Dens are Present, Coordinate with USFWS
and/or CDFW], and BIO-24 [Implement Measures During Construction and Operation to Protect San
Joaquin Kit Fox]. See discussion, above, for text of mitigation measures.
Rationale: The Proposed Project would mitigate impacts on special-status species and sensitive natural
communities and obtain take authorization if applicable, ensuring that impacts on these species would be
less than significant with mitigation.
Impact CUM-2. Effects on Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources.
Description of Significant Effect: Four Native American pre-contact archaeological sites are located within
the Proposed Project site boundaries. The City and BVWSD are committed to work with the tribes to
protect the sites through a Project design that avoids affecting the areas with sensitive tribal resources.
Prior to advancing design plans, the City shall retain a qualified archaeologist to work with the tribes to
accurately map the boundaries of the known resources. Following site delineation, the City will then
discuss with the tribes potential design elements to protect the sites, and provide the tribes the
opportunity to discuss and review the construction design plans at 60 percent completion and 90 percent
completion to ensure that the resources are avoided or treated appropriately. The design plans shall also
designate a protected area within the Project limits that will be used to reinter any Native American
human remains and associated grave items that may be discovered during construction. In addition,
implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1, CR-2, and CR-3 would require preconstruction cultural
resources awareness training and construction monitoring, as well as preparation of an unanticipated
discovery plan for artifacts, resources, and human remains. Implementation of these measures would
reduce these impacts to less than significant.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures CR-1 [Conduct Preconstruction Cultural Resources Awareness
Training and Construction Monitoring], CR-2 [Prepare an Unanticipated Discovery Plan relative to Cultural
Resources], CR-3 [Comply with Required Response Protocol for the Unanticipated Discovery of Human
Remains], and TCR-1 [Implement Mitigation Measures Recommended in Public Resources Code Section
21084.3 to Avoid Damaging Effects on Tribal Cultural Resources]. See discussion, above, for text of
mitigation measures.
Rationale: Identified cumulative projects located in the vicinity of the Proposed Project would likely be
sensitive to the presence of archaeological and/or historic resources. The potential exists for
unanticipated discovery of artifacts and resources during excavation activities. These projects would be
required under CEQA to implement similar mitigation measures to the Proposed Project, thereby reducing
impacts to a level that would be less than significant with mitigation. Therefore, with mitigation, the
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 53
Proposed Project would not contribute substantially to a significant cumulative impact on cultural or tribal
cultural resources.
VI. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES
Section 15126.6(a) of the CEQA Guidelines requires the discussion of “a reasonable range of alternatives to
a project, or the location of a 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 alternatives.”
Three alternatives, including the No Project (No Build) Alternative, were analyzed in detail in the FEIR,
Chapter 19, Alternatives Analysis:
Alternative: No Project Alternative
Alternative 1: Reduced Pumping Alternative
Alternative 2: Reduced Recharge Area Alternative
These alternatives are evaluated for their ability to avoid or substantially lessen the impacts of the project
identified in the FEIR, as well as consideration of their ability to meet the basic objectives of the project
as described in the FEIR, Chapter 2, Project Description, and above.
For the reasons set forth below, and in light of the analysis presented in the EIR at Chapter 19, Alternatives
Analysis, the environmentally superior alternative is Alternative 2, Reduced Recharge Area Alternative.
However, while this alternative would achieve most of the Proposed Project’s objectives, it would do so
at a reduced performance level. Removing Basin 24 from the project area would reduce the amount of
water stored in the groundwater aquifer and could, during dry or multiple-dry years, reduce the amount
of water available for recovery.
The No Project Alternative would not achieve any of the Proposed Project’s objectives as it would forego
the opportunities to: support achieving groundwater sustainability within the Kern County Sub-basin;
provide ecosystem public benefits and water supply benefits for agricultural and M&I uses; and, reduce
BVWSD’s and RRBWSD’s dependence on the California Delta by storing water locally in the groundwater
aquifer for later extraction and use.
Alternative 1 would meet most, but not all, of the project objectives, though at a reduced level of
performance compared to the Proposed Project. Limiting recovery during very low groundwater
conditions would reduce the project’s ability to increase operating flexibility for BVWSD’s and RRBWSD’s
existing and future Conjunctive Use Programs. However, operations would remain unchanged during
most years.
Therefore, while each alternative has benefits, none of the alternatives is superior to the project when
balancing the avoidance of environmental impacts, the project benefits, and policy considerations.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 54
A. Conveyance Route Alternatives Considered
During development of the Proposed Project, the project engineering team evaluated four possible
conveyance routes (i.e., options) to bring water to the project site. Option 2 was ultimately selected on
the basis of design, land ownership, topographic, environmental, and engineering considerations. A brief
explanation of each option and the reasons for their dismissal are provided below.
Option 1. Central Option with Connection to James Canal: Option 1 would involve constructing
a new canal from the Basin 2 headgate of the City’s 2800 Acre facility that would travel south to
join the James Canal, which passes through the project site in a north-south direction and
conveys water to the Kern Water Bank south of the project site. This option would require new
construction and would also affect the existing canal, which would require widening, new
turnouts, culvert crossings, and siphons. The option would deliver water to lower elevation
basins of the project; therefore, pumping would be required to move water to the higher
elevation basins of the project. This option was dismissed because of the additional impacts
associated with modifying the existing James Canal and the environmental impact associated
with energy use from pumping.
Option 2. East Alignment Along Pioneer Project: Option 2 would involve construction of a new
turnout at the Basin 1 headgate leading to a new canal that would follow along the east side of
the Pioneer Project property to the east side of the project site. This option to convey water from
the City’s 2800 Acre facility to the Proposed Project is the most efficient in terms of alignment
and gravity flow, and requires the least impactful amount of construction or energy use
compared to the other options.
Option 3. Reconstruct the James Canal from the River to the Delivery Point: Option 3 would
involve constructing a new turnout west of the Basin 1 headgate leading to a new canal that
would travel southeast through the Pioneer Project property to join the James Canal, which
passes through the project site in a north-south direction and conveys water to the Kern Water
Bank south of the project site. This option would require new construction and also affect the
existing canal, which would require widening, new turnouts, culvert crossings, and siphons. The
option would deliver water to lower elevation basins of the project; therefore, pumping would
be required to move water to the higher elevation basins of the project. This option was
dismissed because of the greater construction impacts and impacts to the existing James Canal
and the environmental impact associated with energy use from pumping.
Option 4. Serve McAllister Independent of Pioneer Project: Option 4 would involve constructing
a new canal from the Basin 2 headgate, from which water would pass through Basin 3 in a
dredged channel leading to Basin 4, reaching the northwest tip of the project site at the south
side of the Kern River Canal. This option would require new construction, which would require
widening, new turnouts, culvert crossings, and siphons. This option would deliver water to the
lowest elevation basin of the project; therefore, intensive pumping would be required to move
water to the higher elevation basins of the project. This option was dismissed because of the
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 55
extensive construction impacts and the least efficient design in terms of alignment, gravity flow,
and energy requirements.
In addition, alternatives were recommended in comments to the Draft EIR. The City has considered these
alternatives and rejects each as infeasible and unnecessary to informed decision- making and public
consideration where the EIR discusses a reasonable range of alternatives.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a) only requires that an EIR “describe a range of reasonable alternatives
to the proposed project, or to the location of the project that would feasibly attain most of the basic
objectives but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant environmental effects of the
project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives.” Section 15126.6(a) also provides that
an EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project; rather, an EIR must consider a
reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision-making and public
participation. Accordingly, the Draft EIR presented the three alternatives listed above, and also considered
and rejected three separate conveyance alternatives. Thus, the Draft EIR considered a number of
alternatives; and City staff determined that those alternatives represented a reasonable range of
alternatives to the Proposed Project.
B. EIR Alternative: No Project (No Build)
1. Description
Under the No Project (No Build) Alternative, BVWSD and RRBWSD would not construct groundwater
recharge ponds, a conveyance pipeline to carry water from the City’s 2800 Acre Facility to the site, or build
infrastructure required to operate a groundwater recharge facility at the site of the previously approved
McAllister Ranch Specific Plan Area. The existing, derelict improvements to the site would remain in place.
The general plan and zoning approvals for the existing specific plan would remain in effect, although there
are no current or foreseeable plans or known project proponents who are considering development of
the site.
2. Finding
The City rejects the No Project (No Build) Alternative, as undesirable and infeasible as it fails to satisfy the
project’s underlying purpose and fails to meet the project objectives. Therefore, the No Project (No Build)
Alternative is rejected because specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations make
the alternative infeasible.
3. Facts in Support of Finding
Under the No Project Alternative, all of the impacts associated with the construction and operation of the
Proposed Project would be avoided. No temporary construction-related impacts or long-term operational
impacts would result, including beneficial impacts on groundwater levels. The potential for impacts on
biological resources and cultural/tribal cultural resources would be eliminated; however, significant
Native American sites in the project area would remain unprotected and would continue to be subject to
vandalism. The bicycle path planned for construction as part of the Proposed Project would not be built,
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 56
delaying connection from the western portion of Bakersfield to the Kern River Parkway. The No Project
Alternative would retain approximately 9,000 housing units identified in the City’s RHNA allocation,
although no project proponent is currently considering development of those units.
Most notably, the No Project Alternative would not increase water supply reliability in the area, increase
operating flexibility for BVWSD’s and RRBWSD’s existing and future Conjunctive Use Programs, or assist
in achieving the sustainability goals of the Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Agency and other
regional water districts. The No Project Alternative would not meet any of the purposes or objectives of
the Proposed Project. For these reasons and others detailed in the record before the City, the City rejects
the No Project (No Build) Alternative as both undesirable and infeasible.
C. EIR Alternative 1: Reduced Pumping Alternative
1. Description of Alternative
Alternative 1 would involve a modified schedule of groundwater pumping for the Proposed Project that
would allow a larger percentage of stored groundwater to remain within the aquifer. Hydrologic modeling
indicated that there is some potential for the Proposed Project to have adverse effects during very low
groundwater conditions. Groundwater pumping drawdown, relative to the baseline condition, would be
greatest in the west central part of the project area. Maximum groundwater drawdown in project wells is
predicted to be as high as approximately 50 feet in the shallow/intermediate aquifer and up to 60 feet in
the deep aquifer. Maximum pumping interference in the nearest non-project wells occurs in the deep
aquifer and is predicted to range from approximately 13 to 29 feet. Alternative 1 would place additional
restrictions on the timing and amount of groundwater recovery to avoid or reduce pumping interference
in non-project wells to 10-15 feet or less.
2. Finding
The City rejects Alternative 1, Reduced Pumping Alternative, as undesirable and infeasible as it fails to
satisfy the project’s underlying purpose and fails to meet the project objectives. Therefore, Alternative 1,
the Reduced Pumping Alternative is rejected because specific economic, legal, social, technological or
other considerations make the alternative infeasible.
3. Facts in Support of Finding
Implementing Alternative 1 would meet most, but not all, of the project objectives, though at a reduced
level of performance compared to the Proposed Project. Limiting recovery during very low groundwater
conditions would reduce the project’s ability to increase operating flexibility for BVWSD’s and RRBWSD’s
existing and future Conjunctive Use Programs. However, operations would remain unchanged during
most years.
With respect to the Alternative 1’s impacts on the environment, impacts of Alternative 1 would be similar
to those of the Proposed Project relative to Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources/Tribal
Resources, Energy, Geology/Soils/Seismicity, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 57
Materials, Land Use, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, and Utilities/Service
Systems.
As to Hydrology and Water Quality, Alternative 1 would be subject to the same water quality and
stormwater regulations as the Proposed Project; therefore, impacts related to surface water and
groundwater quality would be similar. Adjusting the timing and frequency of pumping in very low
groundwater conditions would reduce the level of pumping interference in the nearest non-project wells
occurring in the deep aquifer, although this would require reduced pumping, which would also reduce the
benefit of the Proposed Project for water supply in times of scarcity. Mitigation measures would reduce
the potential for significant impacts to less than significant.
For these reasons, the City rejects Alternative 1, Reduced Pumping Alternative, as both undesirable and
infeasible.
D. EIR Alternative 2: Reduced Recharge Area Alternative
1. Description of Alternative
Alternative 2 would reduce the area operated as part of the Proposed Project from 2,070 acres to 1,910
acres by removing Basin 24 (measuring approximately 160 acres) from the project area. This area would
be fenced off to separate it from the remaining groundwater recharge area. No project-related activities
would take place within this area. The loss of this area would eliminate approximately 41.4 cfs of recharge
capacity, which would reduce the overall recharge capacity of the Proposed Project by approximately 8
percent, from 488 cfs to 446.6 cfs.
2. Finding
The City rejects Alternative 2, the Reduced Recharge Area Alternative, as undesirable and infeasible as it
fails to satisfy the project’s underlying purpose and fails to meet the project objectives. Therefore,
Alternative 2 is rejected because specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations
make the alternative infeasible.
3. Facts in Support of Finding
Implementing Alternative 2 would meet most of the project objectives, albeit at a reduced level of
performance compared to the Proposed Project. Removing Basin 24 from the project area would reduce
the amount of water stored in the groundwater aquifer and could, during dry or multiple-dry years, reduce
the amount of water available for recovery.
With respect to Alternative 2’s impacts on the environment, impacts of Alternative 2 would be similar to
those of the Proposed Project relative to Air Quality, Energy, Geology/Soils/Seismicity, Greenhouse Gas
Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Land Use, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services,
Recreation, and Utilities/Service Systems.
Impacts of Alternative 2 would be reduced from those of the Proposed Project relative to Biological
Resources and Cultural Resources/Tribal Cultural Resources. As to Biological Resources, avoiding
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 58
operations at Basin 24 would eliminate the potential for impacts on chenopod scrub habitat and the
multiple special-status plant and wildlife species found there. Although the Proposed Project would
include mitigation to reduce impacts to less than significant, avoiding the impact altogether would be
preferable.
As to Cultural Resources/Tribal Cultural Resources, avoiding operations at Basin 24 would eliminate the
potential for impacts on significant cultural and tribal cultural resources. Although the Proposed Project
would include mitigation to reduce impacts to less than significant, avoiding the impact altogether would
be preferable.
As to Hydrology and Water Quality, Alternative 2 would be subject to the same water quality and
stormwater regulations as the Proposed Project; therefore, impacts related to surface water and
groundwater quality would be similar. Reducing the area available for recharge and recovery would result
in a reduction of approximately 8 percent in the amount of water stored in the groundwater aquifer and
could, during dry or multiple-dry years, reduce the amount of water available for recovery.
Thus, for each of these reasons, the City rejects Alternative 2, Reduced Recharge Area Alternative, as both
undesirable and infeasible.
VII. OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS
A. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
Section 15126.2(b) of the CEQA Guidelines requires and EIR to describe any significant impacts that cannot
be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. Based on the analysis presented in Chapters 4-18 of the EIR,
all of the impacts associated with the Proposed Project would be reduced to a less-than-significant level
through implementation of the identified mitigation measures. No impacts have been identified as
significant and unavoidable.
B. Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes
Sections 15126.2(c) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR identify significant irreversible
environmental changes that would be caused by the Proposed Project. These changes may include, for
example, uses of non-renewable resources or provision of access to previously inaccessible areas, as well
as project accidents that could result in permanent, long-term changes.
Construction of the Proposed Project would require a permanent, minor commitment of natural resources
resulting from the direct consumption of fossil fuels, construction materials, and energy required for the
production of materials. Operation of the Proposed Project would allow for the recharge of groundwater
in the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin, Kern County Subbasin, thereby increasing the reliability of
groundwater availability. This would constitute a beneficial change in the environment. Furthermore,
operation of the Proposed Project would not require the future use of non-renewable resources beyond
fuel and equipment needed for routine operation and maintenance activities. Therefore, the primary and
secondary impacts resulting from operation of the Proposed Project would be less than significant.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 59
Accidental release of hazardous materials could trigger irreversible environmental damage. As discussed
in the EIR, construction would involve various ground-disturbing activities and operation of heavy
equipment, which could loosen soils, thereby allowing for subsequent precipitation events to erode and
transport the soils/sediment off-site. Additionally, much of the equipment used in project construction
and operation would contain small amounts of hazardous materials (e.g., fuel, oil, lubricant). If improperly
handled or managed, these hazardous materials could leak or be spilled. Then, the materials could either
be washed off-site to receiving waters or infiltrate into groundwater, potentially resulting in violations of
water quality standards.
However, the Proposed Project would be required to obtain coverage under the Construction General
Permit, which requires preparation and implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP would include good site
housekeeping measures for proper storage and management of hazardous materials, as well as spill
prevention, control, and counter-measures. Implementation of the SWPPP would greatly reduce the
potential for Proposed Project construction activities to result in accidental releases of hazardous
materials. Considering the types and relatively minimal quantities of hazardous materials that would be
used for the Proposed Project and the spill response plans and other procedures that would be required
by the SWPPP, accidental release is unlikely. As a result, significant irreversible environmental changes
from accidental releases are not expected.
C. Growth Inducement
CEQA Guidelines Sections 15126(d) and 15126.2(d) require an EIR to include a detailed statement of a
proposed project’s anticipated growth-inducing impacts. The analysis of growth-inducing impacts must
discuss the ways in which a proposed project could foster economic or population growth or the
construction of additional housing in the surrounding environment. The analysis must also address
project-related actions that would remove existing obstacles to population growth, tax existing
community service facilities, and require construction of new facilities that cause significant
environmental effects or encourage or facilitate other activities that could, individually or cumulatively,
significantly affect the environment. A project would be considered growth inducing if it induces growth
directly (through the construction of new housing or increasing population) or indirectly (increasing
employment opportunities or eliminating existing constraints on development). Under CEQA, growth is
not assumed to be either beneficial or detrimental.
As discussed in FEIR Chapter 14, Population and Housing, the Proposed Project would not increase the
need for new homes or businesses; therefore, it would not directly induce substantial population growth.
The Proposed Project, on its own, would not extend water supply service to new areas such that it would
indirectly induce population growth. However, the Proposed Project would increase groundwater storage
in the Kern River Subbasin up to 200,000 AF. It is anticipated that up to 56,000 AF of stored water could
be extracted from the aquifer in any given year. Following completion of the Proposed Project, BVWSD
and RRBWSD would be able to provide recovered water to their landowners and customers, among
others, for beneficial uses, including irrigation and municipal and industrial uses.
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 60
Furthermore, construction-related jobs would be short-term and would be anticipated to draw from the
existing workforce. The Proposed Project would not displace any existing housing units or persons, or
create any housing units. The small amount of job growth associated with the Proposed Project’s
operation is not anticipated to generate sufficient economic activity such that it would result in substantial
population growth.
Therefore, the Proposed Project would improve the reliability with which BVWSD and RRBWSD could
accommodate beneficial uses of water.
D. Environmental Effects Determined Not Significant and Screened Out from EIR Analysis
CEQA Guidelines Section 15128 requires an EIR to contain a brief statement indicating reasons that various
possible significant effects of a project were determined not to be significant and therefore are not
discussed in detail in the EIR. Through the NOP/IS, the City identified the following subject areas where
impacts will clearly be less than significant and, therefore, these environmental factors were not
addressed in the EIR: Aesthetics, Agriculture/Forestry Resources, and Wildfire.
VIII. GENERAL CEQA FINDINGS
A. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
1. General Finding
Pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code, the City, in adopting these Findings, also adopts
the MMRP for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project. The MMRP is designed to ensure that,
during project implementation, the City and other responsible parties will comply with the mitigation
measures adopted in these Findings. The City hereby binds itself to cause the various feasible mitigation
measures to be implemented in accordance with the FEIR and MMRP. The mitigation measures constitute
a binding set of obligations upon the City’s certification and approvals identified herein.
The City hereby finds that the MMRP, which is incorporated into the project conditions of approval, meets
the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 by providing for the implementation and
monitoring of project conditions intended to mitigate potential environmental effects of the project.
2. Regulatory Compliance
Federal, state, regional, and local laws contain certain regulatory compliance measures that must be
adhered to in implementing the project. The FEIR describes the regulatory setting within each chapter,
which includes the details of regulatory compliance measures. Where regulatory compliance measures
are required by law, the City has not separately proposed or adopted mitigation requiring regulatory
compliance (as it would be declaratory of existing law). Nonetheless, the City finds that the project must
comply with all applicable regulatory compliance measures.
B. CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 And 15092 Findings
Based on the foregoing findings and the information contained in the administrative record, the City has
made one or more of the following findings with respect to each of the significant effects of the project:
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 61
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which
mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency and such changes have been adopted by such other agency, or can and should be
adopted by such other agency.
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly-trained workers, make
infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the FEIR.
Based on the foregoing findings and the information contained in the administrative record, and as
conditioned by the foregoing:
All significant effects on the environment due to the project have been eliminated.
C. City’s Preparation of the EIR Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15084(d)
CEQA Guidelines section 15084(d) provides a lead agency may choose one of the following arrangements
or a combination of them for preparing a draft EIR:
(1) Preparing the draft EIR directly with its own staff.
(2) Contracting with another entity, public or private, to prepare the draft EIR.
(3) Accepting a draft prepared by the Applicant, a consultant retained by the Applicant, or any
other person.
(4) Executing a third party contract or memorandum of understanding with the Applicant to
govern the preparation of a draft EIR by an independent contractor.
(5) Using a previously prepared EIR.
The City has relied on Section 15084(d)(4) of the CEQA Guidelines, which allows executing a third party
contract or memorandum of understanding with the applicant to govern the preparation of a EIR by an
independent contractor. Subject to specific responsibilities imposed on the project Applicant and EIR
consultant, the City retains the sole right and discretion to determine the adequacy of performance of the
EIR consultant, and to independently review and analyze all documentation for the project. In that
context, the City allowed the project applicant to select and retain an EIR consultant to prepare the EIR
submitted to the City for independent review. The City has reviewed, revised, and clarified, as necessary,
the submitted working drafts of the EIR to ensure that both the Draft EIR, draft Final EIR, and FEIR reflect
the City’s own independent judgment, including reliance on City experienced, technical personnel from
various City departments.
D. City’s Independent Judgment
Before using a draft EIR prepared by another entity or through a third-party contractor, the City is required
to subject the draft to its own review and analysis such that the draft EIR circulated for public review
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 62
reflects the City’s independent judgment (Public Resources Code Section 21082.1(c), CEQA Guidelines
Section 15084(e).) The City must also certify the final EIR reflects its independent judgment (Public
Resources Code Section 21082.1 (c), CEQA Guidelines Section 15090(a)(3), Friends of La Vina v. County of
Los Angeles (1991) 232 Cal.App.3d 1446, 1455).
The City extensively reviewed the Proposed Project, the Draft EIR, draft Final EIR, and FEIR and its analyses
to ensure the EIR reflects the City’s own independent judgment. Multiple iterations of technical reports
and the preliminary draft EIR were “screen-checked” by the City and its staff to ensure the analyses
contained therein are factual, accurate, applicable, and based on the City’s independent review and
judgment. Further, the City’s Development Services Department completes an independent evaluation of
land development applications, including this project, for compliance with applicable City, State, and
Federal laws, regulations, and ordinances. As such, City staff is not an advocate for or against the project,
but acts in its independent regulatory capacity as the lead agency to review and independently evaluate
the EIR and project.
The City conducted multiple screen-check (or iteration) reviews of the Draft EIR prior to release for public
review. The City also conducted multiple reviews of technical studies prior to public review. City staff
provided comments, clarifications, additions, revisions, and updates that were then addressed by
subsequent iterations. The City has further reviewed and edited, as necessary, the submitted working
drafts to reflect the City’s own independent judgment, including reliance on City’s experienced, technical
personnel from various City departments. In addition to providing comments on the EIR and technical
reports, City staff regularly met with the applicant and their consultants to clarify or explain comments
and issues, and to resolve outstanding questions and/or issues as they arose.
City staff thoroughly reviewed each iteration of the EIR and technical reports—including the Draft EIR,
draft Final EIR, and FEIR—and provided comments, revisions, additions, and clarifications to ensure the
documents were consistent with applicable City requirements, CEQA, and the State CEQA Guidelines.
Reports were reviewed for technical adequacy and completeness of analysis (e.g., confirming that all
relevant anticipated impacts and feasible mitigation and alternatives were addressed adequately). This
standard of review is consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15003(i) that provides that “CEQA does not
require technical perfection in an EIR, but rather adequacy, completeness, and a good-faith effort at full
disclosure.”
In addition to the extensive independent review of the EIR (including the Draft EIR, draft Final EIR, and
FEIR), the City has further considered public review and input during the open, lengthy, and extensive
public review process. This includes extensive public/agency involvement and participation during the
public EIR scoping meeting, the Notice of Preparation review period, and the public/agency review and
comment period on the Draft EIR. All comments received during the Draft EIR comment period were
responded to in writing and included in the Final EIR for presentation to the Planning Commission and the
City Council prior to noticed public hearings. The City has also considered staff presentations and public
hearings regarding the EIR and project. The City has exercised independence, objectivity, and
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 63
thoroughness to ensure the FEIR is a technically adequate environmental document that reflects the City’s
independent judgment.
Thus, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21082.1(c), and prior to certification, the City hereby
finds it has independently reviewed and analyzed:
• The Draft EIR and its technical studies;
• The draft Final EIR, including public comments, responses to comments, revised draft EIR pages,
and additional or revised technical studies; and,
• The FEIR, including public comments, responses to comments, revised EIR pages, etc.
The City hereby finds that the Draft EIR, draft Final EIR, and FEIR reflect the independent judgment of the
City as the Lead Agency for the project.
E. Nature of Findings
Any finding made by the City shall be deemed made, regardless of where it appears in this document. All
of the language included in this document constitutes findings by the City, whether or not any particular
sentence or clause includes a statement to that effect. The City intends that these findings be considered
as an integrated whole and, whether or not any part of these findings fail to cross-reference or incorporate
by reference any other part of these findings, that any finding required or committed to be made by the
City with respect to any particular subject matter of the FEIR, shall be deemed to be made if it appears in
any portion of these findings.
F. Reliance on Record
Each and all of the findings and determinations contained herein are based on substantial evidence, both
oral and written, contained in the administrative record relating to the project. In accordance with Public
Resources Code Section 21167.6(e), the record of proceedings (i.e., administrative record) for the
Council’s decision on the project is comprised of the following documents:
• The FEIR (November 2024) for the project, including appendices;
• The draft Final EIR (September 2024) for the project, including appendices;
• The Draft EIR (July 2022) for the project, including appendices;
• The Initial Study/Notice of Preparation (IS/NOP) (June 2020) for the project;
• Any appendices, studies or documents cited, referenced, or relied on in the IS/NOP, Draft EIR, draft
Final EIR, FEIR, or any document prepared for the project’s EIR and either made available to the public
during a public review period or included in the City’s non-privileged, retained files on the project;
• Reports and technical reports, studies, and memoranda included or referenced in the IS/NOP, Draft
EIR, draft Final EIR, FEIR, or City’s responses to comments on the project;
• The project application materials;
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 64
• All public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the project, including notices issued by the
City to comply with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, or any other law governing the processing and
approval of the project;
• Scoping Meeting(s) notices and comments received at Scoping Meeting(s);
• The Notice of Availability and Notice of Completion of the Draft EIR;
• Comments received on the NOP;
• All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, or other planning or environmental documents relating to the
project or its compliance with CEQA and prepared by the City, consultants to the City, or responsible
or trustee agencies with respect to the project that were either made available to the public during a
public review period or included in the City’s non-privileged, retained files on the project;
• All written comments and attachments on the project received from agencies, organizations, or
members of the public during the Draft EIR comment period or prior to the close of the public hearing
before the Council;
• All City responses to comments received from agencies, organizations, or members of the public, or
otherwise transferred from the City in connection with the project or its compliance with CEQA;
• Any supplemental documents submitted to the City prior to public hearings on the project;
• Staff reports prepared by the City for any information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings
relating to the project, and any exhibits or attachments thereto;
• Minutes and/or transcripts (including all presentation material used or relied upon at such sessions,
meetings, and hearings) of all public information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings
relating to the project, including the October 3, 2024 Planning Commission hearing; and November
20, 2024 City Council hearing;
• Any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at such information sessions, public
meetings, and public hearings;
• Any proposed decisions or findings submitted to the City Council and made available to the public
during any public review period;
• All findings, resolutions, and ordinances adopted by the Planning Commission or this City Council in
connection with the project, and all documents cited or referred to therein;
• Project permit conditions;
• The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project;
• Any documents expressly cited in these findings and any documents incorporated by reference;
• The City of Bakersfield General Plan and all pertinent environmental documents prepared in
connection with its adoption;
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 65
• The full written record actually before the Planning Commission and/or City Council;
• The project’s submitted plans and any project approval documents;
• All City website materials relating to the EIR or project;
• Any other written materials included in the City’s retained files for the EIR or project that are relevant
to the City’s compliance with CEQA or its decision on the merits of the project, and that were released
for public review or relied upon in the environmental documents prepared for the project; and
• The Notice of Determination.
The Council intends that only those public records relating to the project and its compliance with CEQA
and listed above shall comprise the administrative record for the project. Only that evidence was
presented to, considered by, and ultimately before the Council prior to reviewing and reaching its decision
on the EIR and project shall comprise the administrative record. The Council does not intend that any
drafts of any study, findings, or environmental document (or portions thereof), that were not released for
public review or otherwise made available to the public be included in the administrative record.
G. Custodian of Records
The custodian of the documents or other material that constitute the record of proceedings upon which
the City’s decision is based is identified as follows:
City of Bakersfield – Development Services Department
1715 Chester Avenue, 2nd Floor
Bakersfield, CA 93301
H. Relationship of Findings to EIR
These findings are based on the most current information available. Accordingly, to the extent there are
any apparent conflicts or inconsistencies between the FEIR and these Findings, these Findings shall
control, and the FEIR is hereby amended as set forth in these Findings.
I. Responses to Late Comments Not Required
CEQA Guidelines Section 15105 requires that the City provide a 45-day public review and comment period
on the Draft EIR. To provide additional time, the City afforded an additional 21 days for public review and
comment on the Draft EIR. The public comment period for the Draft EIR began on July 18, 2022 and ended
on September 22, 2022.
J. Recirculation Not Required
CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 provides the criteria that a lead agency is to consider when deciding
whether it is required to recirculate an EIR. Recirculation is required when “significant new information”
is added to the EIR after public notice of the availability of the Draft EIR is given, but before certification.
(CEQA Guidelines, §15088.5(a).) “Significant new information,” as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section
15088.5(a), means information added to an EIR that changes the EIR so as to deprive the public of a
CEQA Findings
September 2024
CEQA Findings for the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project 66
meaningful opportunity to comment on a “substantial adverse environmental effect” or a “feasible way
to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project’s proponents
have declined to implement.”
An example of significant new information provided by the CEQA Guidelines is a disclosure showing that
a “new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation measure
proposed to be implemented;” that a “substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact
would result unless mitigation measures are adopted to reduce the impact to a level of insignificance;” or
that a “feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously
analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project, but the project’s
proponents decline to adopt it.” (CEQA Guidelines, §15088.5(a)(1)-(3).)
Recirculation is not required where “the new information added to the EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or
makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR.” (CEQA Guidelines, §15088.5(b).) Recirculation also
is not required simply because new information is added to the EIR — indeed, new information is
oftentimes added given CEQA’s public/agency comment and response process and CEQA’s post-Draft EIR
circulation requirement of proposed responses to comments submitted by public agencies. In short,
recirculation is “intended to be an exception rather than the general rule.” (Laurel Heights Improvement
Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1112, 1132.)
The City hereby finds that recirculation of the EIR prior to certification is not required. In addition to
providing responses to comments, the Final EIR includes revisions to expand upon information presented
in the Draft EIR; explain or enhance the evidentiary basis for the Draft EIR’s findings; update information;
and to make clarifications, amplifications, updates, or helpful revisions to the Draft EIR. Accordingly,
recirculation is not required.
K. Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report, CEQA Guidelines § 15090
The City Council certifies that the FEIR, dated November 2024, on file with the Development Services
Department (SCH # 2020060267), has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA
Guidelines, that the EIR was presented to the Council, and that the Council reviewed and considered the
information contained therein before approving the project, and that the EIR reflects the independent
judgment and analysis of the Council. (State CEQA Guidelines § 15090.)
03_MapPackages
0 500 1,000
Feet_LARIMAR
DRLODE
N
D
RWINDERMEREST
BOLTHOUSEDR
CAMPUSPARKDR
CHAMBER BLVD
WINDERMERE STHI
GH
GA
T
E
P
A
RK
B
L
V
D
PENSINGER RDWINDERMERESTMUIR
LA
ND
SPKWY
S ALLEN RDS ALLEN RDS ALLEN RDPANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LNS ALLEN RDS ALLEN RDWHITE LN
MC CUTCHEN RD
K E R N RI V E R
C-1/P.C.D.
WM-TC
WM-CO
E
A-20A
C-1/P.C.D.
WM-R2
C-2
WM-R1
E
DI
FP-P
WM-R2
DI
WM-SU
C-2/P.C.D.
C-1/P.C.D.
C-C/P.C.D.-PE
A-20A
DI
DI
FP-S
FP-S
WM-R3
OS
R-1
C-1
R-1R-1R-2/P.U.D.
R-1/P.U.D.
R-3/P.U.D.
R-2/P.U.D.
R-2
R-1/P.U.D.
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-2/P.U.D.
R-1
R-3/P.U.D.
General Plan Amendment/
Zone Change
19-0342
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Zoning
R-1 One Family Dwelling 6,000 sq.ft. min lot size
R-1-4.5 One Family Dwelling 4,500 sq.ft. min lot size
E Estate
10,000 sq.ft. min lot size
R-S Residential Suburban
24,000 sq.ft./dwelling unit
R-S-( ) Residential Suburban
1, 2.5, 5 or 10 min lot size
R-2 Limited Multiple Family Dwelling
4,500 sq.ft. min lot size (single family)
6,000 sq.ft. min lot size (multifamily)
2,500 sq.ft. lot area/dwelling unit
R-3 Multiple Family Dwelling
6,000 sq.ft. min lot size 1,250 sq.ft. lot area/dwelling unit
R-4 High Density Multiple Family Dwelling 6,000 sq.ft. min lot size
600 sq.ft. lot area/dwelling unitR-H Residential Holding
20 acre min lot sizeA Agriculture
6,000 sq.ft. min lot sizeA-20A Agriculture
20 acre min lot sizePUD Planned Unit Development
TT Travel Trailer ParkMH Mobilehome
C-O Professional and Administrative Office
C-1 Neighborhood Commercial
C-2 Regional Commercial
C-C Commercial Center
C-B Central Business
PCD Planned Commercial Development
M-1 Light Manufacturing
M-2 General Manufacturing
M-3 Heavy Industrial
P Automobile ParkingRE Recreation
Ch Church OverlayOS Open Space
HOSP Hospital OverlayAD Architectural Design Overlay
FP-P Floodplain PrimaryFP-S Floodplain Secondary
AA Airport ApproachDI Drilling Island
PE Petroleum Extraction CombiningSC Senior Citizen Overlay
HD Hillside Development CombiningWM- West Ming Specific Plan
GPA/ZC 19-0342
MAP PACKAGE
Exhibit C
A. . .
V ~
!i BAKERSFIELD
Page 1 of 3
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE BAKERSFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO THE METROPOLITAN BAKERSFIELD GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP, CIRCULATION ELEMENT, AND RESCINDING THE MCALLISTER SPECIFIC
PLAN FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PANAMA LANE AND SOUTH ALLEN ROAD (GPA/ZC/SPA
NO. 19-0342).
WHEREAS, Buena Vista Water Storage District and Rosedale Rio Bravo Water
Storage District filed applications with the City of Bakersfield proposes an amendment of
the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan (MBGP) Land Use Element to change the
designation from SR (Suburban Residential), LR (Low Density Residential), LMR (Low
Medium Density Residential), HMR (High Medium Density Residential), HR (High Density
Residential), and GC (General Commercial) to R-EA (Resource – Extensive) on 2,072 acres
located at the northwest corner of the Panama Lane and South Allen Road Intersection;
and
WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes an amendment of the MBGP Circulation
Element to remove all McAllister Ranch interior street alignments approved by Resolution
094-07 on 2,072 acres located at the northwest corner of the Panama Lane and South
Allen Road Intersection; and WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes Specific Plan Amendment to rescind the McAllister Ranch Specific Plan on 2,072 acres, generally located at the northwest corner
of the Panama Lane and South Allen Road Intersection on 2,072 acres located at the northwest corner of the Panama Lane and South Allen Road Intersection; and
WHEREAS, the above-mentioned concurrent amendments are referred as the
“Project”; and WHEREAS, the Applicant filed concurrent applications with the City of Bakersfield
for proposing a change in zone classification from R-1 (One Family Dwelling), E (Estate),
R-2/PUD (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), R-3/PUD (Multiple
Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), C-1/PCD (Neighborhood
Commercial/Precise Commercial Development), C-C-/PCD-PE (Commercial
Center/Precise Commercial Development-Petroleum Extraction Combining) and DI (Drill
Island) to A-WR (Agriculture-Water Recharge Combining) on 2,072 acres located at the
northwest corner of the Panama Lane and South Allen Road Intersection; and WHEREAS, the Project proposes development of a water banking facility (storage
and recovery) on the Property, including water conveyance to and from the Property
and spreading and recovery facilities onsite at the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Secretary of the Planning Commission set Thursday, October 3, 2024
at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield,
Page 2 of 3
California, as the time and place for a public hearing before the Planning Commission to consider the Project and associated environmental determination as required by
Government Code Section 65353, and notice of the public hearing was given in the manner provided in Title 17 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission Resolution No. ____ recommends certification
and adoption of the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project Environmental
Impact Report, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and CEQA Findings per
Section 15091 of the California Environmental Quality Act by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the facts presented in the staff report, environmental document and
special studies, and evidence received both in writing and by verbal testimony at the
above referenced public hearing support the following findings:
1. All required public notices have been given. Hearing notices regarding the
proposed 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
Environmental Impact Report was prepared and properly noticed for
public review.
3. The public necessity, general welfare, and good planning practices justify the Project.
4. The Project is compatible with the land use designations and zone
classifications and is internally consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Bakersfield Planning Commission as
follows:
1. The above recitals, incorporated herein, are true and correct.
2. The Project is subject to the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project
Environmental Impact Report as recommended for approval by the by
Planning Commission Resolution No. ______.
3. The Project is hereby recommended for approval by the City Council
located on the map as shown in Exhibit B incorporated herein.
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
October 3, 2024 on a motion by Commissioner _____ and seconded by Commissioner
_____, by the following vote.
Page 3 of 3
AYES:
NOES: ABSENT:
APPROVED
____________________________________
Daniel Cater, CHAIR
City of Bakersfield Planning Commission
Exhibits (attached):
Exhibit A: Location Map
03_MapPackages
0 500 1,000
Feet_LARIMAR
DRLODE
N
D
RWINDERMEREST
BOLTHOUSEDR
CAMPUSPARKDR
CHAMBER BLVD
WINDERMERE STHI
GH
GA
T
E
P
A
RK
B
L
V
D
PENSINGER RDWINDERMERESTMUIR
LA
ND
SPKWY
S ALLEN RDS ALLEN RDS ALLEN RDPANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LNS ALLEN RDS ALLEN RDWHITE LN
MC CUTCHEN RD
K E R N RI V E R
C-1/P.C.D.
WM-TC
WM-CO
E
A-20A
C-1/P.C.D.
WM-R2
C-2
WM-R1
E
DI
FP-P
WM-R2
DI
WM-SU
C-2/P.C.D.
C-1/P.C.D.
C-C/P.C.D.-PE
A-20A
DI
DI
FP-S
FP-S
WM-R3
OS
R-1
C-1
R-1R-1R-2/P.U.D.
R-1/P.U.D.
R-3/P.U.D.
R-2/P.U.D.
R-2
R-1/P.U.D.
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-2/P.U.D.
R-1
R-3/P.U.D.
General Plan Amendment/
Zone Change
19-0342
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Zoning
R-1 One Family Dwelling 6,000 sq.ft. min lot size
R-1-4.5 One Family Dwelling 4,500 sq.ft. min lot size
E Estate
10,000 sq.ft. min lot size
R-S Residential Suburban
24,000 sq.ft./dwelling unit
R-S-( ) Residential Suburban
1, 2.5, 5 or 10 min lot size
R-2 Limited Multiple Family Dwelling
4,500 sq.ft. min lot size (single family)
6,000 sq.ft. min lot size (multifamily)
2,500 sq.ft. lot area/dwelling unit
R-3 Multiple Family Dwelling
6,000 sq.ft. min lot size 1,250 sq.ft. lot area/dwelling unit
R-4 High Density Multiple Family Dwelling 6,000 sq.ft. min lot size
600 sq.ft. lot area/dwelling unitR-H Residential Holding
20 acre min lot sizeA Agriculture
6,000 sq.ft. min lot sizeA-20A Agriculture
20 acre min lot sizePUD Planned Unit Development
TT Travel Trailer ParkMH Mobilehome
C-O Professional and Administrative Office
C-1 Neighborhood Commercial
C-2 Regional Commercial
C-C Commercial Center
C-B Central Business
PCD Planned Commercial Development
M-1 Light Manufacturing
M-2 General Manufacturing
M-3 Heavy Industrial
P Automobile ParkingRE Recreation
Ch Church OverlayOS Open Space
HOSP Hospital OverlayAD Architectural Design Overlay
FP-P Floodplain PrimaryFP-S Floodplain Secondary
AA Airport ApproachDI Drilling Island
PE Petroleum Extraction CombiningSC Senior Citizen Overlay
HD Hillside Development CombiningWM- West Ming Specific Plan
GPA/ZC 19-0342
MAP PACKAGE
Exhibit A
A. . .
V ~
!i BAKERSFIELD
Page 1 of 3
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BAKERSFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP IN TITLE 17 OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE BY CHANGING THE ZONE CLASSIFICATION ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PANAMA LANE AND SOUTH ALLEN ROAD (GPA/ZC/SPA NO. 19-0342).
WHEREAS, Buena Vista Water Storage District and Rosedale Rio Bravo Water
Storage District (“Applicant”) filed an application with the City of Bakersfield to change
the zone classification from R-1 (One Family Dwelling), E (Estate), R-2/PUD (Limited
Multiple Family Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), R-3/PUD (Multiple Family
Dwelling/Planned Unit Development), C-1/PCD (Neighborhood Commercial/Precise
Commercial Development), C-C-/PCD-PE (Commercial Center/Precise Commercial
Development-Petroleum Extraction Combining) and DI (Drill Island) to A-WR (Agriculture-
Water Recharge Combining), on 2,072 acres, generally located at the northwest corner
of the Panama Lane and South Allen Road Intersection (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the Applicant filed concurrent applications with the City of Bakersfield
for : (1) an amendment of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan (MBGP) Land Use
Element to change the designation from SR (Suburban Residential), LR (Low Density
Residential), LMR (Low Medium Density Residential), HMR (High Medium Density Residential), HR (High Density Residential), and GC (General Commercial) to R-EA
(Resource – Extensive); (2) an amendment of the MBGP Circulation Element to remove all McAllister Ranch interior street alignments approved by Resolution 094-07; (3) a
Specific Plan Amendment to rescind the McAllister Ranch Specific Plan on 2,072 acres, generally located at the northwest corner of the Panama Lane and South Allen Road
Intersection (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the Project proposes development of a water banking facility (storage and recovery) on the Property, including water conveyance to and from the Property
and spreading and recovery facilities onsite at the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Secretary of the Planning Commission set Thursday, October 3, 2024
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 Project and associated environmental determination as required by
Government Code Section 65353, and notice of the public hearing was given in the
manner provided in Title 17 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission Resolution No. ____ recommends certification
and adoption of the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project Environmental
Impact Report, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and CEQA Findings per
Section 15091 of the California Environmental Quality Act by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the facts presented in the staff report, environmental document and
Page 2 of 3
special studies, and evidence received both in writing and by verbal testimony at the above referenced public hearing 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
Environmental Impact Report was prepared and properly noticed for
public review.
3. The public necessity, general welfare, and good planning practices justify
the Project.
4. The Project is compatible with the land use designations and zone
classifications and is internally consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield
General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Bakersfield Planning Commission as
follows:
1. The above recitals, incorporated herein, are true and correct.
2. The Project is subject to the McAllister Ranch Groundwater Banking Project
Environmental Impact Report as recommended for approval by the by Planning Commission Resolution No. ______.
3. The Project is hereby recommended for approval by the City Council,
incorporating the change into the official zoning map as described in Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 17.06.020 located on the map as shown
in Exhibit A and as specifically described in Exhibit B, all of which are
incorporated herein.
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
October 3, 2024 on a motion by Commissioner ________ and seconded by Commissioner
______, by the following vote.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Page 3 of 3
APPROVED
____________________________________
Daniel Cater, CHAIR City of Bakersfield Planning Commission
Exhibits (attached):
Exhibit A: Zone Change Map
Exhibit B: Legal Description
03_MapPackages
0 500 1,000
Feet_LARIMAR
DRLODE
N
D
RWINDERMEREST
BOLTHOUSEDR
CAMPUSPARKDR
CHAMBER BLVD
WINDERMERE STHI
GH
GA
T
E
P
A
RK
B
L
V
D
PENSINGER RDWINDERMERESTMUIR
LA
ND
SPKWY
S ALLEN RDS ALLEN RDS ALLEN RDPANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LN PANAMA LNS ALLEN RDS ALLEN RDWHITE LN
MC CUTCHEN RD
K E R N RI V E R
C-1/P.C.D.
WM-TC
WM-CO
E
A-20A
C-1/P.C.D.
WM-R2
C-2
WM-R1
E
DI
FP-P
WM-R2
DI
WM-SU
C-2/P.C.D.
C-1/P.C.D.
C-C/P.C.D.-PE
A-20A
DI
DI
FP-S
FP-S
WM-R3
OS
R-1
C-1
R-1R-1R-2/P.U.D.
R-1/P.U.D.
R-3/P.U.D.
R-2/P.U.D.
R-2
R-1/P.U.D.
R-1
R-1
R-1
R-2/P.U.D.
R-1
R-3/P.U.D.
General Plan Amendment/
Zone Change
19-0342
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
Zoning
R-1 One Family Dwelling 6,000 sq.ft. min lot size
R-1-4.5 One Family Dwelling 4,500 sq.ft. min lot size
E Estate
10,000 sq.ft. min lot size
R-S Residential Suburban
24,000 sq.ft./dwelling unit
R-S-( ) Residential Suburban
1, 2.5, 5 or 10 min lot size
R-2 Limited Multiple Family Dwelling
4,500 sq.ft. min lot size (single family)
6,000 sq.ft. min lot size (multifamily)
2,500 sq.ft. lot area/dwelling unit
R-3 Multiple Family Dwelling
6,000 sq.ft. min lot size 1,250 sq.ft. lot area/dwelling unit
R-4 High Density Multiple Family Dwelling 6,000 sq.ft. min lot size
600 sq.ft. lot area/dwelling unitR-H Residential Holding
20 acre min lot sizeA Agriculture
6,000 sq.ft. min lot sizeA-20A Agriculture
20 acre min lot sizePUD Planned Unit Development
TT Travel Trailer ParkMH Mobilehome
C-O Professional and Administrative Office
C-1 Neighborhood Commercial
C-2 Regional Commercial
C-C Commercial Center
C-B Central Business
PCD Planned Commercial Development
M-1 Light Manufacturing
M-2 General Manufacturing
M-3 Heavy Industrial
P Automobile ParkingRE Recreation
Ch Church OverlayOS Open Space
HOSP Hospital OverlayAD Architectural Design Overlay
FP-P Floodplain PrimaryFP-S Floodplain Secondary
AA Airport ApproachDI Drilling Island
PE Petroleum Extraction CombiningSC Senior Citizen Overlay
HD Hillside Development CombiningWM- West Ming Specific Plan
GPA/ZC 19-0342
MAP PACKAGE
Exhibit A
A. . .
V ~
!i BAKERSFIELD
Exhibit B
EXHIBIT "A"
ROSEDALE RIO-BRAVO WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
McALLISTER RANCH -WATER RECHARGE FACILITIES
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
BEING PORTIONS OF LOTS 20, 30, 31 AND 32 AS SHOWN UPON THE SALES MAP
OF LANDS OF KERN COUNTY LAND COMPANY FILED MAY 28, 1892, TRACT No. 6229 -
PHASE 1 PER MAP BOOK 56, PAGES 1 THROUGH 18, TRACT No. 5840-UNIT A PER MAP
BOOK 44, PAGES 38 THROUGH 42, ALL IN THE OFFICE OF THE KERN COUNTY
RECORDER; ALSO BEING PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 16 AND 21 THROUGH 23, TOWNSHIP
30 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, M.D.M., IN THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, COUNTY OF KERN,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
NORTHWEST UNIT
BEGINNING AT THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE
NORTH 00°47'05" EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF
SAID SECTION 21, A DISTANCE OF 2,664.15 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
SAID SECTION, ALSO BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE
NORTH 01°19'14" EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 16, A DISTANCE OF
2,638.51 FEET TO THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG SAID WEST LINE, NORTH 01°18'28" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 299.77
FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE KERN RIVER CANAL AS PER THAT
CERTAIN GRANT DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 4999, PAGES 431 AND 436 OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS; THENCE
NORTH 54°42'16" EAST, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, A DISTANCE OF 350.01 FEET TO THE
BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, HAVING A
RADIUS OF 550.00 FEET, FROM WHICH POINT A RADIAL LINE BEARS NORTH 34°33'52"
WEST; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°48'53",.AN ARC DISTANCE OF 94.21; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, NORTH 45°37'16" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 45.62
FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC
RAILROAD COMPANY -ASPHALTO BRANCH RIGHT-OF-WAY AS PER DEEDS
RECORDED IN BOOK 47, PAGE 356 AND BOOK 54, PAGE 262, BOTH OF DEEDS; THENCE
SOUTH 43°15'00" EAST, ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 426.01
FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 46°45'00" WEST, CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE, A
DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 43°15'00" EAST, CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE, A
DISTANCE OF 2,960.00 FEET; THENCE
P:\PROJECTS\17008.00-RRBWSOMR\Legals\17008EM01A_WATER STORAGE.docx DJB 6/27/2017
EXHIBIT "A"
ROSEDALE RIO-BRAVO WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
McALLISTER RANCH -WATER RECHARGE FACILITIES
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED)
NORTH 46°45'00" EAST, CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE, A
DISTANCE OF 103.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE
NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 3,280.57 FEET, FROM WHICH POINT A RADIAL
LINE BEARS NORTH 45°01'42" EAST; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE, SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID
CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00°25'29", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 24.32 FEET
TO THE BEGINNING OF A COMPOUND CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, HAVING A
RADIUS OF 2,914.59 FEET; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE, SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID
CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 33°09'18", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1,686.57
FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY,
HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,932.74 FEET, FROM WHICH POINT A RADIAL LINE BEARS
NORTH 10°09'19" EAST; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE, EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE,
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°13'29", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 472.18 FEET TO A
POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE
SOUTH 89°04'1 O" EAST, CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE AND SAID
SOUTH LINE, A DISTANCE OF 547.17 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID
SECTION 16, ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 22; THENCE
SOUTH 89°28'21" EAST, CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE AND ALONG
THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 22, A DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET; THENCE
LEAVING SAID SOUTHWESTERLY AND NORTH LINES, SOUTH 00°48'05" WEST, A
DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET; THENCE
NORTH 89°28'21" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 99.87 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF
THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE
LEAVING SAID EAST LINE, NORTH 89°04'10" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2,391.80 FEET;
THENCE
SOUTH 00°47'07" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2,555.35 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST-
WEST MID-SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE
NORTH 89°14'38" WEST, ALONG SAID EAST-WEST MID-SECTION LINE, A DISTANCE OF
2,891.66 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 324.70 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
P:\PROJECTS\17008.00-RRBWSDMR\Legals\17008EM01A_WATER STORAGE.docx DJS 6/29/2017
EXHIBIT "A"
ROSEDALE RIO-BRAVO WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
McALLISTER RANCH -WATER RECHARGE FACILITIES
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED)
NORTH UNIT
BEGINNING AT THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 22; THENCE
SOUTH 89°28'07" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 2,649.21 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER
OF SAID SECTION 22, ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23;
THENCE
SOUTH 89°21'16" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 23, A DISTANCE OF
2,639.67 FEET TO THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE
SOUTH 00°57'16" WEST, ALONG THE NORTH-SOUTH MID-SECTION LINE OF SAID
SECTION 23, A DISTANCE OF 940.09 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID
TRACT No. 6229 -PHASE 1; THENCE
NORTH 89°03'22" WEST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT No. 6229-PHASE 1,
A DISTANCE OF 400.64 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY,
HAVING A RADIUS OF 955.00 FEET; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18°10'31", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 302.94 FEET; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, NORTH 70°52'51" WEST, A DISTANCE OF
1,026.10 FEET; THENCE
LEAVING SAID NORTH LINE AND ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 10 OF SAID TRACT
No. 6229-PHASE 1 THE FOLLOWING SIXTEEN (16) COURSES:
1) SOUTH 19°07'09" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 375.00 FEET; THENCE
2) SOUTH 50°37'48" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 350.72 FEET; THENCE
3) SOUTH 68°12'12" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 90.91 FEET; THENCE
4) SOUTH 73°00'12" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 127.26 FEET; THENCE
5) SOUTH 76°38'18" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 300.00 FEET; THENCE
6) SOUTH 71°46'35" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 591.16 FEET; THENCE
7) NORTH 60°31'46" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 122.33 FEET; THENCE
8) NORTH 32°44'17" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 132.40 FEET; THENCE
9) NORTH 13°21'42" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 68.17 FEET; THENCE
P:\PROJECTS\17008.00-RRBWSDMR\Legals\17008EM01A_WATER STORAGE.docx DJB 612912017
EXHIBIT "A"
ROSEDALE RIO-BRAVO WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
McALLISTER RANCH -WATER RECHARGE FACILITIES
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED)
10) SOUTH 68°09'58" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 128.82 FEET; THENCE
11) SOUTH 65°56'30" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 345.60 FEET; THENCE
12) SOUTH 76°42'34" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 154.75 FEET; THENCE
13) SOUTH 79°32'55" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 260.22 FEET; THENCE
14) SOUTH 81°52'39" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 204.63 FEET; THENCE
15) SOUTH 86°34'01" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 69.28 FEET; THENCE
16) SOUTH 88°47'14" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 225.39 FEET; THENCE
LEAVING SAID NORTH LINE, NORTH 86°48'56" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 63.22 FEET TO
THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 10; THENCE ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 10
THE FOLLOWING TWENTY SEVEN (27) COURSES:
1) NORTH 88°53'40" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 90. 73 FEET; THENCE
2) NORTH 85°45'19" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 225.00 FEET; THENCE
3) NORTH 88°00'33" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 71.79 FEET; THENCE
4) SOUTH 81 °06'45" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 71.43 FEET; THENCE
5) SOUTH 72°31'42" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 201.30 FEET; THENCE
6) SOUTH 81°08'35" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 90.20 FEET; THENCE
7) NORTH 89°34'29" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 272.63 FEET; THENCE
8) NORTH 55°13'02" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 239.07 FEET; THENCE
9) NORTH 69°58'22" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 71.78 FEET; THENCE
10) SOUTH 80°22'30" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 205.11 FEET; THENCE
11) NORTH 79°31'18" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 111.13 FEET; THENCE
12) NORTH 60°18'25" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 112.87 FEET; THENCE
13) NORTH 54°07'59" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 70.45 FEET; THENCE
P:\PROJECTS\17008.00-RRBWSDMR\Legals\17008EM01A_WATER STORAGE.docx DJB 6/29/2017
EXHIBIT "A"
ROSEDALE RIO-BRAVO WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
McALLISTER RANCH -WATER RECHARGE FACILITIES
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED)
14) NORTH 63°41'38" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 70.10 FEET; THENCE
15) NORTH 80°28'35" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 229.40 FEET; THENCE
16) NORTH 86°58'22" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 55.18 FEET; THENCE
17) SOUTH 87°39'41" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 164.57 FEET; THENCE
18) NORTH 64°59'42" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 94.31 FEET; THENCE
19) NORTH 29°32'04" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 98.26 FEET; THENCE
20) NORTH 11°53'55" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 283.22 FEET; THENCE
21) NORTH 25°37'30" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 151.15 FEET; THENCE
22) NORTH 05°54'02" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 108.83 FEET; THENCE
23) NORTH 09°31'25" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 140.95 FEET; THENCE
24) NORTH 80°28'35" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 410.65 FEET; THENCE
25) SOUTH 09°31'25" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 198.92 FEET; THENCE
26) SOUTH 47°45'57" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 1,062.71 FEET; THENCE
27) SOUTH 47°24'37" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 330.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT No. 6229 -PHASE 1;
THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE THE FOLLOWING FOUR (4) COURSES:
1) SOUTH 42°35'23" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 185.86 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF
A CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 6,945.00 FEET;
THENCE
2) SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
02°19'29", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 281.79 FEET; THENCE
3) SOUTH 40°15'54" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 855.22 FEET; THENCE
4) SOUTH 39°23'49" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 28.54 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
EAST-WEST MID-SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION 22, THENCE
P:\PROJECTS\17008.00-RRBWSDMR\Legals\17008EM01A_WATER STORAGE.docx DJB 6/29/2017
EXHIBIT "A"
ROSEDALE RIO-BRAVO WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
McALLISTER RANCH -WATER RECHARGE FACILITIES
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED)
NORTH 89°32'14" WEST, ALONG SAID EAST-WEST MID-SECTION LINE, A DISTANCE OF
162.28 FEET TO THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 22, ALSO BEING THE
EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE
NORTH 89°14'38" WEST, ALONG THE EAST-WEST MID-SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION
21, A DISTANCE OF 2,390.95 FEET; THENCE
LEAVING SAID EAST-WEST MID-SECTION LINE, NORTH 00°47'07" EAST, A DISTANCE OF
2,555.35 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 89°04'10" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 2,391.80 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE
OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE
LEAVING SAID EAST LINE, SOUTH 89°28'21" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 99.87 FEET; THENCE
NORTH 00°48'05" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE
OF SAID SECTION 22; THENCE
SOUTH 89°28'21" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, A DISTANCE OF 2,549.10 FEET TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 347.62 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
SURPLUS AREA No. 1
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE
NORTH 00°45'11" EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 21, A DISTANCE OF
2,664.28 FEET TO THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE
SOUTH 89°14'38" EAST, ALONG THE EAST-WEST MID-SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION
21, A DISTANCE OF 5,282.61 FEET TO THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION
21, ALSO BEING THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 22; THENCE
SOUTH 89°32'14" EAST, ALONG THE EAST-WEST MID-SECTION LINE OF SAID SECTION
22, A DISTANCE OF 162.28 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT No.
6229 -PHASE 1; THENCE ALONG SAID WEST LINE THE FOLLOWING THIRTEEN (13)
COURSES:
1) SOUTH 39°23'49" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 301.50 FEET; THENCE
2) SOUTH 35°21'48" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 120.19 FEET; THENCE
3) SOUTH 40°03'53" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 188.79 FEET; THENCE
P:\PROJECTS\17008.00-RRBWSDMR\Legals\17008EM01A_WATER STORAGE.docx DJB 6/29/2017
EXHIBIT "A"
ROSEDALE RIO-BRAVO WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
McALLISTER RANCH -WATER RECHARGE FACILITIES
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED)
4) SOUTH 04°56'07" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 28.28 FEET; THENCE
5) SOUTH 49°56'07" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 83.03 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A
CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,549.00 FEET;
THENCE
6) SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
02°58'12", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 80.29 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-
TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF
1,546.97 FEET, FROM WHICH POINT A RADIAL LINE BEARS SOUTH 43°22'34"
EAST; THENCE
7) SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
24°26'47", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 660.05 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-
TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,545.00
FEET, FROM WHICH POINT A RADIAL LINE BEARS SOUTH 67°28'49" EAST;
THENCE
8) SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
21°43'06", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 585.64 FEET; THENCE
9) SOUTH 00°48'05" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 32.00 FEET; THENCE
10) SOUTH 02°29'54" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 540.28 FEET; THENCE
11) SOUTH 00°48'05" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 273.25 FEET; THENCE
12) SOUTH 45°48'05" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 28.28 FEET; THENCE
13) SOUTH 00°48'05" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 60.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE
NORTH 89°25'02" WEST, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, A DISTANCE OF 2,559.23 FEET TO
THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 21; THENCE
NORTH 89°25'21" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2,640.17 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 328.86 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
P:\PROJECTS\17008.00-RRBWSDMR\Legals\17008EM01A_WATER STORAGE.docx DJS 6/2912017
EXHIBIT "A"
ROSEDALE RIO-BRAVO WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
McALLISTER RANCH -WATER RECHARGE FACILITIES
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED)
SURPLUS AREA No. 2
BEGINNING AT THE NORTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23, ALSO BEING THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT No. 5840 -UNIT A; THENCE
SOUTH 89°21'59" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
SAID SECTION 23 AND THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT No. 5840-UNIT A, A
DISTANCE OF 2,639.20 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23 AND
THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT No. 5840 -UNIT A; THENCE
SOUTH 00°56'00" WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 23 AND THE EAST
LINE OF SAID TRACT No. 5840-UNIT A, A DISTANCE OF 2,640.50 FEET TO THE EAST
QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE
SOUTH 00°55'43" WEST, CONTINUING ALONG SAID EAST LINES, A DISTANCE OF
2,640.28 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23 AND THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT No. 5840 -UNIT A; THENCE
NORTH 89°23'51" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 23 AND THE
SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT No. 5840-UNIT A, A DISTANCE OF 2,641.13 FEET TO THE
SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 23, THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID
TRACT No. 5840 -UNIT A, AND THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT No. 6229 -
PHASE1;THENCE
NORTH 89°22'34" WEST, CONTINUING ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 23
AND ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT No. 6229-PHASE 1, A DISTANCE OF
1,479.40 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 26 OF SAID TRACT 6229 -PHASE
1; THENCE
LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE, NORTH 00°37'05" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID
LOT 26, A DISTANCE OF 1,050.69 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 26;
THENCE
NORTH 89°22'55" WEST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 26, A DISTANCE OF
120.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A
RADIUS OF 1,000.00 FEET; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°26'37", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 42.65 FEET; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, NORTH 86°56'18" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 451.55
FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF
1,000.00 FEET; THENCE
P:IPROJECTS\17008.00-RRBWSOMR\Legals\17008EM01A_WATER STORAGE.docx DJS 6/29/2017
EXHIBIT "A"
ROSEDALE RIO-BRAVO WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
McALLISTER RANCH -WATER RECHARGE FACILITIES
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED)
CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00°29'42", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 8.64 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF LOT 25 OF SAID TRACT 6229 -PHASE 1; THENCE
NORTH 00'56'38" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 25, A DISTANCE OF
1,228.09 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 23 OF SAID TRACT 6229 -PHASE
1; THENCE
SOUTH 89'03'22" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 23, A DISTANCE OF
505.22 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 17 OF SAID TRACT 6229-PHASE 1;
THENCE ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 17 THE FOLLOWING TWENTYONE (21)
COURSES:
1) NORTH 00'56'38" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 55.00 FEET; THENCE
2) NORTH 00°39'37" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 175.63 FEET; THENCE
3) SOUTH 89'03'22" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 6.72 FEET; THENCE
4) NORTH 00'56'38" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 114.60 FEET; THENCE
5) SOUTH 89'22'43" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 259.75 FEET; THENCE
6) NORTH 00'37'09" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 97.79 FEET; THENCE
7) NORTH 04'57'59" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 421.27 FEET; THENCE
8) NORTH 01°04'38" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 293.37 FEET; THENCE
9) NORTH 09°48'19" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 245.66 FEET; THENCE
10) NORTH 04'08'44" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 76.19 FEET; THENCE
11) NORTH 24°22'38" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 84.83 FEET; THENCE
12) NORTH 52'05'43" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 92.62 FEET; THENCE
13) NORTH 46'33'39" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 83.79 FEET; THENCE
14) NORTH 28°20'08" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 71.34 FEET; THENCE
15) NORTH 08°35'16" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 71.63 FEET; THENCE
16) NORTH 01°45'45" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 55.61 FEET; THENCE
P:\PROJECTS\17008.00-RRBWSDMR\Legals\17008EM01A_WATER STORAGE.docx DJB 6/29/2017
EXHIBIT "A"
ROSEDALE RIO-BRAVO WATER STORAGE DISTRICT
McALLISTER RANCH -WATER RECHARGE FACILITIES
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED)
17) NORTH 54°18'16" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 66.80 FEET; THENCE
18) NORTH 09°57'06" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 60.26 FEET; THENCE
19) NORTH 00°58'01" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 147.62 FEET; THENCE
20) NORTH 13°08'39" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 96.68 FEET; THENCE
21) NORTH 19°04'53" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 90.26 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT No. 6229 -PHASE 1; THENCE
SOUTH 70°52'51" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, A DISTANCE OF 581. 12 FEET TO THE
BEGINNING OF A CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 955.00 FEET;
THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18°10'31", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 302.94 FEET; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, SOUTH 89°03'22" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 400.64
FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT No. 6229 -PHASE 1 AND A POINT
ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT 5840 -UNIT A; THENCE
NORTH 00°57'16" EAST, ALONG SAID WEST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 940.09 FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 483.68 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
MCINTOSH '
&ASSOCIATES-~
661-834-4814 • 661-834-0972
2001 Wheelan Court • Bakersfield, CA 93309
' ,,___,(1
1 ✓ 7
*
P:\PROJECTS\17008.00-RRBWSDMR\Legals\17008EM01A_WATER STORAGE.docx DJS 6/29/2017