HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD NO 4112ORDINANCE NO.
4112
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 17.06.020 (ZONE MAP
NO. 123-24) OF TITLE SEVENTEEN OF THE BAKERSFIELD
MUNICIPAL CODE BY CHANGING THE ZONING FROM AN MH
(MOBILE HOME) ZONE TO PCD (PLANNED COMMERCIAL
DEVELOPMENT) ZONE ON 37.5 ACRES GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF STATE ROUTE:_ 99, NORTH
OF PANAMA LANE (FILE # 02-0193).
WHEREAS, in accordance with the procedure set forth in tile provisions of Title 17 of
the Municipal Code of the City of Bakersfield, the Planning Commission held a public hearing
on a petition to change the land use zoning of those certain properties in the City of Bakersfield
generally located on the east side of State Route 99, north of Pan~ma Lane, shown on Exhibit
"1 ;" and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 160-02 on December 19, 2002, the Planning
Commission recommended approval and adoption of an ordinance amending Title 17 of the
Municipal Code to approve concurrent Zone Change No. 02-0193 as delineated on attached
Zoning Map No.123-24 marked Exhibit "7", by this Council and this Council has fully considered
the recommendations made by the Planning Commission as set forth in that Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, as a result of said hearing, did make several
general and specific findings of fact which warranted preparation ol an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) and changes in zoning of the subject property from an MH (Mobile Home) zone to
a PCD (Planned Commercial Development) zone, and the Council has considered said findings
and all appear to be true and correct; and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Bakersfield, in accordance with the provisions of
Section 65355 of the Government Code, conducted and held a public hearing on
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2003 on the above described Case No. 02-0193 of the
proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of the Metropolitar Bakersfield 2010 General
Plan, notice of time and place of the hearing having been given at least ten (10) calendar days
before the hearing by publication in the Bakersfield Californian, a local newspaper of general
circulation; and
WHEREAS, Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control filed an appeal of the Planning
Commission's recommendation for this project; and
WHEREAS, the law and regulations relating to the preparation and adoption of EIRs, as
set forth in CEQA and City of Bakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures, have been duly
followed by city staff, Planning Commission and this Council; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield is the Lead Agency for ~aid project; and
WHEREAS, for the above-described GPA, an Initial Stud¢ was conducted and it was
determined that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment and an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 160-02 on December 19, 2002, the Planning
Commission recommended approval and adoption of Case No. 02-0193 subject to conditions,
and mitigation measures listed in Exhibit "3" and shown on Exhibit "2," and this Council has fully
considered the findings made by the Planning Commission as set forth in that Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the applicant agreed to all conditions of approval, including mitigation
measures; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered and hereby makes the following findings:
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15090, the lead agency (City of
Bakersfield) adopted a resolution certifying that:
(a) The final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; and
(b)
The final EIR was presented to the Lead Agency and that the Lead
Agency reviewed and considered the information contained in the final
EIR prior to recommending approval the project.
In accordance with CEQA Guideline Sections 15151 and 15090, the Final EIR
was considered for adequacy, completeness and good faith effort at fu~l
disclosure and has been completed in compliance with CEQA.
In accordance with CEQA Guideline Sections 15151 and 15090, the Final EIR
was presented to the Lead Agency and the Lead Agency reviewed and
considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to approving the
project.
In accordance with CEQA Section 15091 findings and supporting rationale
regarding identified significant environmental effects and related mitigation
measures is attached hereto as Exhibit "4."
In accordance with CEQA Section 15092, the City Council finds that except for
air quality and noise impacts, all other impacts on the environment identified as
significant in said EIR have either been eliminated or the effects have been
reduced to less than significant, as shown in findings under Section 15091.
In accordance with CEQA Section 15092, the City Council determined that the
remaining significant impacts to air quality and noise found to be unavoidable
under Section 15091 are acceptable due to a Statement of Overriding
considerations as described in Section 15093, as shown in attached Exhibit "5."
In accordance with CEQA Section 15093, a Statement of Overriding
Considerations with supporting reasons related to air quality and noise impacts is
recommended for adoption as shown on attached Exhibit "5."
Conditions of approval attached hereto as Exhibit "3"are needed to provide for
orderly development, and the public health, safety and welfare.
Exhibit "3" attached hereto also contains all mitigation measures listed in the EIR
for the project and the conditions required pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal
Code Chapter 17.53, Site Plan Review that the applicant/developer must satisfy.
10.
The applicant, Panama 99 Properties, LLC, Inc. agreed to implement all
mitigation measures identified in the environmental analysis contained within the
EIR, and all conditions of approval and all Site Plan Review conditions contained
in Exhibit "3."
11.
In accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, Exhibit "6" attached
hereto contains the monitoring program for implementing the adopted mitigation
measures.
SECTION 1.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Bakersfield
as follows:
true and correct.
All of the foregoing recitals incorporated herein, are hereby found to be
2. All required public notices have been given.
3. The Final Environmental Impact Report for GPA/ZC 02-0193 has been
certified and adopted by the City Council.
4. The report of the Planning Commission, including maps and all reports
and papers relevant thereto, transmitted by the Secretary of the Planning Commission to the
City Council, is hereby received and accepted.
5. The Statement of Facts, Findings, and Mitigation Measures attached in
Exhibit "4" are hereby adopted for GPA No. 02-0193.
6. That certain environmental impacts regarding air quality are considered
unavoidable and cannot feasibly be mitigated to a less than significant level. Moreover, the
project alternatives analyzed in the Final Environmental Impact Report would not feasibly
mitigate the impacts. These impacts are discussed in attached Exhibit "4." Notwithstanding
disclosure of these impacts, the City Council is approving the project based on the overriding
considerations as set forth in the "Statement of Overriding Considerations" attached in Exhibit
7. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached in Exhibit "6"
is hereby adopted for GPA No. 02-0193.
8. The City Council hereby denies the appeal.
9. Section 17.06.020 (Zoning Map) of the Municipal Code of the City of
Bakersfield be and the same is hereby amended by changing the land use zoning of that
certain property in said City, the boundaries of which property is shown on Zoning Map. No.
123-24 marked Exhibit "7" attached hereto and made a part hereof, and are more specifically
described in attached Exhibit "8 ".
10. Such zone change is hereby made subject to the conditions of approval
including mitigation measures, listed in attached Exhibit "3", subject to approval of GPA 02-
0193.
SECTION 2.
This ordinance shall be posted in accordance with the Bakersfield Municipal
Code and shall become effective not less than thirty (30) days from and after the date of its
passage.
......... 000 .........
the
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance was passed and adopted, by
Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on
FE~ 2. 6 2003 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBER COUCH, CARSON, BENHAM, MAGGARD, HANSON, SULLIVAN, SALVAGGIO
NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ~
ABSTAIN:COUNCiLMEMBER ¢~.(~,¢~
ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBER ~
PAMELA A. McCARTHY, ,.~MC
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APPR/~,~ED FEB 2.6 2003
H/~RVE'C'L. HALL
Mayor of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED as to f~m
BART J. THILTGEN
City Attorney
Exhibits 1. zone Change Location Map 2. Planned Commercial Development Preliminary Site Plan
3. Conditions of approval (incorporating mitigation measures)
4. Statement of Facts, Findings, and Mitigation Measures
5. Statement of Overriding Considerations
6. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
7. Zone Map No. 123-24
8. Legal Description
jeng // S:~ZoneChangelPanama99tcclOZC-CC. doc II February 13, 2003
N
9g
0¥0~1
X
X
mmm
EXHIBIT "3"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GPA/PCD ZC 02-0193
AESTHETICS:
Mitiqation Measures:
Construction equipment staging areas shall be located in the southwest quarter of the site and
appropriate screening (i.e., temporary fencing with opaque material), used to buffer views of
construction equipment and material, when feasible. Staging locations shall be indicated on
project Final Development Plans and grading Plans are subject to review and approval of the
City. Compliance with this measure is subject to periodic field inspection by City Staff.
(Mitigation Measure 5.1-1)
No metal storage containers and no semi-trailer storage shall be allowed within the Project area.
(Mitigation Measure 5.1-2a)
For outside sales and/or storage of merchandise, materials and/or equipment, there shall be a
designated area specifically identified on the final site plan for such uses. These areas shall be
completely screened by a minimum 6-foot high solid wall or fence. Items may not be stacked higher
than the height of the screen. Outside sales and/or storage areas shall not be located on sidewalks
or other locations, which may hinder views or pathways of pedestrians or vehicles. The outside
area shall be included in calculating the parking requirements for the shopping center. (Mitigation
Measure 5.1-2b)
Landscaping along State Route 99 adjacent the truck loading area shall include evergreen shrubs,
ground cover and trees, which visually buffer the truck loading area from public view along this
portion of State Route 99. (Mitigation Measure 5.1-2c)
Discretionary Conditions:
Lowe's elevations shall be upgraded to improve aesthetic continuity with Major 1 building.
(Planning)
On the north side of the major tenant buildings, developer shall construct a minimum 16-foot high
wall adjacent the truck loading docks to shield the trucks and loading activities from residential
homes located north of the project site. (Planning)
All mechanical and electrical equipment (to be installed on the structure or on the ground) shall be
adequately screened from public view. The screening shall be considered as an element of the
overall design and must blend with the architectural design of the building and/or landscaping as
appropriate. Method of screening shall be approved by the Planning Department. (Planning)
An 8-foot high masonry wall shall be required along the entire north and east boundaries. Portion of
wall adjacent the sump shall be located on the south side of the sump. The only access allowed
along the north boundary shall be for emergency access near the end of Walton Drive. The
emergency access gate shall be designed to be aesthetically compatible with the masonry wall as
approved by the Planning Director. (Planning)
S:~ZoneChangelPanarna991cctExh-conditions perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 2 of 21
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Prior to or with submittal of final development plans, the applicant shall submit an application for a
Comprehensive sign Plan. No signage, except for miscellaneous temporary construction signage
as allowed by the City's Sign Ordinance, is permitted prior to approval of a comprehensive sign
plan. (Planning)
16.
17.
18.
All trees around the perimeter of the site shall be minimum size of 24-inch box trees. At least 50%
of the trees internal to the site shall be a minimum 24-inch box size trees. All trees adjacent to
buildings shall be a minimum 24-inch box size trees. All other trees shall be a minimum 15-gallon
size. (Planning)
The number of parking spaces facing Freeway 99 shall be reduced from 58 to no more than 29
spaces (a 50% reduction). The area where parking spaces are eliminated shall be landscaped with
evergreen 24-inch box trees. (Planning)
The "landscape area" in the south central portion of the project site shall include turf and trees
(minimum 24-inch box size), five (5) picnic tables with benches, and trash receptacles. (Planning)
(minimum size), turf and shrubs. (Planning)
Trees in the parking areas shall be placed at 1 tree for every 6 parking spaces with maximum
spacing of 65 feet between trees. (Planning)
Building pad areas, which will not be built on immediately after grading shall be hydroseeded or
turfed and maintained along with other required landscaping. Pad areas to be turfed shall be
labeled as such on final development plans and shall be provided with a perimeter barrier to prevent
vehicular access. (Planning)
Prior to the start of construction activities, Developer shall install temporary fencing that includes a
6-foot high silt fence along the entire north property line of the project site (including behind Lowe's)
to preclude truck access into the residential neighborhood and limit blowing dust. (Planning)
Emergency generator and trash compactors shall be enclosed by an 8-foot masonry wall.(Planning)
Semi-truck trailer parking on the project site shall be limited to three (3) days.
Regular maintenance of the project site shall be provided through C.C. & R.'s.
approved by the City of Bakersfield.
LIGHT AND GLARE:
Mitigation Measure:
19.
C.C. & R.'s shall be
The proposed Project shall adhere to the following lighting standards and requirements
(Mitigation Measure 5.1-3):
Provide elevation detail for poles, luminaries and foundation heights to verify luminaire
mounting height above ground;
Jettg // S:~ZoneChange'xPanatna99Xc'c~Exh-co~iditiot~s perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 3 of 21
Specif7 fully shielded luminaries as defined by the IESNA to mitigate glare;
Adjust placement of perimeter luminaries with house side shields to mitigate light spill
and glare; and
Provide photometric analysis indicating that there is no light spill on adjacent residential
properties.
Light fixtures mounted on the sides or rear of major tenant buildings must be designed to
project light down (not out) and the light source must be completely shielded from
adjacent residential property.
Lights may be shielded with covers, baffles or other mechanisms as approved by the
City Building Director.
Discretionary Condition:
20.
Lights mounted on the north and east sides of the two major buildings shall be no higher than 8
feet. Lights shall be directed and or shielded to shine downward and away from adjacent residential
property. (Planning)
PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY:
Discretionary Condition:
21.
Prior to submittal of Final Development Plans, the applicant shall submit a Security Plan to the
Bakersfield Police Department for review and approval. (Contact the Planning Department for name
of Police Department contact person when ready to submit the Security Plan to the Police
Department.) With submittal of Final Development Plans, evidence of approval by the Police
Department shall be provided to the City Planning Department. The following measures shall be
incorporated into the Security Plan:
· Provision of on-site security guards;
· Security lighting at parking areas, loading areas, and walkways;
· Use of dead bolts, closed-circuit televisions, security lighting and alarms, and other design
features to increase on-site security;
· Elimination of dead spaces and areas of potential concealment; and
· Provision of visible addresses and access to emergency vehicles.
(Planning)
Jeng ff S:XZoneChat~ge~Panama99Xcc~E~th-cotlditions perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 4 of 21
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION:
Mitigation Measures
22.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project applicant shall comply with the Metropolitan
Bakersfield Transportation Impact Fee Program (RTIF) as more specifically listed in Table 5.3-7,
Future Street Improvements and Local Mitigation Percentages, of the Final EIR (see next page for
Table 5.3-7). The Project applicant shall participate in the improvements required on a pro-rata fair-
share basis. (Mitigation Measure 5.3-1a) (Note: In Table 5.3-7 "Panama Lane west of Colony
Street," Project % Share has been revised on next page for clarification.)
Table 5.3-7 of GPA/ZC 020-193 EIR
Future Street Improvements and Local Mitigation Percentages
Improvements not Project % Sham
Total Improvements Covered by RTIF For Local
Intersection Required by 2020 * (Local Mitigation) Mitigation
South H Street at McKee Road Install Signal - 1 WBL, 1 WBR, 2 NBL,
1 NBT, 1NBL, 2 SBL, 1 SBT, 1 SBR Install Signal 2.16%
Hosking Road at Wible Road Install Signal- 2 EBL 2EBT, 1 EBR, 4.10%
2WBL, 2 WBT, 1 WBR, 1NB., 2 NBT, 1 Install Signal
NBR, 1 SBL 2 SBT, 1 SBR
Hosking Road at South H Street Install Signal- 1 EBL, 1 WBL, 1 NBL, 1 3.15%
NBT, 1 NBR, 1 SBT, 1 SBR install Signal
Berkshire Road at Wible Road Install Signal - 1EBL, 1 WBL, 1 NBL, 1 6.34%
NBT, 1 NBR, 1 SBR, 1 SBT, 1 SBR Install Signal
Berkshire Road at S. H Street Install Signal - 1 WBL, 1 NBL, 1 NBT, 1
NBR, 1 SBL, 1 SBT, 1 SBR (EB Lanes
will be built by adjacent development) Install Signal 4.69%
Panama Lane at Gosford Road Install Signal- 1 EBL, 2 WBT, 1 WBR, 2 2.16%
NBL, 2 NBT, 1 NBR, 1 SBL, 2 SBT, 1
SBR
Panama Lane at Ashe Road Install Signal - 1 EBL, 2 EBT, 1 EBR, 2 2.87%
NBL, 2 NBT, 1 NBR install Signal
Panama Lane at Akers Road 1 NRB 1 NBR 6.94%
Panama Lane at Wible Road 1 WBR 1 WBR 9.99%
Panama Lane at 99 SB Off Ramp 1 SBR 1SBR 11.00% (33.10%)
Panama Lane at Colony Street 1EBL, 1 EBR *, 1 WBL 2 WBR, 1 SBL, 2 1 EBL, 1 WBL, 2 WBR, 1 100%
SBR SBL, 2 SBL
Panama Lane at S. H Street 1 EBL, 1 NBT, 1 WBL, 1 WBT, 1 NBL, 1 1 EBL, 1 WBL, 1 NBL, 1 10.60%
SBL, 1 SBR SBL, 1 SBR
Panama Lane at Monitor Street Install Signal- Stripe for ultimate lane Install Signal 8.13%
usage
Wible Road at Harris Road 1 EBL 1 WBL, 1 WBR, 1 NBL, 1 NBR, 1 1 EBL, 1 WBL, 1 WBR, 1 3.68%
SBL, 1 SBR NBL, 1 NBR, 1 SBL, 1
SBR
White Lane at Wible Road ** 1 EBR, 1 WBR, 1 NBT, 1 SBT
Jeng // S:~ZoneChange~Panama99Xcc~h-condition* perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 5 of 21
Improvements not Project % Share
Total Improvements Covered by RTIF For Local
Intersection Required by 2020 * (Local Mitigation) Uitigation
White Lane at 99 SB Off Ramp ** 1 EBT, 1 WBT, 1SRB **
White Lane at SR 99 NB Off Ramp ** install Signal - 1 EBT, 1 WBT
Panama Lane west of Colony Street Right - most WB for "NB SR-99 only" Right - most WB for "NB 7.01% of portion of
lane SR-99 only" Lane the cost that is
determined by City
to be responsibility of
new development
· Condition of approval for Southerly Project by Sierra Pacific Development
· *To be built with current project under design by the City of Bakersfield
(%) Caltrans Percent Share
NB - Northbound SB - Southbound WB - Westbound EB - Eastbound
L- Left Turn Lane T Through Lane R - Right Turn Lane
23.
Various roadways and intersections in the Project vicinity fall below a LOS C by the year 2020 and
are not a part of the Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation Impact Fee Program (RTIF). In order
to maintain LOS C for year 2020+, prior to application for building permit, the Project
applicantJengineer shall submit for approval by the City Engineer, estimates and fee calculations for
the fair share of local mitigation identified in the traffic impact study/EIR. At the time of building
permit issuance, the applicant shall contribute the fair share of local mitigation fees based upon the
approved calculations. The following is a listing of required intersections and roadway
improvements (Mitigation Measure 5.3-1b):
Intersection Improvements
South H Street at McKee Road: Install signal (LOS C);
Hosking Road at Wible Road: Install signal (LOS C);
Hosking Road at South H Street: Install signal (LOS C);
Berkshire Road at Wible Road: Install signal (LOS B);
Berkshire Road at South H Street: Install signal (LOS B);
Panama Lane at Gosford Road: Install signal (LOS C);
Panama Lane at Ashe Road: Install signal (LOS B);
Panama Lane at Monitor Street: Install signal (LOS C);
White Lane at SR-99 Northbound Off-Ramp: Install signal (LOS B).
Roadway Improvements
Panama Lane at Akers Road: Add northbound right turning lane (LOS C);
Panama Lane at Wible Road: Add westbound right turning lane (LOS C);
Panama Lane at SR~99 Southbound Off-Ramp: Add southbound right turning dane (LOS
C);
Jeng // S:~ZoneChange~Panama99~'e~Exh-conditions perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 6 of 21
Panama Lane at Colony Street: Add eastbound left turning lane, westbound left turning lane,
two westbound right turning lanes, southbound left turning lane and two southbound right
turning lanes (LOS C). Improvement is required prior to opening day;
Panama Lane at South H Street: Add eastbound left turning lane, westbound left turning lane,
northbound left turning lane, southbound left turning lane, and southbound right turning lane
(LOS C);
Wible Road at Harris Road: Add eastbound left turning lane, westbound left turning lane,
westbound right turning lane, northbound left turning lane, northbound right turning lane,
southbound left turning lane and southbound right turning lane (LOS C);
White Lane at Wible Road: Add eastbound right turning lane, westbound right turning lane,
northbound through lane, and southbound through lane (LOS D);
White Lane at SR-99 Southbound Oft-Ramp: Add eastbound through lane, westbound through
lane and south bound right turning lane (LOS D); and
White Lane at SR-99 Northbound Off-Ramp: Add eastbound through lane and westbound
through lane (LOS B).
24. The unsignalized access location along Panama Lane shall be modified to prohibit a left turn movement
out of the site. (Mitigation Measure 5.3-2a)
25. The center lane for the proposed extension of Colony Street exiting the site shall be striped for
shared left turn/through movement instead of only a through movement at the intersection at
Panama Lane. Improvement is required prior to opening day. (Mitigation Measure 5.3-2b)
In addition, developer shall study modification of northbound Colony Street, from Panama Lane, to
add a left turn lane for the In N Out Burger driveway, and 2 through lanes.
26. In order to address the westbound taper between the northbound off-ramp and Colony Street, final
design plans for the proposed Project shall convert the right-most westbound lane into a "Northbound
SR-99 Only" lane. (Mitigation Measure 5.3-2c)
Discretionary Conditions:
27. Although the following are improvements listed in the above-mentioned Mitigation Measures for Traffic,
the following shall be required to be completed for Opening Day. (Public Works)
25.1 The intersection improvements at Panama Lane and Colony Street.
25.2 All median, channelization and striping changes on Panama Lane, including re-striping No. 3
west bound lane as a trap right lane into the Freeway 99 north bound on-ramp.
Jeng ff S:~ZoneChatige'xPatianta99~'c~E~h-cottditiotts perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 7 of 21
28.
Prior to an application being deemed complete for land division, development, boundary adjustment, or
other approval for the GPA/ZC site, the following shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer (Public Works):
28.1 Submit an overall sewer and drainage plan for the entire project site for review and approval by
the City Engineer. Provide a drainage easement for the retention basin site of a size and
configuration to meet ultimate retention requirements. Grant flowage easements as necessary.
28.2 Provide fully executed dedication of Colony Street on the north side of Panama Lane for
6 lanes.
28.3 Provide fully executed dedication of Panama Lane for additional lanes.
28.4 Dedicate an additional 10 feet on the south side of Maurice Street. Construct a curb,
gutter and sidewalk. Developer to landscape north side of wall and maintain it.
28.5 Remove the cross gutter on Panama at Colony. Construct a drain inlet to the onsite
retention basin.
28.6 Construct full width landscape median islands.
29.
The entire area project area shall be included in the Consolidated Maintenance District. The
applicant shall pay all fees for inclusion of the entire GPA/ZC site in the Consolidated Maintenance
District. (Public Works)
30.
Developer shall consult with Golden Empire Transit District (GET) prior to submittal of Final Site
Plan Review. Developer shall construct a bus shelter and turnout to accommodate at least 2
busses within the project site. Developer shall submit a letter from GET with the Final Site Plan
Review, which indicates GET is satisfied with the bus shelter/turnout location and design. If the bus
shelter/turnout is located adjacent Freeway 99, enhanced landscaping to screen the shelter from
Freeway 99 shall be required. At a minimum, 24-inch box size evergreen trees shall be planted and
shrubs. This landscaping plan shall be approved by the Planning Director. (Planning)
31.
In addition to the landscaped and pedestrian friendly walkways shown on the site plan, the
developer shall also add such a (north-south oriented) walkway to separate parking areas in the
vicinity of the dashed line separating the two major stores shown on the site plan. This would result
in the parking lot being divided into modules of approximately 400-450 spaces with landscaped
walkways in between. (Planning)
32.
In addition to the reciprocal access shown on the PCD for parcels adjacent to the south, the applicant
shall provide for reciprocal access to the "Not a Part" parcel on the northeast corner of Colony Street
and Panama Lane. (Planning)
33.
A minimum of two bicycle racks at each major store shall be provided to encourage and accommodate
bicycle use. (Planning)
34. The driveway area behind the Wal-Mart building will be striped and signed to prohibit truck parking.
dettg ff S:~oneChangeX, Pana~na99¥c~E,,,h-conditio.'ts perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 8 of 21
35.
The applicant shall construct a deceleration (right turn) lane on the westbound portion of Panama
Lane to improve access to the easterly driveway entry if the applicant is able to obtain the right-of-
way for the deceleration lane. If the applicant is unable to obtain right-of-way for the deceleration
lane, the applicant will not be required to construct the deceleration lane. The applicant shall submit
documentation regarding the status of deceleration lane with final development plans to the
Planning Director. (See attached Sketch lA)
36.
Developer shall provide a marked crosswalk between the parking area and the landscaped area
located near the Colony Street entrance.
AIR QUALITY:
Mitigation Measures
37.
The following mitigation measures shall be utilized during the construction phase of the Project to
reduce construction exhaust emissions (Mitigation Measure 5.4-1a):
Properly and routinely maintain all construction equipment, as recommended by
manufacturer manuals, to control exhaust emissions.
Shut down equipment when not in use for extended periods of time to reduce
emissions associated with idling engines.
Encourage ride sharing and use of transit transportation for construction employee
commuting to the project sites.
Use electric equipment for construction whenever possible in lieu of fossil fuel-fired
equipment.
Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations; this may
include ceasing of construction activity during the peak-hour of vehicular traffic on
adjacent roadways.
38.
Construction of the project requires the implementation of control measures set forth under
Regulation VIII, Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.
The following mitigation measures, in addition to those required under Regulation VIII, shall be
implemented to reduce fugitive dust emissions associated with the Project (Mitigation Measure 5.4-1b):
All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for
construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water,
chemical stabilized suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover, or
vegetative ground cover.
All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively
stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
Jeng // S:~ZoneChangeV°anama99Nrc~Exh-conditions perCCdoc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPAJZC 02-0193
Page 9 of 21
39.
All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut & fill, and
demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing
application of water or by presoaking.
When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectively
wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least six inches of freeboard space from
the top of the container shall be maintained.
All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from
adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is
expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to
limit the visible dust emissions. Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden)
Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of
outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust
emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or
more feet from the site and at the end of each workday.
Any site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout.
Asphalt-concrete paving shall comply with San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
District Rule 4641 and restrict the use of cutback, slow-cure and emulsified asphalt
paving materials.
Grading activities shall cease during periods of high winds (greater than 20 mph over
a one-hour period).
Construction-related vehicle speeds shall be limited to 15 mph on all unpaved areas
at the construction site,
Wash off construction and haul trucks to minimize the removal of mud and dirt from
the project sites.
The Project shall comply with Title 24 of the California Energy Efficient Standards for Residential
and Non-Residential Buildings. These requirements, along with the following mitigation measures,
shall be incorporated into the project design (Mitigation Measure 5.4-2a):
Use of Iow-NOx emission water heaters.
Provision of shade trees to reduce building cooling requirements.
Installation of energy-efficient and automated air conditioners.
Exterior windows shall all be double-paned glass.
Energy-efficient (Iow-sodium) parking lights shall be used.
Jeng // S:VZo~wChange~Panama99~'cXExh-conditions perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 10 of 21
40.
Transportation control measures and design features shall be incorporated into the Project to
reduce emissions from mobile sources. The following control measure is recommended to provide
a strategy to reduce vehicle trips, vehicle use, vehicle miles traveled, and vehicle idling and traffic
congestion for the purpose of reducing motor vehicle emissions: Streets and traffic signals for
intersections and street segments that may impact the surrounding local roadway system due to
Project-generated traffic shall be improved. Specific mitigation measures for improving the level of
service on congested roadways is presented in Section 5.3, Traffic and Circulation. (Mitigation
Measure 5.4-2b)
NOISE:
Mitigation Measure:
41.
A minimum 8-foot-high block wall shall be constructed along the north perimeter of the Wal-Mart
store from the northwest property corner to the approximate location of the northeast corner of the
Wal-Mart store. (Mitigation Measure 5.5-3) (Note: Wall requirement expanded with Condition No. 8.)
Discretionary Condition:
42.
No exterior amplified public address system shall be allowed. In addition, the amplified sound system
in the outdoor nursery sales area shall be designed so as not to disturb adjacent residential homes.
43. Hours of deliver for semi-trailer trucks shall be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 10 p.m.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measures:
44.
Habitat Conservation fees for the Project shall be calculated based on the fee in effect at the time
payable to the Planning Department prior to the issuance of an urban development permit as
defined in the Implementation/Management agreement for the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat
Conservation Plan. Upon payment of fees, the applicant shall receive acknowledgement of
compliance with the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan. (Mitigation Measure 5.6-1a)
45.
Pursuant to the terms of the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan
(Implementation/Management Agreement Section 4.7.4), the Urban Development Permittee is
required to accomplish the following in regards to the San Joaquin Kit Fox dens located at the
Project site (Mitigation Measure 5.6-1b):
Notify U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and
Game (CDFG) at least five (5) business days prior to the initiation of any ground disturbance
activities, of the intent to grade the area. Under the terms of the MBHCP implementing
agreement, the wildlife agencies are responsible to arrange for relocation of kit fox if they
deem it is appropriate and feasible;
Jeng // S:~ZmleChange~Panama99~'c~Exh-conditions perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page11 of 21
Eliminate the known den(s) in the following manner which will allow the kit fox to escape the
construction area prior to grading:
All known San Joaquin Kit Fox dens that will be unavoidably destroyed by project
actions shall be carefully excavated by or under the direct supervision of a qualified
wildlife biologist;
- Dens shall be completely excavated and subsequently back-filled and compacted to
prevent later use by kit foxes prior to onset of project construction;
- Dens shall be monitored for three (3) days prior to excavation to ensure that dens are
not occupied by kit foxes when excavated;
- If a kit fox is found inadvertently inside a den during excavation, the animal(s) shall be
allowed to escape unhindered.
46.
The MBHCP requires certain take avoidance measures for the San Joaquin Kit Fox. MBHCP
guidelines regarding tracking and excavation shall be followed to prevent entrapment of kit fox in
dens. Specific measures during the construction phase of the Project shall be implemented and
include the following (Mitigation Measure 5.6-1c):
A preconstruction survey shall be conducted on the proposed Project site prior to site
grading to search for any additional native kit fox dens;
All pipes, culverts or similar structures with a diameter of four inches or greater shall be kept
capped to prevent entry of kit fox. If they are not capped or otherwise covered, they shall be
inspected daily prior to burial or closure to ensure no kit foxes, or other protected species,
become entrapped;
Excavations shall either be constructed with escape ramps or be covered to prevent
entrapment, or the site(s) could be protected during construction, such as with a wildlife
exclusion fence, which would eliminate the possibility of ranging animals from being harmed
during construction; and
All food, garbage and plastic shall be disposed of in closed containers and regularly
removed from the site to minimize attracting ranging kit fox or other animals.
47.
Prior to Grading Permit issuance, the Project applicant shall comply with the following Burrowing
Owl (raptor) nest mitigation (Mitigation Measure 5.6-1d):
If site grading is proposed during the raptor nesting season (February through
September), a focuses survey for raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified
raptor biologist prior to grading activities in order to identify active nests in areas
potentially impacted by project implementation;
Jeng // S:~Zo~eChat~ge'xPaaa.ta99~'c~Exh-cottditions perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
G PA/ZC 02-0193
Page 12 of 21
If construction is proposed to take place during the raptor nesting/breeding season
(February through September), no construction activity shall take place within 500
feet of an active nest until the young have fledged (as determined by a qualified
biologist). Any nests that must be removed as a result of project implementation
shall be removed during the non-breeding season (October-January);
Preconstruction surveys shall include a survey for Burrowing Owl. If active
Burrowing Owl burrows are detected outside of breeding season (September 1
through January 31), passive and/or active relocation efforts may be undertake, if
approved by CDFG and USFWS. If active Burrowing Owl burrows are detected
during breeding season (February 1 through August 31 ), no disturbance to these
burrows shall occur without obtaining appropriate permitting through the Migratory
Bird Treaty Act.
If construction is initiated during the nesting season and active eggs or nests are
identified in the preconstruction survey, the applicant shall consult with the USFWS
and California Department of Fish and Game to conduct issuance of a Migratory Bird
Permit and burrow closure prior to the nesting season.
48.
The presence of any previously unidentified protected species which are not addressed in the
MBHCP, including those protected under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act, shall be avoided
and evaluated by a qualified biologist prior to construction. The USFWS and CDFG should be
notified of previously unreported protected species. Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife
shall be reported immediately to the CDFG and USFWS. (Mitigation Measure 5.6-1e)
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measures:
49.
If archaeological or paleontological resources are discovered during excavation and grading
activities on-site, the contractor shall stop all work and the developer shall retain a qualified
archaeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action. Salvage
operation requirements in Appendix K of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines shall
be followed and the treatment of discovered Native American remains shall comply with State codes
and regulations of the Native American Heritage Commission. (Mitigation Measure 5.7-1)
50.
Should any human bone be encountered during any earth removal or disturbance activities, all
activity shall cease immediately and a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor shall be
immediately contacted, who shall then immediately notify the Director of Development. The Director
of the Department of Development Services shall contact the Corner pursuant to Section 5097.98
and 5097.99 of the Public Resources Code relative to Native American remains. Should the corner
determine the human remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission
shall be contacted pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. (Mitigation Measure 5.7-2)
Je~tg // S:XYG)~eCba~tge~Paaa~na9qXcc~Exh-co~tditions perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 13 of 21
OPEN SPACE PARK:
Discretionary Condition:
51.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, or recordation of a subdivision map, whichever occurs first,
the developer shall compensate the City for the loss of the 3 acres of land designated OS-P (Open
Space-Park) by payment of a $75,000 fee. Amount to be used for park site acquisition as
determined appropriate by the City Recreation and Parks Department. (Planning)
SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE OF FINAL PLANS:
Discretionary Conditions:
52.
Square footages of individual structures may be less than that depicted on the plans but cannot exceed
a 5% increase in the square footage shown in the plans. In the event of any increase or portion thereof,
the developer is shall comply with the City's Parking Ordinance. (Planning)
53.
Final landscaping plans shall be in substantial conformance with the preliminary landscaping plans, as
conditioned in this exhibit. (Planning)
OTHER CONDITIONS:
54.
If acceptable to IN-N-OUT, provide a pedestrian connection from the "landscaped area" on the Wal-
Mart project through tN-N-OUT's wrought iron fence to the IN-N-OUT establishment south of the
project. (Added by City Council)
55.
The applicant shall work with CalTrans in an effort to replace the existing fence along FWY 99 with
an upgraded fence treatment (such as wrought iron) that would allow visual penetration to the site,
enhance the appearance of the freeway fence and satisfy CalTrans safety concerns. (City Council)
56.
The applicant shall work with the adjacent property owner north of the site, east of the intersection
of Maurice Ave. and Walton Dr. (Lot 58 of Tract 4181 ) to finish out landscaping on said lot and
provide an attractive transition and visual screen along the side property line adjacent to the project
area. Plans shall be approved by the Planning Director. (City Council)
57.
In the event the Wal-Mart store located at 2300 White Lane closes following the opening of a Wal-
Mart store at the subject site, Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust hereby agrees as follows:
57.1.
Neither Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust nor any affiliate will place restrictions on the
subsequent use of the White Lane store, which would have the effect of prohibiting reuse of
the White Lane store by any retail concern; provided, however, that this condition should not
be deemed violated by the imposition of covenants, conditions and restrictions in a form
typically encountered in retail shopping centers in Southern California (i.e. obnoxious uses).
Jeng // S:~ZoneChange~Panama99'~'c~Exh-conditions perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPNZC 02-0193
Page 14 of 21
57.2.
If on the fifth anniversary of the opening of a Wal-Mart store at the subject site, the White
Lane store is both (a) owned by Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust or any affiliate and (b)
a successor tenant had not taken occupancy, then subject to the receipt of demolition
permits from all public agencies having jurisdiction, including the City of Bakersfield, Wal-
Mart Real Estate Business Trust will promptly commence the demolition of the White Lane
store and will diligently prosecute the same to completion. Wal-Mart Real Estate Business
agrees to diligently pursue all permits required for such demolition.
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust agrees that, in the event it fails to perform any of its
foregoing obligations, the City of Bakersfield's remedies at law would be inadequate and
further agrees in that event, that the City would have the right to exercise all available
equitable remedies, including the remedy of injunction and the remedy of specific
performance. (City Council)
58. SITE PLAN COMPLIANCE LIST
The following are specific items that the Site Plan Review Committee has noted
that you need to resolve before you can obtain a building permit or be allowed
occupancy. These items may include changes or additions that need to be shown on
the final building plans, alert you to specific fees, and/or are comments that will help
you in complying with the City's development standards. The item will note when it is
to be completed and each has been grouped by department so that you know who to
contact if you have questions.
A. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - BUILDING (staff contact - Phil Burns 661/326-3718)
The applicant shall submit 4 copies of grading plans and 2 copies of the preliminary soils
report to the Building Division. You must submit a final soils report to the Building Division
before they can issue a building permit.
The applicant shall include fire resistive wall construction details with the final building plans
for all exterior walls of any building that are within 20' of property lines if it is commercial, or
5' of property lines if it is residential.
Include with or show on the final building plans information necessary to verify that the
project complies with all disability requirements of Title 24 of the State Building Code.
The applicant shall obtain all required approvals from the Kern County Environmental Health
Services Department (2700 "M" Street, Bakersfield, CA; Ph. 661/862-8700) for any food
handling facility, (ie. market, delicatessen, cafe, concession, and restaurant) before building
permits can be issued.
Structures exceeding 10,000 square feet in area shall require installation of an automatic fire
sprinkler system.
Jeng // S:XZoneChange~Panatna99W'c~Exh-conditions perCC~doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPNZC 02-0193
Page 15 of 21
Business identification signs are not considered nor approved under this review. A separate
review and sign permit from the Building Division is required for all new signs, including
future use and construction signs. Signs must comply with the Sign Ordinance (Chapter
17.60).
The Building Division will calculate and collect the appropriate school district impact fee at
the time they issue a building permit.
B. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - PLANNING (staff contact - Wayne Lawson 661/326-3145)
The minimum parking required for this project has been computed based on use and shall
be as follows:
Square
Use Footage
Retail (Lowes 134,574 sq. ft.
Including a garden center
*Retail (Major #1 ) 219,622 sq. ft.
(Including a garden center)
Retail (Building C) 25,000 sq. ft.
Fuel Islands N/A
(No buildings)
Parking Required
Ratio Parking
1 space/300 sq. ft. 539 spaces
1 space/300 sq. ft.
I space/300 sq. ft.
Credit 2 space/fuel pump
732 spaces
83 spaces
-12 spaces
Total Required 1,342 Spaces
*If this becomes a 219,622 sq. ft multi-tenant building, an additional 181 parking spaces will
be required.
** Number of parking spaces may be adjusted in order to respond to conditions of approval.
*** At a minimum, the development shall be required to satisfy the parking ratio criteria in BMC Ch.
17.58 (Parking Ordinance).
(Note: 1,939 parking spaces are shown on the proposed site plan, however, 20 spaces will
be used to house cart corrals, resulting in 1,919 a variable spaces. New pads and a
restaurant in Bu#ding C will also increase the number of required parking spaces)
The applicant shall staple a copy of a final landscape plan to each set of the final building
plans submitted to the Building Division. In addition, one (1) copy of the landscape plan
shall also be submitted to the Planning Division. Building permits will not be issued until the
Planning Division has approved the final landscape plan for consistency with approved site
plans and minimum ordinance standards (please refer to the attached standards - Chapter
17.61).
Please be advised that these landscaping standards create four (4) categories of trees and
each category has its own separate set of spacing, evergreen-to-deciduous ratios, location,
and performance standards. These categories are:
Jeng // S:~.oneChange'xPa~ama99Xcc~Exh-conditions perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 16 of 21
· Street frontage trees
· Parking lot (shade trees)
· Shade/accent trees at building entrances
· Trees that buffer adjacent residential areas
Approved landscaping, parking, lighting, and other related site improvements shall be
installed and inspected by the Planning Division before final occupancy of any building or
site. Please schedule final inspections with the staff contact noted above.
(NOTE: Plants must match the species identified and be installed in the locations
consistent with the approved landscape plan. Otherwise, changes made without prior
approval of the Planning staff may result in the removal and/or relocation of installed
plant materials and delays in obtaining building occupancy.)
Number and location of trees in the parking lot shall conform to the requirements of BMC
Section 17.61.030 G., which requires a ratio of 1 tree for each 6 parking spaces, and be
sufficient to achieve the minimum shading of 40% (BMC 17.61.030 H), and trees shall have
a maximum spacing of 65 feet apart. (Refer to discretionary condition section for other
landscape requirements.)
Overlooks from windows, balconies, and decks of the 2"d or higher floor into rear yards of
property containing single family homes must be architecturally screened (see attached
Section 17.08.090). This condition affects any office, commercial, and industrial building,
and any apartment or condominium structure containing 3 or more units that are within 150
feet of properties zoned R-l, R-S, R-S-lA, MH, or PUD, or from condominium projects of a
single family character. Screening proposals must be approved by the Planning Division
before building permits will be issued. Suggested methods for accomplishing screening are
included in the attached ordinance section.
Parking lot lighting is required by the Bakersfield Municipal Code (Section 17.58.060A).
Illumination shall be evenly distributed across the parking area with light fixtures designed
and arranged so that light is directed downward and is reflected away from adjacent
residential properties and streets. Use of glare shields or baffles may be required for glare
reduction or control of back light. All light poles, standards and fixtures, including bases or
pedestals, shall not exceed a height of 40' above grade. The final building plans shall
include a picture or diagram of the light fixtures being used and show how light will be
directed onto the parking area.
Our records show your project is contained on 5 (five) assessor parcels and building
footprints will cross parcel lines. You must either merge these parcels into one parcel or
provide documentation that required improvements for this project, such as offsite parking or
access, is available for the actual lifetime of this project (ie. recorded lease or other
instrument) before any building permits can be issued. Evidence of a legal lot merger may
include one of the following:
Jeng // S:XZoneChange~Panama99~'c'~Exh-conditions perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 17 of 21
10.
11.
13.
14.
Provide a copy of a grant deed recorded before March 4, 1972 where the legal
description identifies all associated parcels as one lot. (Note: Assessor's parcel
information is not acceptable since the Assessor does verify legality of lots.)
Provide a copy of a recorded parcel map, subdivision map, or certificate of
compliance showing the property as one lot.
Addressing for the project shall be designated as shown by staff on the returned site plan.
These address numbers will be the only addresses assigned by the city unless you wish to
have a different address program. Internal unit addresses will be only by suite number and
will be the responsibility of the owner or developer to assign to each tenant.
(It is recommended that you assign suite numbers beginning with 100, 200, 300, etc. instead
of an alphabetic character. If in the future a tenant space is split, you would then be able to
assign a number between these numbers which would keep your suites addressed in
numerical order. Keeping an orderly numbering system will make it easier for customers,
emergency personnel, marl defivery to find the business.)
NOTICE - This project is within an area of documented "known" den sites for the San
Joaquin kit fox. A kit fox clearance survey is needed prior to approval of a grading plan and
any ground disturbance to determine if kit fox dens exist on the site. The Planning Division
is to receive a copy of this clearance survey. This also requires that the applicant provide
notice to wildlife agencies at least 5 business days before grading occurs and/or any found
den sites are excavated. Forms and instructions are available at the Planning Division.
Please contact Jim Movius at (661) 326-3778 if you have questions concerning this matter.
(Metropofitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan Implementation/Management
Agreement Section 4.7.4 & Bakersfield Municipal Code §15.68.070).
The applicant shall file with the Planning Division before any building permits are issued a
copy of a recorded lease or other instrument that ensures that the offsite parking and/or legal
access proposed for this project is available for its actual lifetime.
The applicant shall file with the Planning Division before any building permits are issued a
copy of a recorded map or other instrument that ensures that drive aisles, parking, and
access is legally shared in common with adjoining properties as depicted on the site plan for
the life of the project.
Rooftop areas of commercial buildings (eg. office, retail, restaurant, assembly, hotel,
hospital, church, school) shall be completely screened by parapets or other finished
architectural features constructed to a height of the highest equipment, unfinished structural
element or unfinished architectural feature of the building.
Developer is also subject to Mitigation Measures and Discretionary Conditions as stated in
previous sections of this Exhibit.
Jeng // S:VZoneChange'xPanama99Xcc~Exh~conditions perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 18 of 21
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT (staff contact - Dave We/rather 6611326-3706)
1. Show on the final building plans the following items:
All fire lanes as indicated on the returned plans, or as they may be modified by the
Fire Department. Spacing between each sign identifying the fire lane must also be
shown on the final plan that meets minimum city standards. The applicant shall
install all required fire lane signs before occupancy of any building or portion of any
building is allowed.
Both offs/re (nearest to site) and on-site fire hydrants with required fire flows. New
fire hydrants shall be sited and installed in accordance with the latest adopted
version of the California Fire Code. Hydrants must be in working order to assure that
adequate fire protection is available during construction unless other arrangements
for such protection are approved by the Fire Department. Please provide 2 sets of
the engineered water plans to Dave We/rather. (Note: All new fire hydrants must be
purchased from the Fire Department.)
If the project has fire sprinkler or stand pipe systems. The Fire Department will issue
guidelines for connection locations (FDC) when automatic sprinkler and stand pipe
systems are required.
Project address, including suite number if applicable. If the project is within a
shopping or business center, note the name and address of the center.
Name and phone number of the appropriate contact person.
The applicant must request an inspection of any underground sprinkler feeds at least 24
hours before they are buried. The Fire Safety Control Division (1715 Chester Avenue, Suite
300, Bakersfield, CA; Ph. 661/326-3951) must complete all on-site inspections of fire
sprinkler systems and fire alarm systems before any building is occupied.
The applicant shall show on the final building plans a 20' wide all-weather emergency
access as indicated by staff on the returned site plan. The Fire Department must approve
the final location and design of this access prior to building permits being issued. This
access shall be constructed before building occupancy will be granted.
All access (permanent and temporary) to and around any building under construction must
be at least 20 feet wide, contain no vehicle obstructions, and be graded to prevent water
pond/rig. Barricades must be in place where ditches and barriers exist in or cross roadways.
Emergency vehicle access must always be reliable.
The applicant shall obtain all necessary approvals from the Fire Department for fuel tanks or
related facilities before they are installed on the site. Please contact the Environmental
Services Division at 661/326-3979 for further information.
Jeng // S:X, ZoaeChatige~Pananta99~'cVz'xh-co~ditio~ts perCC, doc
Februa(v 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 19 of 21
If you handle hazardous materials or hazardous waste on the site, the Environmental
Services Division may require a hazardous material management plan before you can begin
operations. Please contact them at 661/326-3979 for further information.
If you treat hazardous waste on the site, the Environmental Services Division may require a
hazardous waste "Tiered" permit before you can begin operations. Please contact them at
661/326-3979 for further information.
If you store hazardous materials on the site in either an underground or a permanent
aboveground storage tank, a permit from the Environmental Services Division is required to
install and operate these tanks. The Environmental Services Division may also require a
Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan before you can begin operations. Please
contact them at 661/326-3979 for further information.
Developer is also subject to Mitigation Measures and Discretionary Conditions as stated in
previous sections of this Exhibit.
D. PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING (staff contact -Janice Horcasitas 661/326-3576)
The applicant shall construct curbs, gutters, 5.5'sidewalks, and streetJalley paving along
Panama Lane according to adopted city standards. These improvements shall be shown on
the final building plans submitted to the Building Division before any building permits will be
issued.
The applicant shall install 1 (one) street light (#62489) along Panama Lane as shown by
staff on the returned site plan. The applicant shall be responsible for providing the labor and
materials necessary to energize all newly installed street lights before occupancy of the
building or site. These improvements shall be shown on the final building plans submitted to
the Building Division before any building permits will be issued.
The applicant shall install new connection(s) to the public sewer system. This connection
shall be shown on the final building plans submitted to the Building Division before any
building permits will be issued.
All driveways, vehicular access and parking areas shall be paved with a minimum of 2" Type
B, A.C. over 3" Class II A.B. according to the Bakersfield Municipal Code (Sections
15.76.020 & 17.58.050 N.) and the adopted standards of the City Engineer. This paving
standard shall be noted on the final building plans submitted to the Building Division before
any building permits will be issued.
If a grading plan is required by the Building Division, building permits will not be issued until
the grading plan is approved by both the Public Works Department and Building Division.
Jetig // S:XZoneCha~tge~Panan~a99~'c~E~h-conditions perCCdoc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 20 of 21
Before you can occupy any building or site, you must reconstruct or repair substandard off-
site improvements to adopted city standards as directed by the City Engineer. Please call
the construction superintendent at 661/326-3049 to schedule a site inspection to find out
what improvements may be required.
You must obtain a street permit from the Public Works Department before any work can be
done within the public right-of-way (streets, alleys, easements). Please include a copy of
this site plan review decision to the department at the time you apply for this permit.
A sewer connection fee shall be paid at the time a building permit is issued. We will base
this fee at the rate in effect at the time a building permit is issued.
If the project is subject to the provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES), a "Notice of Intent" (NOI) to comply with the terms of the General Permit
to Discharge Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (WQ Order No. 92-08-DWQ)
must be filed with the State Water Resources Control Board in Sacramento before the
beginning of any construction activity. Compliance with the general permit requires that a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) be prepared, continuously carried out, and
always be available for public inspection during normal construction hours.
10.
A transportation impact fee for regional facilities shall be paid at the time a building permit is
issued. This fee will be based at the rate in effect at the time the permit is issued. The Public
Works Department will calculate an estimate of the total fee when you submit construction
plans for the project.
11.
The developer shall provide a drainage study that shall include percolation tests for the
review and approval of the City Engineer. In addition the City would like to consolidate the
on site retention basin with nearby City owned retention basins.
12.
Developer is also subject to Mitigation Measures and Discretionary Conditions as stated in
previous sections of this Exhibit.
E. PUBLIC WORKS - TRAFFIC (staff contact - George Gillburg 661/326-3997)
Street return type approach(es), if used, shall have 20' minimum radius returns with a 68' x
37' throat width. All dimensions shall be shown on the final building plans.
Two-way drive aisles shall be a minimum width of 24 feet. If perpendicular (90°) parking
spaces are proposed where a vehicle must back into these aisles, the minimum aisle width
shall be 25 feet. All drive aisle dimensions shall be shown on the final building plans.
Show the typical parking stall dimensions on the final building plans. Minimum parking stall
dimensions shall be 9' wide x 18' long. Vehicles may hang over landscape areas no more
than 21/2 feet provided required setbacks along street frontages are maintained, and trees
and shrubs are protected from vehicles as required by the Planning Division.
Jeng // S:VZoneChange~°atlatna99Xcc~Exh-conditions perCCdoc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "3"
GPA/ZC 02-0193
Page 21 of 21
Plans for modification of the traffic signal at Colony Street and Panama Lane must be
submitted to the Traffic Engineer including plans for roadwork on Panama Lane.
The left turn out from the easternmost entrance is not allowed. The final plan shall be
redesigned in compliance with the median opening City of Bakersfield standard T-8 or 7-9 as
applicable.
6. Turn lanes and drive aisles shall be designed per applicable City of Bakersfield standards.
The center of the drive approach into "Gas" facility must be at least 150' from center of any
other drive approach, per City of Bakersfield standard %12. The final plan shall be
redesigned to comply with this standard as approved by the Traffic Engineer.
Developer is also subject to Mitigation Measures and Discretionary Conditions as stated in
previous sections of this Exhibit.
PUBLIC WORKS - SOLID WASTE (staff contact - John Wilburn 661/326-3114)
You must contact the staff person noted above before building permits can be issued
or work begins on the property to establish the level and type of service necessary for the
collection of refuse and/or recycled materials. These levels of service are based on how
often collection occurs as follows:
Can or cart service --
Front loader bin service --
Roll-off compactor service --
1 cubic yard/week or less
1 cubic yard/week - 12 cubic yards/day
More than 12 cubic yards/day
Show on the final building plans 1 (one), 10' x 20' inside dimension, refuse bin enclosure
designed according to adopted city standards (Detail #S-43)*. Before occupancy of the
building or site is allowed 4, 3 cubic yard front loading type refuse bins shall be placed within
the required enclosure. (*For Building C)
3. Show on the final building plans 3 (three) compactor roll-off bin locations.
Facilities that require infectious waste services shall obtain approval for separate infectious
waste storage areas from the Kern County Health Department. In no instances shall the
refuse bin area be used for infectious waste containment purposes.
Facilities that require grease containment must provide a storage location that is separate
from the refuse bin location. This shall be shown on the final building plans.
Facilities that participate in recycling operations must provide a location that is separate from
the refuse containment area. This shall be shown on the final building plans.
Jeng // SAZoneChange'xPanama9CAcc~Exh-conditions perCC, doc
February 13, 2003
EXHIBIT "4"
FACTS AND FINDINGS REGARDING
THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS FOR
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT/
ZONE CHANGE #02-0193
S:~oneChange\Panama99\cc\Ex-Fact- Finding.doc
February 13, 2003
TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND FINDINGS .................................................................................................................... 1
I. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1
II. Project Description .............................................................................................................. 2
III. Findings with Respect to Significant Effects ........................................................................ 3
IV, Findings with Respect to the Environmental Review Process ............................................. 3
V, Findings Regarding Effects Determined
To Be insignificant During Initial Study ................................................................................ 5
VI, Findings Regarding Effects Determined
To Be Insignificant Or Less Than Significant ..................................................................... 19
Vii, Findings Regarding Effects Determined
To Be Mitigated To Less Than Significant ......................................................................... 24
VIII. Findings Regarding Infeasibility of
Mitigation Measures for Significant Impacts ...................................................................... 43
IX. Finding Regarding Infeasible Alternatives ......................................................................... 46
S:~ZoneChange\Panama99\cc\Ex-Fact- Finding.doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND FINDINGS
I. INTRODUCTION
The following statement of facts and findings have been prepared in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Public Resources Code Section 21081.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 provides that:
"No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental
impact report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects
on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out
unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings:
The following potential significant impacts of the proposed project have been separated into
three categories:
(~)
Those potential impacts that have been determined to be less than significant,
based on review of available information in the project record, and in
consideration of existing standard development review requirements and existing
codes and regulations;
(2)
Those potential impacts that could be mitigated to a level that is considered less
than significant with the implementation of the recommended mitigation
measures; and
(3)
Those potential impacts that could not be reduced to a less than significant level
with the implementation of the existing policies and standards and the
recommended mitigation measures.
For potentially significant impacts (categories (2) and (3) above), the City of Bakersfield ("City")
has made one of the following three findings for each potentially significant impact and provides
facts in support of each finding in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091:
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment.
Those changes or alterations required in the project to mitigate or avoid
significance environmental effects are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that
other agency.
Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation
measures or project alternatives identified in the final environmental impact
report."
S:tZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
The Final EIR for the General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193 identifies certain
significant environmental effects which may occur as a result of the project. Therefore, findings
are set forth herein pursuant to Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines. Mitigation Measures
are based in part on the requirements contained in Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources
Code. A Mitigation Monitoring Program will be adopted as part of the project Resolution.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project consists of an amendment to the Land Use Element of the Metropolitan
Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and concurrent zone change in order to establish a mixed-use
commercial center on the 37.52-acre site. As shown in Table 3-2, Development Statistical
Summary, of the Final EIR, the proposed Project includes two major buildings, a satellite pad
and gasoline fuel station for a total of 379,196 square feet of gross building area. The Project
includes the extension of Colony Street and a drainage sump to be constructed at the northeast
corner of the site (refer to Exhibit 3-6, Site Plan, of the Final EIR).
Wal-Mart would be located in the northwest corner of the site, east of SR-99 and south of
Maurice Avenue. The structure would encompass 219,622 square feet of building area. The
tentative design includes a garden center at the southwest corner of the building. The total
square footage for Wal-Mart, including the parking area, would be 851,812 square feet. Wal-
Mart is a general store providing a variety of goods and services that may include the following:
24-hour operation, general merchandise, pharmacy, vision care, photo center, bank, tires and
lube, liquor sales, outdoor sales, garden center sales, truck docks and loading facilities, outside
container storage, outside sales areas, rooftop proprietary satellite communications and
parking.
The Lowe's Home Improvement Warehouse (Lowe's) building site would be east of Wal-Mart
and would encompass 117,000 square feet of building space and a total of 17,574 square feet
for a garden center located on the west side of the building. The total square feet for the entire
Lowe's site is 593,967. Lowe's is a store providing sales and services that may typically include
merchandise for home improvement, home decorating services, a garden center, outside
container storage, outside sales areas, and lumber. Parking area for both buildings would
extend to the southern end of the property and would include approximately 1,831 spaces.
Building 'C' would be located at the southeast corner of the property incorporating 25,000
square feet of building area and 108 parking spaces for a total lot size of 104,176 square feet.
The total number of parking spaces is approximately 1,939 spaces. The southeast corner of
proposed Project site would extend south to Panama Lane, where a gas station would be
constructed on a 25,013 square foot lot. A 1.37-acre sump area would be located at the
northeast corner of the Project site, just north of the Lowe's building site.
Access to the site would be provided by the extension of Colony Street into the Project site.
This would include widening Colony Street to five lanes with a turning lane and providing
additional intersection signal upgrades. Colony Street would extend north into the Project site
and then loop to the west to allow easier access to all parking lanes. A decorative landscape
area is proposed immediately south of the loop road. Additional access, mainly for the loading
areas located at the northern portion of the site, would be provided by an access drive along the
eastern perimeter of the site.
S:~oneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
2 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
The General Plan Land Use Amendment would require a change from an LR (Low Density
Residential) designation on 33.94 acres and OS-P (Open Space - Park) on three acres to a GC
(General Commercial) designation. A concurrent zone change would be required to change
36.94 acres from a MH (Mobile Home) zone and 0.58 acres from a C-2 (Regional Commercial)
designation to a PCD (Planned Commercial Development) zone. A PCD zone implements
specific site and architectural design for a commercial development. Section 17.54.010 of the
Bakersfield Municipal Code states the intent and purpose of this zone is to "allow for innovative
design and diversification in the relationship of various uses, buildings, structures, lot sizes and
open space while incurring compliance with the General Plan and the intent of the Municipal
Code."
III. FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
The City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency and decision-maker for the project, has reviewed and
considered the information contained in both the Draft and Final EIRs prepared for the General
Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193 and the public record. The Lead Agency makes the
following finding pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines:
The City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency and decision-maker, having reviewed
and considered the information contained in the Draft and Final EIRs prepared
for the General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193 and public records,
finds that changes or alterations to the project will avoid or substantially lessen
potentially significant environmental impacts. These changes or alterations are
related to the implementation of the mitigation measures detailed in this
document.
The City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency and decision-maker, having reviewed
and considered the information contained in the Draft and Final EIRs prepared
for the General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193 and the public record,
finds that there are specific economic, social, or other considerations which make
the mitigation measures for Air Quality and Noise in the Draft and Final EIR's
infeasible.
The City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency and decision-maker, finds that
significant and unmitigable impacts on Air Quality and Noise may occur with
future development in conjunction with implementation of the General Plan
AmendmentJZone Change #02-0193. This finding requires that the Lead Agency
issue a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" under Section 15093 and
15126(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines if the Lead Agency wishes to proceed
with approval of the project.
IV. FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
The City of Bakersfield, acting as Lead Agency for the environmental review of the project,
makes the following findings with regard to the environmental review process undertaken to
analyze the potential environmental impacts of the project:
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
3 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
In accord with Section 15063(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, as amended, the
City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency, undertook the preparation of an Initial
Study. The completed Initial Study determined that a number of environmental
issue areas may be impacted by the construction and operation of General Plan
Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193. Furthermore, the Lead Agency determined
that an FIR would be prepared to address the project's potential impacts on
those environmental issue areas identified in the Initial Study requiring further
analysis.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 15082 of the State CEQA Guidelines, as
amended, the City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency, circulated a Notice of
Preparation (NOP) to public agencies, special districts, and members of the
public requesting such notice for a 30-day period commencing on July 11, 2001,
and concluding on August 9, 2001.
During the circulation period for the Notice of Preparation, the City of Bakersfield,
as Lead Agency, advertised and conducted a public scoping meeting on August
1, 2001 at the City of Bakersfield City Hall Council Chambers in the City of
Bakersfield.
A Draft EIR was prepared which analyzed project-related impacts related to the
following environmental issue areas: aesthetics, public health and safety, traffic
and circulation, air quality, noise, biological resources and cultural resources.
Project alternatives, growth-inducing impacts, and cumulative effects were also
analyzed in the Draft EIR.
During the Draft EiR's public review period which began on September 13, 2002,
and concluded on October 28, 2002, the City of Bakersfield held a noticed
Planning Commission public hearing at the regularly scheduled meeting of
October 3, 2002 regarding the Draft EIR. The public was afforded the
opportunity to orally comment on the Draft EIR at the public hearing, and the
testimony was considered by the decision-makers. Upon the close of the public
review period, the Lead Agency proceeded to evaluate and prepare responses to
all written comments received from both citizens and the public agency during
the public review period.
The aforementioned comments and responses and other information consistent
with the requirements of Section 15132 of the State CEQA Guidelines, as
amended, comprise the Final EIR. Following completion of the Response to
Comments document, the Lead Agency's responses to the comments received
from the public agencies were transmitted to those public agencies for
consideration at least 10 days prior to the Final EIR's certification.
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
4 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
V. FINDINGS REGARDING IMPACTS DETERMINED TO BE
INSIGNIFICANT IN THE INITIAL STUDY/NOTICE OF
PREPARATION
The City of Bakersfield conducted an Initial Study in July 2002, to determine significant effects
of the project. In the course of this evaluation, certain impacts of the project were found to be
less than significant due to the inability of a project of this scope to create such impacts or the
absence of project characteristics producing effects of this type. The effects determined not to
be significant are not included in primary analysis sections of the Draft EIR.
AESTHETICS
Would the proposal:
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
The proposed project site is level with no topographic relief. The area surrounding the
site is developed with no visual access to scenic areas. The site is not designated as a
scenic vista or located along a scenic highway, as defined by the Metropolitan
Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. Therefore, development of this site would not have a
substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.
Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
Aside from sparse vegetation, there are no rock outcrops or rocks, plant resources
and/or historic buildings on the property. The site is situated along SR-99, which is not
designated as a State Scenic Highway. Therefore, impacts in this regard would be less
than significant.
AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental
effects, lead agencies may refer to the Cafifomia Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an
optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the
project:
Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
The Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan anticipates development of the area
based on current designations consisting of Iow-density residential, open space park and
general commercial uses. The General Plan acknowledges that the area contains prime
soil (capabiLity Class I and II) but identifies the site as "prime agricultural soils lost to
urbanization". Therefore, impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
S:tZoneChangelPanamagglcclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
5 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
The proposed project site is not a part of the Williamson Act Land Contract and is not
zoned for agricultural use. Therefore, there is no conflict of existing zoning or with the
Williamson Act contract provisions.
Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature,
could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
Although for several years the site was utilized for agricultural purposes, it has been
vacant and fallow for approximately 20 years. Thus, implementation of the proposed
project would not convert farmland to non-agricultural uses and impacts are less than
significant.
AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance cdteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
Create objectionable oders affecting a substantial number of people ?
Commercial uses on-site may have the potential for creating odors. These emissions
would be comparable to those anticipated with any type of commercial activity (e.g., food
service activities). While the emissions from these activities are common and not
identified as being particularly hazardous, they may be subject to permitting
requirements that call for the use of "best available control technology" in order to
eliminate or reduce the levels of emissions. Any potential nuisance related to odor that
may occur with these activities would be mitigated under the APCD's permitting
requirements.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No riparian habitat has been identified on the proposed project site. Thus, significant
impacts in this regard would not occur with project implementation.
Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
6 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
No federally protected wetlands occur on-site. Therefore, impacts are less than
significant.
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No locally designated natural communities as referenced in the Metropolitan Bakersfield
2010 General Plan's Conservation Element have been identified for the project site.
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
The Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan (MBHCP) is the regional
conservation plan that addresses the effect of urban growth on federally and State
protected plant and animal species within the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General
Plan area. The MBHCP utilizes a mitigation fee paid by applicants for grading or building
permits to fund the purchase and maintenance of habitat land to compensate for the
effects of urban development on endangered species habitat. Therefore, payment of
this impact fee would result in a less than significant impact.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resoume as
defined in CEQA Guidelines §15064.5?
It is likely that Native American peoples historically traversed the general region.
However, there are no major historical or documented archaeological sites in the
immediate vicinity. No Federal- or State-designated historic sites or structures have
been recorded on, adjacent, or within a one-half mile radius of the proposed project site.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
There are no known active faults that exist within the site nor is it located within an
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. No evidence was observed that indicated surface
faulting has occurred across the property during the Holocene time. Thus, no impacts
associated with rupture of an earthquake fault would occur.
S:~oneChangelPanama991cctEx-Fact- Finding.doc
7 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
Strong seismic ground shaking?
The southern portion of the San Joaquin Valley is bordered by a major active fault
system, making Bakersfield a historically active seismic area. There are a total of eight
(8) faults in or near the Metropolitan Bakersfield area, of which six (6) are known to be
active. As previously stated, there is no evidence indicating surface faulting has
occurred across the property during the Holocene time. Additionally, current
development standards would require the project applicant to comply with appropriate
seismic design criteria in accordance with Uniform Building Code, resulting in less than
significant impact.
Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
The predominant soils on-site consist of loose to very dense silty sand, sandy silt, sand,
and clayey silt. Moderate cohesion strength is associated with the silty and clayey soils.
Groundwater was not encountered within a depth of 50 feet during exploratory drilling.
Groundwater in the vicinity of the proposed project site is typically encountered at depth
on the order of 100 feet below the site grade. Therefore, the potential for soil
liquefaction within the proposed project site is very Iow due to the moderate density of
the subsurface soils and the lack of groundwater.
Landslides ?
Impacts associated with landslides or mudslides are not anticipated. Erosion from the
Coast Range Mountains and the Sierra Nevada systems has resulted in the deposition
of immense thickness of sediments in the valley floor. Heavily laden streams from the
Sierra Nevada have built very prominent alluvial fans along the margins of the San
Joaquin Valley. This has resulted in a rather flat topography in the vicinity of the
proposed project site.
Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
In general, the upper soil of the site consists of 6 to 12 inches of very loose to silty sand,
sandy silt or sand. The loose consistency is related to repeated cultivation and discing
for weed control. These soils are disturbed, have Iow strength characteristic, and are
highly compressible when saturated.
Clearing and grading for construction may expose soils to short-term wind and water
erosion. Implementation of erosion control measures as required by the City and
adherence to all requirements set forth in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit for construction activities would reduce these impacts to less
than significant.
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 an on-site or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
8 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
Refer to responses regarding rupture of an earthquake fault and seismic related ground
failure.
Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
The soil associations underlying the area are generally sandy with high percolation
rates. The soil can be characterized as well drained and non-expansive. Thus,
significant impacts in this regard would not occur.
Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative
waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
water?
The project proposes to install on-site sewer lines. It would not be necessary to install
septic tanks or other alternative types of wastewater disposal systems. No significant
impacts are anticipated in this regard.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.
Would the project:
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Future uses on-site may handle materials that are considered hazardous, though these
materials would be limited to solvents and chemicals used for cleaning, building
maintenance, and those used in landscaping. No uses would be located on-site that
would be engaged in the production or disposal of hazardous materials; thus, significant
impact in this regard would not occur.
There is the potential for a hazardous materials release on SR-99 since the proposed
project site is adjacent to this regional transit facility. Federal, state and local regulations
related to the transport of hazardous materials reduce the potential for release of
hazardous materials. Therefore, impacts are anticipated to be less than significant in
this regard.
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment?
The proposed project is not anticipated to result in the creation of health hazards with
compliance with pertinent health and safety regulations. The proposed uses would not
use, generate, or dispose of hazardous materials in large quantities.
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
9 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan AmendmentJZone Change #02-0193
Due to the nature of the proposed uses, hazardous emissions would not be anticipated
and hazardous materials would not be handled. Further the proposed project site is not
located within a one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, therefore, no
impacts are anticipated in this regard.
Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment?
A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted for the proposed
project site. After reviewing historical records and regulatory listing agency records,
interviewing owners and conducting site reconnaissance, the Phase I ESA revealed no
evidence of Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) in connection with the
proposed project site. The findings of the Phase I ESA will be presented in the EIR.
For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
The proposed project site is located approximately four miles southwest of Bakersfield
Municipal Airport. The Municipal Airport is primarily utilized for private planes and
commercial passenger capability does not currently exist. Therefore, given the project's
distance from the Municipal Airport, it is not anticipated that there would be a safety
hazard for the people residing or working within the proposed project area.
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project area ?
The proposed project site is located approximately four miles southwest of Bakersfield
Municipal Airport. The Municipal Airport is primarily utilized for private planes and
commercial passenger capability does not currently exist. Therefore, given the project's
distance from the Municipal Airport, it is not anticipated that there would be a safety
hazard for the people residing or working within the proposed project area.
Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
A Flood Evacuation Plan has been prepared by the City of Bakersfield in response to a
potential flood hazard. Evacuation of the site would be on SR-99. The project does not
propose land uses or substantial alterations in the circulation system, which would
interfere with the established evacuation plan.
Emergency access to the site would be evaluated following consultation with emergency
service providers (such as the Bakersfield Fire and Police Department) to identify
potential impacts and required mitigation. Due to the site's location along SR - 99,
potential impacts to emergency service providers are anticipated to be less than
significant.
S:tZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
10 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan AmendmentJZone Change #02-0193
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands ?
The site is located outside the fire hazard area established by the Kern County Fire
Depadment (Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, page V111-32). Additionally,
much of the existing vegetation would be removed with implementation of the proposed
project; thus, reducing potential impacts in this regard.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project:
Violate any water quafity standards or waste discharge requirements?
Development of the proposed project would be subject to state and regional water
quality standards. Any development on the site would be required to implement Best
Management Practices (BMPs) in order to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES). Additionally, the project would be required to comply with
the guidelines established by the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP).
Substantially deplete groundwater suppfies or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would
drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
The proposed project would be serviced through the California Water Service Company.
Due to the limited size of this development in comparison to the overall service area of
CWSC, it is not anticipated that this project would lead to a substantial depletion of
groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge.
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Existing drainage infrastructure associated with the surrounding development combined
with development of appropriate drainage infrastructure with the construction of the site
would be sufficient to limit any significant erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Therefore,
any impacts would be reduced to a hess than significant level.
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
S:~oneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
11 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
Existing drainage infrastructure associated with the surrounding development combined
with development of appropriate drainage infrastructure with the construction of the site
would be sufficient to limit any significant erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Therefore,
any impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.
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?
The proposed project is not anticipated to substantially affect the storm water drainage
systems due to existing drainage infrastructure and the limited size of the development
project. Additionally, the development of this project would require the implementation of
BMP standards in accordance with NPDES guidelines and SWPPP measures.
Otherwise substantially degrade water quafity?
The proposed project is not anticipated to substantially affect the storm water drainage
systems due to existing drainage infrastructure and the limited size of the development
project. Additionally, the development of this project would require the implementation of
BMP standards in accordance with NPDES guidelines and SWPPP measures.
Place housing within a lO0-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
Implementation of the proposed project would not involve the development of housing.
Further, the proposed project site is not located within a 100-year floodplain, as
delineated by Flood Insurance Rate Maps prepared by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). Impacts associated with flood and water related hazards
are considered to be less than significant.
Place within a lO0-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect
flood flows?
Implementation of the proposed project would not involve the development of housing.
Further, the proposed project site is not located within a 100-year floodplain, as
delineated by Flood Insurance Rate Maps prepared by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). Impacts associated with flood and water related hazards
are considered to be less than significant.
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding,
including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
Isabella Dam, which is located approximately forty (40) miles northeast of Bakersfield,
has a capacity to hold 570,000 acre-feet of water. If an earthquake were to occur in the
vicinity, it could result in a break in the dam, This could, under certain conditions, cause
the entire lake storage to be released, which would result in flooding 60 square miles of
the Metropolitan Bakersfield area.
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
12 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
LAND
As a result of the possible dangers associated with Isabella Dam, the City of Bakersfield
entered the Regular Phase of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) as
administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) on May 1, 1985.
Additionally, the Kern River Designated Floodway Program provides development
criteria and issues permits for development within the limits of the Kern River Designated
Floodway. In July 1985, both the City and County adopted the Kern River Plan Element
(KRPE) as a part of their General Plans. Compliance with the NFIP, the Kern River
Designated Floodway Program and the KRPE results in less than significant impact.
Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
There are no large bodies of open water located on or adjacent to the proposed project
site which may result in seiche or tsunami hazards. Hazards involving tsunamis, seiche,
or mudflows are not expected to affect the development.
USE AND PLANNING.
Would the project:
Physically divide an established community?
Single-family residential neighborhoods occur to the north and east of the site with
general commercial uses to the south along Panama Lane. The site is a transitional
area between residential uses and commercial services to the south. The limited size of
the site precludes it from dividing an established community.
Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
The proposal includes a General Plan Amendment of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010
General Plan and concurrent zone change of Title 17 Zoning of Metropolitan Bakersfield
Municipal Code to allow commercial development on a site currently planned for
residential, open space and general commercial.
The project would be regulated by the guidelines established in the various
environmental plans that apply to the proposed project site, including; Air Quality
Maintenance and Non-Attainment Plan for Kern County, Bikeways Plan, Emergency
Response Plan, Regional Transportation Plan, Solid Waste Management Plan,
Hazardous Waste Management Plan and Habitat Conservation Plan. Approval of the
proposed General Plan Amendment, zone change and applicable permits (approval from
responsible agencies) would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
S:~oneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
13 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation
plan ?
The proposed project site is located within the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat
Conservation Plan area. Therefore, the developer would be required to pay impact fees,
which are placed in an account and which can only be used for habitat acquisition and
management. Compliance with these mitigation measures would result in a less than
significant impact. No locally designated natural communities as referenced in the
Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan's Conservation Element have been
identified for the project site.
MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resoume that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
As indicated by Figure V-3 of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, there are
no mineral resources that would be of value located within the Proposed project site. It
is further noted that two oil fields are located within a five-mile radius of the site but do
not affect the property. No impacts are anticipated in this regard.
Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
As indicated by Figure V-3 of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, there are
no mineral resources that would be of value located within the Proposed project site. It
is further noted that two oil fields are located within a five-mile radius of the site but do
not affect the property. No impacts are anticipated in this regard.
NOISE.
Would the project result in:
For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
The proposed project site is located approximately four miles southwest of Bakersfield
Municipal Airpod. Given the project's distance from the Municipal Airpod, it is not
anticipated that there would be a safety hazard for the people residing or working within
the proposed project area. Additionally, the proposed project site is not located within an
airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport.
Therefore, project implementation would not expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels.
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx~Fact- Finding.doc
14 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
For a project within the vicinity of a pdvate airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
The proposed project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore
project implementation would not expose people residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels.
POPULATION AND HOUSING.
Would the project:
Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
The proposed project would not involve the displacement of housing. No impacts in this
regard would occur.
Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
The proposed project would not involve the displacement of housing. No impacts in this
regard would occur.
PUBLIC SERVICES.
Would the project 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 for any of the public services:
Fire protection ?
The City of Bakersfield Fire Department and the Kern County Fire Department are
responsible for fire protection services within Metropolitan Bakersfield. The potential
increase in services is expected to be paid for by property and sales tax revenues
generated by this development.
Police protection ?
The City of Bakersfield Police Department provides law enforcement and public safety
services for the entire City. Future development of the site would require additional
service demands on the Police Department, however, due to the limited size of the
development and the development of security measures such as street and parking lot
lighting, these demands are not expected to have a substantial adverse affect on police
protection performance.
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
15 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
Schools ?
Since there is no residential uses proposed for the site and the development would not
induce substantial new housing in the nearby vicinity, no significant impacts are
anticipated to public school facilities. The development would be required to pay fees as
required by state law, to offset any cumulative effects of the children of the future
employees who may attend public schools.
Parks ?
The proposal would amend the General Plan Land Use designation of three acres from
OS-P (Open Space- Park) to GC (General Commercial). The Park Element of the
Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan lists ten acres as the minimum size for a
neighborhood park. It is unlikely that additional acreage adjacent the three acres would
be acquired to create a minimum ten acre neighborhood park. Bakersfield Municipal
Code Chapter 15.80 provides the method by which park land is to be dedicated,
reserved and/or fees paid in-lieu of land dedication. Impacts are considered to be less
than significant.
Other public facilities ?
Due to the size and scope of the proposed project, the project would not significantly
affect other governmental agencies. No significant impacts are anticipated in this
regard.
RECREATION.
Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
The proposal would amend the General Plan Land Use designation of three acres from
OS-P (Open Space- Park) to GC (General Commercial). The Park Element of the
Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan lists ten acres as the minimum size for a
neighborhood park. It is unlikely that additional acreage adjacent the three acres would
be acquired to create a minimum ten acre neighborhood park. Bakersfield Municipal
Code Chapter 15.80 provides the method by which park land is to be dedicated,
reserved and/or fees paid in-lieu of land dedication. Impacts are considered to be less
than significant.
Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
The project would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities.
Therefore, impacts in this regard are not anticipated.
S:tZoneChangetPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
16 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC.
Would the project:
Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a
change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
The proposed project would not affect air traffic patterns and would not result in safety
risks to air traffic.
Result in inadequate emergency access?
The project would be subject to design review by the fire and police departments to
assure that adequate emergency access is provided. The City's standard review
procedures prior issuance of building permits reduce impacts to a less than significant
level.
Result in inadequate parking capacity?
Section 17.58.110.8 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code specifies the parking
requirements for neighborhood and regional shopping centers. It requires 1 space per
200 square feet of gross floor area up to 35,000 square feet, plus 1 additional space per
250 square feet of gross floor area in excess of 35,000 square feet. Additionally,
freestanding satellite pads shall be computed separately unless satellite buildings
contain two or more tenants. Based upon these requirements, the Project would require
a total of 1,612 parking spaces if Wal-Mart and Lowe's were considered one use or
1,577 parking spaces if Wal-Mart and Lowe's are considered separate uses. The
proposed Project would include 1,939 parking spaces, which is well above Municipal
Code guidelines under either scenario.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board?
The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board has jurisdiction over
wastewater treatment for the proposed project site. Due to the limited scope and size of
the development project, this project is not anticipated to exceed the requirements
established by the board in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin.
Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects ?
S:~ZoneChangeIPanama99tcclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
17 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
The California Water Service Company has indicated that furnishing service for the
property would not have a significant effect upon the present supply and future water
supplies. Potable water meeting all federal and state water quality standards is available
for the property.
Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion
of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects ?
Development of the proposed project would be subject to state and regional water
quality standards. Any development on the site would be required to implement Best
Management Practices (BMPs) in order to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES). Additionally, the project would be required to comply with
the guidelines established by the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP).
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements
and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
The proposed project would be serviced through the California Water Service Company.
Due to the limited size of this development in comparison to the overall service area of
CWSC, it is not anticipated that this project would lead to a substantial depletion of
groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge.
Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may
serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in
addition to the provider's existing commitments?
The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board has jurisdiction over
wastewater treatment for the proposed project site. Due to the limited scope and size of
the development project, this project is not anticipated to exceed the requirements
established by the board in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin.
Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's
solid waste disposal needs ?
The City Solid Waste Division and contracted haulers are responsible for solid waste
collection. The proposed project would generate additional solid waste which would be
minimal due to the limited size of the project. There is no expectation that the project
would substantially affect the City's capacity to accommodate its solid waste disposal
needs.
Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
The project must comply with adopted programs and regulations pertaining to solid
waste.
S:tZoneChange~Panama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
18 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
VI. FINDINGS REGARDING EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE
INSIGNIFICANT OR LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
The City finds that based on substantial evidence appearing of the Final EIR, Technical
Appendices and in the administrative record, that the proposed project would have insignificant
or less than significant impacts in the following areas:
AESTHETICS
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
5.1-4
Project development, together with cumulative projects may result in greater
urbanization in the Project area. Compliance with applicable City codes would
reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels.
Facts Supporting Finding
Construction of currently approved and pending projects in the vicinity would
permanently alter the nature and appearance of the area through loss of open space
areas. Cumulative impacts can be mitigated to less than significant levels with use of
building materials that are consistent with the general character of the area, landscaping
design, and proper lighting techniques to direct light on-site and away from adjacent
properties.
PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/CONDITIONS ON-SITE
5.2-1
Implementation of the proposed Project may create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials. Analysis has concluded that no evidence exists of recognized
environmental conditions in connection with the subject site and a less than
significant impact would occur in this regard.
Facts Supporting Findinq
Krazan's research of the subject site facility for a Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment (ESA) did not identify evidence of recognized environmental conditions
(REC's) in connection with the subject site. Based on the current use of the subject site,
the likelihood of an impact to the subsurface of the subject site by hazardous materials
appears to be Iow. Additionally, based on Krazan's field observations of adjacent
properties, review of the EDR report, and regulatory records, the potential for adverse
environmental impacts to the subject site from adjacent properties appears unlikely. In
conclusion, the Phase I ESA of the subject site conducted by Krazan revealed no
evidence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject site.
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
19 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
HAZARDOUS MATERIAL USERS/FACILITIES
5.2-2
Project development could create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials. However, hazardous materials would typically involve "household"
chemicals commonly found in a grocery store and/or commercial uses.
Compliance with State and applicable local regulations would reduce potential
impacts to less than significant levels.
Facts Supportinq Findinq
The level of risk associated with hazardous materials to be used on the Project site is no
different than that found at other retailers in the area. With the proper use and disposal
of the chemicals are not expected to result in hazardous or unhealthful conditions for
employees or patrons of the center. A less than significant impact would occur in this
regard after compliance with State and applicable local regulations.
A gasoline fueling station is proposed for the southeast corner of the site. This facility
will store and dispense gasoline and diesel fuels which are known hazardous
substances. Again, City Fire Department and APCD standards and regulations of the
storage, handling and use of these materials are adequate to result in less than
significant impacts.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
5.2-3
The proposed Project, in combination with other cumulative projects, could
increase exposure to the public of hazardous substances. Compliance with
Federal, State, and local requirements on a project-by-project basis would
reduce cumulative impacts to a less than significant level.
Facts Supporting Finding
Compliance with local, State and Federal regulations would ensure that contamination or
exposure to hazardous substances is avoided or controlled to minimize the risk to the
public on a case-by-case basis as the cumulative projects are constructed.
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION
5.3-3
Project implementation may result in additional bus transit ridership to and from
the site. Current services accommodating the Project site would accommodate
the increase in passengers resulting in a less than significant impact.
Facts Supporting Finding
While there may be additional ridership for shoppers and employees traveling to the
Project site, it is anticipated that there would not be a need to add a bus route or bus
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
20 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
stop to accommodate the increase in passengers, thus impacts are less than
significant.~ As part of the discretionary review of the General Plan Amendment and
concurrent zone change, decision-makers may consider accommodation of future on-
site bus transit facilities.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
5.3-4
Development of the proposed Project, along with future development in
accordance with the City of Bakersfield 2010 General Plan would result in an
increase in vehicle trips distributed throughout the roadways serving the Project
Area. Based on the findings of the Traffic Study contained within Appendix 15.2
of the EIR, cumulative impacts related to traffic would be mitigated to less than
significant levels.
Facts Supporting Finding
Development-specific requirements for traffic signals and other roadway improvements
shall be evaluated on a project-by-project basis. Individual developers may pay a share
of the costs for area wide (local) improvements to roadways and public facilities or
construct the needed improvements as part of that specific project. Regional roadway
projects and alternative transportation system (rapid transit) shall be funded by new
development through the Regional Transportation Impact Fee Program (RTIF).
AIR QUALITY
LOCALIZED CO EMISSIONS
5.4-3
The Project may expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations. Analysis has concluded that a less than significant impact would
occur in this regard.
Facts Supportinq Finding
Mobile Soume - Carbon Monoxide
Carbon monoxide emissions are a function of vehicle idling time and, thus, under normal
meteorological conditions, depend on traffic flow conditions. CO "Hot Spot" modeling is
required if a traffic study reveals that the project will reduce the Level of Service (LOS)
on one or more streets to E or F; or, if the project will worsen an existing LOS F. A traffic
study prepared by Ruettgers & Schuler indicates that twelve unsignalized intersections
(based on Year 2020+ Projections) warrant a CO Hot Spot analysis. The results of the
modeling analysis are shown in Table 5.4-6, CALINE-4 Predicted Carbon Monoxide
(CO) Concentrations, of the Final EIR. As such, the CO impacts from the proposed
Project are considered less than significant.
* Confirmed by Emery Rendes, GET Planner, during phone conversation on July 30, 2002 and with written
confirmation provided on July 31, 2002.
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
21 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
CONFORMITY WITH AIR QUALITY ATTAINMENT PLAN
5.4-4
The Project has the potential to conflict with the Air Quality Attainment Plan.
Analysis has concluded that a less than significant impact would occur in this
regard.
Facts Supporting FindinR
Although the Project would represent an incremental negative impact to air quality in the
Basin, of primary concern is that Project-related impacts have been properly anticipated
in the regional air quality planning process and reduced whenever feasible. The "traffic
Impact study" prepared by Ruettgers & Schuler recommends mitigation measures, such
as street improvements and traffic signals, for intersections and street segments which
fall below an acceptable Level of Service due to the impact of future traffic. The
proposed mitigation measures are traffic flow improvements that are recognized
transportation control measures in compliance with the Air Quality Attainment Plan.
The Air Quality Attainment Plan predicted the workforce in Kern County to increase 40
percent and housing to increase 30 percent from 1990 to 2000. Although the proposed
project was not anticipated by the Plan, it is consistent with growth projections in the
County. Thus, the Project is considered consistent with the Air Quality Attainment Plan.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
5.4-5
Impacts to regional air quality resulting from cumulative development may
s¢gnificantly impact existing air quality levels. Analysis has concluded that a less
than significant impact would occur in this regard.
Facts Supporting Finding
The Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts2 states, "impacts of
local pollutants (CO, HAPs) are cumulatively significant when modeling shows that the
combined emissions from the project and other existing and planned projects will exceed
air quality standards." The project is not expected to cause a cumulative impact in
excess of the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for several reasons.
CO "hot spot" modeling demonstrated that the ambient air quality standards for CO
would not be exceeded as a result of the Project. Also, the Project is not a source of
HAP emissions and therefore cannot have a significant impact from HAPs.
For ROG and NOx, the only significance thresholds exceeded would be from the
Project's mobile source emissions. Therefore the Project is considered to be
cumulatively less than significant for ROG and NOx. PM~0 emissions from the Project
are minimal and are expected to be less than significant.
Cumulative operational impacts associated with the Project are also expected to be less
than significant. For the most part, the cumulative vehicular emissions from the Project
would not occur at the site, but would be distributed throughout an area surrounding the
2 CARB Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts, revised January 10, 2002, p. 29.
S:tZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
22 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan AmendmentJZone Change #02-0193
Project site. Overall, cumulative impacts are expected to be less than the CAAQS and,
therefore, would be considered less than significant.
NOISE
SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACTS
5.5-1
Grading and construction within the Project area would result in temporary noise
impacts to nearby noise sensitive receptors. Adherence to City Code
requirements would reduce construction noise impacts to a less than significant
level.
Facts Supporting Finding
In addition to construction noise generated at the Project site, construction would also
cause traffic noise along access routes to the site due to the movement of equipment
and workers to the site. Heavy equipment detailed in Table 5.5-7, Typical Construction
Equipment Noise Levels, of the Final EIR, is expected to be moved on to the site once
during each construction phase and would have a less than significant short-term effect
on noise levels. Daily transportation of construction workers is not expected to cause a
significant effect since this traffic would not be a substantial percentage of current daily
volumes in the area, and would not be anticipated to increase traffic noise levels by
more than 1 dBA.
Construction noise would last the duration of construction, although it would be the most
noticeable during the initial months of site intensive grading and building construction.
Noise sensitive receptors in proximity to the construction site may experience excessive
noise levels resulting from construction activities. These impacts, however, are exempt
as noted above and would be short-term, ceasing upon completion of each
grading/construction phase. As such, construction impacts are considered to be less
than significant.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
5.5-4
Implementation of the proposed Project, together with buildout and cumulative
projects, would increase the ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity.
Vehicular traffic from the Project, along with buildout and cumulative projects
would not exceed City cumulative noise exposure standards along local
roadways. As such, the Project combined with buildout and cumulative projects,
would not contribute a significant and unavoidable noise impact.
Facts Supporting Findinq
Table 5.5-11, Buildout and Cumulative Traffic Noise Levels, of the Final EIR, shows that
buildout and cumulative traffic noise levels would exceed the City's 65 dB CNEL criterion
with or without the noise contribution of the project, except along Wible Road from
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
23 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
Panama Lane to Harris Road. At this location, traffic noise levels with or without the
project would be less than the 65 dB criterion. Hence, the project would not cause traffic
noise levels to exceed the 65 dB CNEL criterion.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
5.6-2
Development of the proposed project would result in the cumulative loss of open
space. Cumulative development is mitigated on a project-by-project basis and in
accordance with the MBHCP.
Facts Suppoding Findinq
Cumulative development within the southern portion of Bakersfield would have the
potential to adversely affect area biological resources. Regional loss of native areas is a
significant issue, although the proposed GPA/ZC #02-0193 Project does not contribute
to this problem. The Bakersfield area is subject to the provisions of the MBHCP, thus
cumulative impacts have been addressed and considered mitigable to less than
significant levels.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
5.7-3 Cumulative development may adversely affect cultural resources. Resources are
evaluated and mitigated on a project-by-project basis.
Facts Supporting Findinq
Potential impacts would be site specific and an evaluation of potential impacts would be
conducted on a project-by-project basis. Each incremental development would be
required to comply with all applicable State, Federal and City regulations concerning
preservation, salvage, or handling of cultural resources. In consideration of these
regulations, potential cumulative impacts upon cultural resources would not be
considered significant.
VII. FINDINGS REGARDING EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED
TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
The City of Bakersfield having reviewed and considered the information contained of the Final
EIR, the Technical Appendices and the administrative record, finds, pursuant to California
Public Resources Code 21081 (a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines 15091 (a)(1) that changes or
alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which would
mitigate, avoid, or substantially lessen to below a level of significance the following potentially
significant environmental effects identified of the Final EIR in the following categories:
Aesthetics, Traffic and Circulation, Air Quality (Short-Term Emissions), Noise (Stationary Noise
Impacts), Biological Resources, and Cultural Resources.
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
24 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
The potentially significant adverse environmental impacts that can be mitigated are listed below.
The City of Bakersfield finds that these potentially significant adverse impacts can be mitigated
to a level that is considered less than significant after implementation of mitigation measures
identified of the Final EIR.
AESTHETICS
SHORT-TERM AESTHETIC IMPACTS
5.1-1
Grading and construction of the proposed Project site would temporarily alter the
visual appearance of the property. Impacts are considered to be short-term;
would cease upon completion of construction activities and would be reduced to
less than significant levels with implementation of the recommended mitigation
measure.
Facts Supporting Finding
Project construction activities would disrupt views across the site from surrounding
areas. Graded surfaces, construction debris, construction equipment and heavy truck
traffic would be visible. Soil would be stockpiled and equipment for grading activities
would be staged at various locations throughout the site. The use of metal storage
containers in conjunction with construction projects would be subject to Section
17.57.050 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code, which allows the use of metal storage
containers for construction, subject to approval by the Building Director, and shall not
exceed 24 months in duration and must be removed upon issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
These impacts would be short-term and would cease upon project completion. With the
implementation of the recommended mitigation pertaining to location of screening areas
and screening and compliance with Municipal Code requirements, short-term impacts
would be reduced to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measure 5.1-1 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.1-1
Construction equipment staging areas shall be located in the southwest
quarter of the site and appropriate screening (i.e., temporary fencing with
opaque material), used to buffer views of construction equipment and
material, when feasible. Staging locations shall be indicated on project Final
Development Plans and grading Plans are subject to review and approval of
the City. Compliance with this measure is subject to periodic field inspection
by City Staff.
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
25 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
LONG-TERM AESTHETIC IMPACTS
5.1-2
Project implementation would permanently alter views of and across the site.
Compliance with the Bakersfield Municipal Code sections and mitigation
measures pertaining to Planned Commercial Development (PCD) requirements,
signage, landscaping, and metal storage containers requirements would reduce
impacts to a less than significant level.
Facts Supporting Findinq
Implementation of the proposed GPA/ZC #02-0193 Project would permanently alter
views across the vacant site to a commercial center. The primary concern for aesthetic
impacts are for the existing residents located to the north of the site, across Maurice
Avenue and to the east of the site. Residents to the north of the site would only have
views of a block wall and the backs of buildings if buffers were not implemented. The
proposed Landscape Plan provides a buffer to reduce visual impacts by planting
evergreen trees, in a 40-foot wide landscape area on the north side of the block wall. In
order to provide more effective visual screening of on-site parking areas and buildings
for residents to the east, a six-foot high block wall would be constructed along the
eastern site boundary adjacent to the PG & E easement. In compliance with Bakersfield
Municipal Code (Title 17.61.030.P), which requires evergreen trees to be installed along
the properly line perimeter as a buffer between office, commercial and industrial uses
and property zoned for residential uses, trees surrounding the perimeter of the site
would be spaced no further than 20 feet apart. Approval of the Landscape Plan would
reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
According to Section 17.57.020 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code, any site area greater
than one-half acre, zoned PCD, is allowed a maximum of two metal storage containers,
and may only be allowed additional containers as approved by the Planning Director
from October 1s~ to January 1s~, each calendar year. Due to the visual impacts of metal
storage containers, the projects relationship to existing residences, and the quality
control objectives of the PCD zone classification, a mitigation measure disallowing metal
storage containers within the site is recommended.
To avoid unsightly placement of merchandise along walkways, in parking spaces and
drive aisles, a designated sales area with screening would enhance the aesthetic quality
objectives of the PCD zone classification. These outside areas and rooftop equipment
are to be screened in accordance with Zoning Ordinance Section 17.24.050. Overlook
screening shall be subject to Zoning Ordinance Section 17.08.090.
The PCD plans depict truck docks and loading facilities for the two major buildings at the
rear of the buildings and for the most part out of public view, except for a portion of the
northwest corner of the project site. Although this loading area is relatively at a similar
grade with State Route 99, the loading area may be visible to the public traveling State
Route 99. To provide transition between the adjacent land uses and drive aisle, a
landscape strip on the east side of the loading area is shown on the preliminary
landscape plan.
S:[ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
26 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
A comprehensive sign plan would be prepared for the proposed Project. The
comprehensive sign plan is subject to Section 17.60.030 of the Municipal Code, which
establishes requirements for a comprehensive sign plan which is subject to approval by
the City Planning Commission. Approval of the comprehensive sign plan would reduce
impacts to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measures 5.1-2 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measures are as follows:
5.1-2a No metal storage containers shall be allowed within the Project area.
5.1-2b
For outside sales and/or storage of merchandise, materials and/or
equipment, there shall be a designated area specifically identified on the final
site plan for such uses. These areas shall be completely screened by a
minimum 6-foot high solid wall or fence. Items may not be stacked higher
than the height of the screen. Outside sales and/or storage areas shall not be
located on sidewalks or other locations which may hinder views or pathways
of pedestrians or vehicles. The outside area shall be included in calculating
the parking requirements for the shopping center.
5.1-2c
Landscaping along State Route 99 adjacent the truck loading area shall
include evergreen shrubs, ground cover and trees which visually buffer the
truck loading area from public view along this portion of State Route 99.
LIGHT AND GLARE IMPACTS
5.1-3
The Project would generate additional light/glare beyond existing conditions due
to on-site security and operational lighting for the Project. Compliance with City
codes and recommended mitigation would reduce potential impacts to less than
significant levels.
Facts Suppoding Findinq
The Project may create light/glare impacts to off-site uses and introduce new sources of
lighting into the Project area. These sources include lighting for commercial businesses,
streetlights, parking lot lights, entryway lights, lighting for signs, and interior building
lighting. The Project site is bordered to the north and east by existing residential
properties. Limiting the effects of the lighting on the existing adjacent residences is an
important aspect of the design of the new facility. Light spill and glare are the major
environmental concerns associated with outdoor lighting installations.
The placement of luminaries in the interior of the parking area has the potential to result
in a significant impact due the amount of spill lighting on adjacent properties. A 35-foot
wide landscape buffer on the east side of the site and the road separation and 40-foot
wide landscape area to the north would limit the amount of spill lighting on the adjacent
residential properties on the east side.
S:~ZoneChangelPanama99[cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
27 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
The photometric analysis3 indicates the levels of spill lighting expected on the adjacent
residential sites. In the majority of adjacent residential areas to the north and east, the
footcandle levels would range from 0.0 footcandles to 0.4 footcandles. However,
footcandle levels within the PG & E easement range from 0.0 to 1.6 footcandles. Since
this area is physically separated by a wood fence, it appears that the residential property
owners would not be affected. In order to minimize the potential impact on adjacent
residences, the design of the parking lot lighting shall be designed to provide 0.0
footcandles of spill lighting on adjacent residential properties. Minor adjustments in the
placement of perimeter luminaries along the north and east side of the site and the
application of house side shields in the photometric analysis would eliminate light spill on
the adjacent residential properties.
Mitigation Measure 5.1-3 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measures are as follows:
5.1-3
The proposed Project shall adhere to the following lighting standards and
requirements:
Provide elevation detail for poles, luminaries and foundation heights to
verify luminaire mounting height above ground;
Specify fully shielded luminaries as defined by the IESNA to mitigate
glare;
Adjust placement of perimeter luminaries with house side shields to
mitigate light spill and glare; and
Provide photometric analysis indicating that there is no light spill on
adjacent residential properties.
Light fixtures mounted on the sides or rear of major tenant buildings must
be designed to project light down (not out) and the light source must be
completely shielded from adjacent residential property.
Lights may be shielded with covers, baffles or other mechanisms as
approved by the City Building Director.
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
TRIP GENERATION, DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
5.3-1
The proposed Project would generate additional trips on the adjacent
roadways, thus affecting the level of service at intersections and roadways
identified below. Impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels
with implementation of mitigation for roadway improvements pursuant to the
requirements of the Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation Impact Fee
Program.
3 The full-scale plan with the photometric analysis is on file and available upon request at City Hall.
S: ~ZoneChangelPanama 991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
28 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
Facts Supporting Finding
TRIP GENERA TION
Trip Generation and Design Hour Volumes were calculated using the ITE Trip
Generation Manual, dh Edition and are shown in Table 5.3-4, Project Trip Generation, of
the Final EIR. Separate rates were used for the individual uses.
TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
The volumes generated by this Project were assigned to the critical intersections for
which impacts were analyzed and are shown in Exhibits 5.3-3, Project PM Peak Hour
Traffic, and 5.3-4, Project AM Peak Hour Traffic. Exhibits, 5.3-5, 2002 Plus Project PM
Peak Hour Traffic, 5.3-6, 2002 Plus Project AM Peak Hour Traffic, 5.3-7, 2020 PM Peak
Hour Traffic, 5.3-8, 2020 AM Peak Hour Traffic, 5.3-9, 2020 Plus Project PM Peak Hour
Traffic, and Exhibit 5.3-10, 2020 Plus Project AM Peak Hour Traffic, show the Project
traffic plus existing and future 2020 traffic, of the Final EIR.
INTERSECTIONS
Signalized intersections were evaluated using Synchro Version 5 from Trafficware.
Unsignalized intersections were analyzed using the Highway Capacity Software Version
2000 from McTrans. Analysis was performed for the following scenarios: existing
(2002), existing plus Project, year 2020, year 2020 plus Project and 2020 plus Project
with mitigation. As shown on Table 3, Intersection Level of Service, PM Peak Hour,
Unsignalized Intersections, Table 4, Intersection Level of Service, AM Peak Hour,
Unsignalized Intersections, Table 5, Intersection Level of Service, PM Peak Hour,
Signalized Intersections, and Table 6, Intersection Level of Service, AM Peak Hour,
Signalized Intersections of the Traffic Study, of Appendix 15.2 of the Final EIR, the
following intersections (without mitigation) would be below the acceptable LOS (LOS C)
under "2002 Plus Project" and "2020 Plus Project" conditions:
Unsignalized - 2002 Plus Project
Berkshire Road at Wible Road (Eastbound) .................................. PM Peak-LOS D
Panama Lane at Ashe Road (Northbound) ................................... PM Peak-LOS D
Panama Lane at Ashe Road (Southbound) ................................... PM Peak-LOS F
White Lane at SR-99 (Northbound Off Ramp) ............................... PM Peak-LOS F
Unsignalized - 2020 Plus Project
Berkshire Road at South H Street (Westbound) ............................ PM Peak-LOS F
South H Street at McKee Road (Northbound and Southbound)...PM Peak-LOS E
Hosking Road at Wible Road (Westbound and Eastbound) .......... PM Peak-LOS F
Hosking Road at South H Street .................................................... PM Peak-LOS F
Berkshire Road at Wible Road (Eastbound and Westbound) ....... PM Peak-LOS F
Berkshire Road at South H Street (Westbound) ............................ PM Peak-LOS F
Berkshire Road at South H Street (Eastbound) ............................. PM Peak-LOS E
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cctEx-Fact- Finding.doc
29 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
Panama Lane at Gosford Road ..................................................... PM Peak-LOS F
Panama Lane at Ashe Road (Northbound and Southbound) ........ PM Peak-LOS F
Panama Lane at Monitor Street ..................................................... PM Peak-LOS F
White Lane at SR-99 (Northbound Off Ramp) ............................... PM Peak-LOS F
Signalized - 2002 Plus Project
Panama Lane at Wible Road ......................................................... PM Peak-LOS D
White Lane at Wible Road ............................................................. PM Peak-LOS E
White Lane at SR-99 (Southbound Off Ramp) .............................. PM Peak-LOS D
Signalized - 2020 Plus Proiect
Panama Lane at Wible Road ......................................................... PM Peak-LOS F
Panama Lane at SR-99 (Southbound Off Ramp) .......................... PM Peak-LOS D
Panama Lane at Colony Street ...................................................... PM Peak-LOS D
Panama Lane at South H Street .................................................... PM Peak-LOS D
Wible Road at Harris Road ............................................................ PM Peak-LOS E
White Lane at Wible Road ............................................................. PM Peak-LOS F
White Lane at SR-99 (Southbound Off Ramp) .............................. PM Peak-LOS F
White Lane at SR-99 (Southbound Off Ramp) .............................. AM Peak-LOS F
ROAD WA YS
Anticipated increased traffic volumes due to continuing development will significantly
impact the existing street system. By the year 2020, the operations at most unsignalized
intersections (in their current configuration) would deteriorate to below LOS C. The
Project traffic does not deteriorate the LOS of any facilities below what would otherwise
be anticipated in the year 2020.
Many of the improvements that are required in order to maintain acceptable levels of
service are listed in the RTIF, for which this Project would be required to contribute the
fare share requirement. The Project's fare share is calculated to be $398,560.
For those improvements that are needed, but not included in the RTIF, the Project
developer would be required to pay the proportionate share for which the Project is
responsible. Therefore, payment of the required fees and compliance with roadway
construction requirements adjacent to the Project would result in less than significant
impacts.
Mitigation Measure 5.3-1 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measures are as follows:
5.3-1a Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project applicant shall comply with
the Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation Impact Fee Program (RTIF) as more
specifically listed in Table 5.3-7, Future Street Improvements and Local
Mitigation Percentages, of the Final EIR. The Project applicant shall participate
in the improvements required on a pro-rata fair-share basis.
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
30 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
Table 5.3-7
Future Street Improvements and Local Mitigation Percentages
Improvements not Project % Share
Total Improvements Covered by RTIF For Local
Intersection Required by 2020 * (Local Mitigation) Mitigation
South H Street at McKee Road Install Signal - 1 WBL 1 WBR, 2
NBL, Install Signal 2.16%
1 NBT, 1NBL, 2 SBL, 1 SBT, 1 SBR
Hosking Road at Wible Road Install Signal - 2 ESL, 2EBT, 1 4.10%
ESR, 2WSL, 2 WBT, 1 WBR, 1NB., Install Signal
2 NBT, 1 NBR, 1 SBL, 2 SBT, 1
SBR
Hosking Road at South H Street Install Signal- 1 EBL, 1 WBL, 1 3.15%
NBL, 1 NBT, 1 NBR, 1 SBT, 1 SBR Install Signal
Berkshire Road at Wible Road Install Signal - 1EBL, 1 WBL, 1 6.34%
NBL, 1 NBT, 1 NBR, 1 SBR, 1 SBT, Install Signal
1 SBR
Berkshire Road at S. H Street Install Signal - 1 WBL, 1 NBL, 1
NBT, 1 NBR, 1 SBL 1 SBT, 1 SBR
(Em Lanes will be built by adjacent Install Signal 4.69%
development)
Panama Lane at Gosford Road Install Signal - 1 EBL, 2 WBT, 1 2.16%
WBR, 2 NBL 2 NBT, 1 NBR, 1 SBL
2 SBT, 1 SBR
Panama Lane at Ashe Road Install Signal - 1 EBL, 2 EBT, 1 2.87%
EBR, 2 NBL, 2 NBT, 1 NBR Install Signal
Panama Lane at Akers Road 1 NRB 1 NBR 6.94%
Panama Lane at Wible Road 1 WBR 1 WBR 9.99%
Panama Lane at 99 SB Off Ramp 1 SBR lSBR 11.00% (33.10%)
Panama Lane at Colony Street 1EBL, 1 EBR *, 1 WBL, 2 WBR, 1 1 EBL, I WBL, 2 WBR, 100%
SBL, 2 SBR 1 SBL, 2 SBL
Panama Lane at S. H Street 1 EBL 1 NBT, 1 WBL, 1 WBT, 1 1 EBL, 1 WBL, 1 NBL, 10.60%
NBL, 1 SBL, 1 SBR t SBL, 1 SBR
Panama Lane at Monitor Street Install Signal - Stripe lor ultimate Install Signal 8.13%
lane usage
Wible Road at Harris Road 1 EBL, 1 WBL, 1 WBR, 1 NBL 1 1 EBL, 1 WBL, 1 WBR, 3.68%
NBR, 1 SBL, 1 SBR 1 NBL, 1 NBR, 1 SBL,
1 SBR
White Lane at Wible Road ** 1 EBR, 1 WBR, 1 NBT, 1 SBT **
White Lane at 99 SB Off Ramp ** 1 EBT, 1 WBT, ISRB **
White Lane at SR 99 NB Off Ramp ** install Signal - 1 EBT, 1 WBT **
Panama Lane west of Colony Street Right - most WB for "NB SR-99 Right - most WB for 7.o1% of portion of the
only" lane "NB SR-99 only~ Lane cost that Js the
determined by City to
be responsibility new
development.
· Condition of approval for Southerly Project by Sierra Pacific Bevelopment
· *To be built with current project under design by the City of Bakersfield
(%) Caltrans Percent Share
NB Nodhbound SB - Southbound WB - Westbound Em- Eastbound
L - Left Turn Lane T - Through Lane R - Right Turn Lane
S:~ZoneChangelPanama99tcclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
31 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
5.3-1b Various roadways and intersections in the project vicinity fail below a LOS C by
the year 2020 and are not a part of the Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation
Impact Fee Program (RTIF). In order to maintain LOS C for year 2020+, prior to
application for building permit, the Project applicant/engineer shall submit for
approval by the City Engineer, estimates and fee calculations for the fair share of
local mitigation identified in the traffic impact study/EIR. At the time of building
permit issuance, the applicant shall contribute the fair share of local mitigation
fees based upon the approved calculations. The following is a listing of required
intersections and roadway improvements:
Intersection Improvements
South H Street at McKee Road: Install signal (LOS C);
Hosking Road at Wible Road: Install signal (LOS C);
Hosking Road at South H Street: Install signal (LOS C);
Berkshire Road at Wible Road: Install signal (LOS B);
Berkshire Road at South H Street: Install signal (LOS B);
Panama Lane at Gosford Road: Install signal (LOS C);
Panama Lane at Ashe Road: Install signal (LOS B);
Panama Lane at Monitor Street: Install signal (LOS C);
White Lane at SR-99 Northbound Off-Ramp: Install signal (LOS B).
Roadway Improvements
Panama Lane at Akers Road: Add northbound right turning lane (LOS C);
Panama Lane at Wible Road: Add westbound right turning lane (LOS C);
Panama Lane at SR-99 Southbound Off-Ramp: Add southbound right
turning lane (LOS C);
Panama Lane at Colony Street: Add eastbound left turning lane,
westbound left turning lane, two westbound right turning lanes,
southbound reft turning lane and two southbound right turning lanes (LOS
C). Improvement is required prior to opening day;
Panama Lane at South H Street: Add eastbound left turning lane,
westbound left turning lane, northbound left turning lane, southbound left
turning lane, and southbound right turning lane (LOS C);
Wible Road at Harris Road: Add eastbound left turning lane, westbound
left turning lane, westbound right turning lane, northbound left turning
lane, northbound right turning lane, southbound left turning lane and
southbound right turning lane (LOS C);
White Lane at Wible Road: Add eastbound right turning lane, westbound
right turning lane, northbound through lane, and southbound through lane
(LOS D);
White Lane at SR-99 Southbound Off-Ramp: Add eastbound through
lane, westbound through lane and south bound right turning lane (LOS
D); and
White Lane at SR~99 Northbound Off-Ramp: Add eastbound through lane
and westbound through lane (LOS B).
S: tZoneChange lPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
32 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
DESIGN HAZARDS
5.3-2
Development of the proposed Project may result in a hazard condition due to a
design feature. Impacts would be reduced to less than significant level with
implementation of recommended mitigation measures.
Facts Supporting Finding
The entrance into the Project site would be provided from Colony Street off of Panama
Lane. For traffic arriving from the east, there would be two right turning lanes from
Panama Lane onto Colony Street. Two left turning lanes would be provided for traffic
from the west. There would be two lanes for entering the site on Colony Street which
would loop around to the west in order to provide easier access to all parking lanes.
Two entrances from Colony Street would be provided for parking at Building C. Two
major entrances would be provided to enter the parking lanes for Lowe's and as the loop
continues west it would provide access to all parking lanes for Wal-Mart. Based on an
updated design for the Colony Street and Panama Lane entrance, Colony Street would
have four lanes to exit the Project site, two left turning lanes, one right turn lane, and one
lane for both right turn and through traffic. In order to accommodate the high traffic
volume, the center lane exiting the site is recommended to be striped for shared left
turn/through movement instead of only through movement. By accommodating an
additional left turn lane, impacts would be reduced to less than significant.
Access for delivery trucks would be provided from an unsignalized access road along
the eastern side of the Project site from Panama Lane. There would be a designated left
turning lane for delivery trucks coming from the west. Access for the delivery trucks
would be limited to the eastern and northern perimeter of the site. A potential traffic
hazard exists for trucks turning left, exiting the site, due to the fact that the intersection is
unsignalized. Therefore, the unsignalized access location should be modified to prohibit
left turn movement out of the site which would reduce impacts to a less than significant
level. This would affect the delivery truck traffic control forcing them to use the Colony
Street exit.
One design feature that Caltrans has issued a comment on is in regards to the abrupt
westbound taper between the northbound off-ramp and Colony Street. The first option is
to reduce the length of the dual eastbound left-turn lane pockets in order to begin this
lane transition sooner. This option is acceptable only if the eastbound queues in said
turn lanes are shown to not back up into the thru travel lanes, and also if the thru lanes
do not back up into the Northbound Off-Ramp signal.
The developer has agreed to the second option to convert the right-most westbound
lane into a "Northbound SR-99 Only" lane. The developer shall pay a proportionate
share equal to 7.01 percent of that portion of the cost of the following improvement as
determined to be the responsibility of the new development by the City of Bakersfield to
the auxiliary lane for the southbound off-ramp from State Route 99 to Panama Lane.
The residential neighborhoods located to the north and east of the Project site could be
negatively impacted by the increase in traffic to the commercial centers. No access
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
33 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan AmendmentJZone Change #02-0193
would be provided to the Project site through the residential neighborhoods to the north
and east in order to ensure that no thoroughfare traffic affects the local traffic on the
surrounding collector streets. The majority of traffic traveling to the Project site would be
from SR-99 to Panama Lane. However, traffic may increase along South H Street and
along the collector streets of Chester and Nimitz Streets in order to access Panama
Lane.
Mitigation Measure 5.3-2 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measures are as follows:
5.3-2a The unsignalized access location along Panama Lane shall be modified to
prohibit a left turn movement out of the site.
5.3-2b
The center lane for the proposed extension of Colony Street exiting the site shall
be striped for shared left turn/through movement instead of only a through
movement at the intersection at Panama Lane. Improvement is required prior to
opening day.
5.3-2c
In order to address the westbound taper between the northbound off-ramp and
Colony Street, final design plans for the proposed Project shall convert the right-
most westbound lane into a "Northbound SR-99 Only" lane.
AIR QUALITY
SHORT-TERM EMISSIONS
5.4-1
Significant short-term air quality impacts may occur during site preparation
and project construction. These impacts are considered less than significant
with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. (Mitigation in
this instance refers to applicable City Development Code Sections and SJV
APCD Rules.)
Facts Supporting Finding
Short-term impacts from the Projects would primarily result in fugitive particulate matter
emissions during construction. Regulation VIII of the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air
Pollution Control District specifies control measures for specified outdoor sources of
fugitive particulate matter emissions. The Air District does not require a permit for these
activities, but does impose measures to control fugitive dust, such as the application of
water or a chemical dust suppressant.
Construction would also result in exhaust emissions from diesel-powered heavy
equipment. The proposed Project may have potentially significant short-term
construction equipment emission impacts, which could exceed the Air District threshold
levels for several criteria pollutants. Because the specific mix of construction equipment
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cctEx-Fact- Finding. doc
34 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
needed for future development is not presently known, equipment emissions cannot be
accurately quantified. This data is not available until the construction of specific project
components is undertaken.
The Bakersfield area and the San Joaquin Valley are non-attainment for particulates.
Although the proposed land uses are not considered a potential source for significant
particulate emissions, fugitive padiculate emissions would occur during construction.
Construction activity has the potential to generate 1.2 tons of total suspended
particulates per acre per month of activity2 Assuming that the total suspended
particulates are comprised of 50 percent PM~o and that the application of water controls
emissions by 50 percent, fugitive PM~0 emissions during construction could be reduced
to 0.3 tons per acre per month of activity. A construction schedule for each project
component would be required to develop accurate emission estimates from construction.
Control measures required and enforced by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
District under Regulation VIII would control these short-term emission sources to a level
that is considered less than significant provided a limited amount of acres is disturbed at
any one time.
Compliance with Regulation VIII of the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control
District and the Bakersfield Zoning Code would reduce particulate emission impacts to
levels that are considered less than significant.
Mitigation Measure 5.4-1 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measures are as follows:
5.4-1a The following mitigation measures shall be utilized during the construction phase
of the Project to reduce construction exhaust emissions:
Properly and routinely maintain all construction equipment, as recommended
by manufacturer manuals, to control exhaust emissions.
Shut down equipment when not in use for extended periods of time to reduce
emissions associated with idling engines.
Encourage ride sharing and use of transit transportation for construction
employee commuting to the project sites.
Use electric equipment for construction whenever possible in lieu of fossil
fuel-fired equipment.
Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations;
this may include ceasing of construction activity during the peak-hour of
vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways.
4 EPA, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources, EPA
Publication No. AP-42, Fifth Edition, GPO Stock No. 055-000-00251-7, January 1995; Section 13.2.3, Heavy
Construction Operations.
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
35 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan AmendmentJZone Change #02-0193
5.4-1b Construction of the project requires the implementation of control measures set
forth under Regulation VIII, Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions of the San Joaquin Valley
Air Pollution Control District. The following mitigation measures, in addition to
those required under Regulation VIII, shall be implemented to reduce fugitive
dust emissions associated with the Project:
All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively
utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust
emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp
or other suitable cover, or vegetative ground cover.
All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be
effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/
suppressant.
All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut &
fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust
emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking.
When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or
effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least six inches of
freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained.
All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or
dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry
rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or
accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of
blower devices is expressly forbidden)
Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the
surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of
fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical
stabilizer/suppressant.
Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends
50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday.
Any site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and
trackout.
Asphalt-concrete paving shall comply with San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution
Control District RuNe 4641 and restrict the use of cutback, slow-cure and
emulsified asphalt paving materials.
Grading activities shall cease during periods of high winds (greater than 20
mph over a one-hour period).
S:tZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
36 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
Construction-related vehicle speeds shall be limited to 15 mph on all unpaved
areas at the construction site.
Wash off construction and haul trucks to minimize the removal of mud and
dirt from the project sites.
NOISE
STATIONARY NOISE IMPACTS
5.5-3
Long-term operations associated with the proposed Project would result in the
generation of on-site noise associated with loading/unloading activities and
mechanical equipment. Analysis has concluded that impacts would be reduced
to less than significant levels with implementation of the recommended mitigation
measures.
Facts Supporting Finding
The major noise sources associated with the proposed Lowe's and Wal-Mart that may
impact nearby residences include slowly moving trucks on the Project site, approaching
and leaving the loading docks, activities at the loading docks themselves, the unloading
of lumber, trash compactors, and roof-top mechanical equipment.
Slowly Moving Trucks (Deliveries) on Project Site
According to Wal-Mart, approximately four general truck deliveries and two to three
refrigerated truck deliveries would occur each day. Deliveries could occur throughout a
24-hour period at Wal-Mart. Lowe's estimates five tractor/trailer deliveries per day.
Some of these would be for lumber. Receiving hours for Lowe's would generally occur
between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., however, trailers could be dropped off late at night or
in the early morning.
Trucks would travel along the east and north side of the Center to access loading docks.
The approximate distances to the center of backyards of the adjacent residents would be
as follows:
Along the east side of the proposed Lowe's, approximately 80 feet from truck
travel lanes.
Along the north side of the proposed Lowe's, approximately 140 feet from
truck travel lanes.
Along the north side of Wal-Mart the distance is approximately 110 feet from
truck travel lanes.
The maximum (Lmax) level of slowly moving heavy and small trucks is about 73 and 70
dBA, respectively, at 50 feet. Assuming a standard rate of attenuation of 6 dB/doubling
of distance for a slowly moving point source, the Lmax in backyards east and north of
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
37 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
Lowe's would be 69 dBA and 64 dBA, respectively. Along the north side of Wal-Mart,
the Lmax due to truck deliveries would be approximately 66 dBA. As shown in Table
5.5-3, Hourly Noise Level Performance Standards, the Lmax criterion during the
nighttime hours is 70 dBA (since truck deliveries could occur during a 24 hour period, it
is necessary to use nighttime criteria as a basis for determining compliance with the
City's noise standards). Therefore, noise levels from slowly moving trucks would not
exceed the City's Lmax noise level criteria and no impact would occur in this regard.
In terms of the CNEL, noise levels would range from 45-50 dB for both the proposed
Wal-Mart and Lowe's. These levels are below the City's 65 dB CNEL criterion. The
CNEL metric usually underestimates the noise nuisance potential of noise sources that
are sporadic, such as truck movements in a shopping center. This is because, by
definition, the CNEL averages the noise level for each hour through a 24-hour period
and adds penalties for noise that occurs in the evening and nighttime hours. The CNEL
is most useful where the noise is more or less continuous, such as traffic noise.
Loading Docks
The Lowe's and Wal-Mart loading docks would be approximately 230 feet and 130 feet,
respectively, from the nearest homes to the north. Noise sources at loading docks may
include truck engines, truck refrigeration units, fork lifts, banging of hand carts and roll-
up doors, noise from P.A. systems, and voices of truck drivers and store employees.
Table 5.5-10, Loading Dock Noise Levels at Nearest Residences, of the Final EIR,
indicates that at residences north of the Lowe's loading dock, predicted L50 and Lmax
noise levels would not exceed the City's criteria. However, at the nearest residences
north of Wal-Mart, the predicted L50 noise level would exceed the City's 50 dBA L50
standard during the nighttime (refer to Table 5.5-3). This impact would be considered
significant unless mitigated. Implementation of the recommended mitigation involving
construction of a block wall would reduce noise levels by a minimum of 5 dBA, resulting
in compliance with the City's noise standard. A less than significant impact would occur
in this regard following mitigation.
Lumber Unloading
Lumber unloading would occur along the rear portion of the Lowe's store. At a distance
of 50 feet, the measured L50 and Lmax from this activity was 61 to 75 dBA, respectively.
At the nearest residences, the predicted L50 and Lmax noise levels would be
approximately 48 and 62 dBA, respectively. These noise levels do not exceed the City's
nighttime standards and no impact would occur in this regard.
Trash Compactors
Based on information gathered by Brown-Buntin, the Sound Exposure Level (SEL) of a
trash compactor is 83.9 dBA at 45 feet. The approximate Lmax would be 76 dBA at 45
feet (the Lmax is usually 8-10 dB less than the SEL assuming an event of approximately
30 seconds). Assuming trash compactors are at the rear of the proposed buildings, the
distance to the nearest residences from the Lowe's compactor would be approximately
230 feet, and the distance from the Wal-Mart compactor would be approximately 130
S:~oneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
38 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
feet. Using the standard 6 dB/doubling of distance attenuation factor, the Lmax values
at the residences at the rear of Lowe's and Wal-Mart would be approximately 62 and 68
dBA, respectively. These levels would not exceed the City's Lmax criteria and no impact
would occur in this regard.
Rooftop Air Conditioners
Air conditioner units ranging from one to 20 tons are assumed would be placed on the
roof of the proposed Lowe's and Wal-Mart stores. At a distance of 90 feet, the noise
level from all units operating simultaneously would be approximately 54 dBA. A 5-foot
parapet is proposed along the roof edge of both stores, which would provide
approximately 6 dBA of attenuation. The resulting noise level at 90 feet would be
approximately 48 dBA. This noise level would not exceed the City's L50-50 dBA
nighttime criteria and no impact would occur in this regard
Mitigation Measure 5.5-3 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measures are as follows:
5.5-3
A minimum 8-foot-high block wall shall be constructed along the north perimeter
of the Wal-Mart store from the northwest property corner to the approximate
location of the northeast corner of the Wal-Mart store.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS
5.6-1 Project construction would permanently replace 37.52 acres of undeveloped land
with urban development, Construction of the bu#dings may result in a loss of
habitat for the San Joaquin Kit Fox and the Burrowing Owl. Mitigation in
accordance with the MBHCP requirements and recommended mitigation
measures, as set forth in this EIR, would reduce impacts to less than significant
levels.
Facts Supporting Finding
Four sensitive animal species were reported by the NDDB or are known to occur in the
vicinity of the Project site: the Burrowing Owl, Swainson's Hawk, the Blunt-Nosed
Leopard Lizard, and the San Joaquin Kit Fox. Two of these four sensitive animal
species, the Burrowing Owl and the San Joaquin Kit Fox, were found on the Project site.
Therefore, construction of the proposed Project may result in the loss of habitat for the
San Joaquin Kit Fox and the Burrowing Owl. Impacts associated with the development
of the Project site would be subject to the terms and conditions of the MBHCP and
associated Implementation Agreement.
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act, together with complementary legislation, obligates the
United States to preserve and protect migratory birds (including the Burrowing Owl)
through the regulation of hunting, the establishment of refuges, and the protection of bird
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cc[Ex-Fact- Finding,doc
39 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
habitats.5 The MBHCP does not authorize take of "migratory birds". A preconstruction
survey must be conducted immediately prior to construction to ensure no Burrowing
Owls have moved into on-site squirrel burrows. With a Migratory Bird Permit and
authorization of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Burrowing Owls may be passively
harassed from their burrows, outside of the nesting season, generally March 1 through
August 15 (CDFG 1995, USFWS), however, dates are relatively site dependent.
Compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and implementation of required mitigation
measures would reduce impact to Burrowing Owls to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measure 5.6-1 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measures are as follows:
5.6-1a
Habitat Conservation fees for the Project shall be calculated based on the fee in
effect at the time payable to the Planning Department prior to the issuance of an
urban development permit as defined in the Implementation/Management
agreement for the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan. Upon
payment of fees, the applicant shall receive acknowledgement of compliance
with the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan.
5.6-1b
Pursuant to the terms of the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan
(implementation/Management Agreement Section 4.7.4), the Urban
Development Permittee is required to accomplish the following in regards to the
San Joaquin Kit Fox dens located at the Project site:
Notify U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department
of Fish and Game (CDFG) at least five (5) business days prior to the initiation
of any ground disturbance activities, of the intent to grade the area. Under
the terms of the MBHCP implementing agreement, the wildlife agencies are
responsible to arrange for relocation of kit fox if they deem it is appropriate
and feasible;
Eliminate the known den(s) in the following manner which will allow the kit fox
to escape the construction area prior to grading:
All known San Joaquin Kit Fox dens that will be unavoidably destroyed by
project actions shall be carefully excavated by or under the direct
supervision of a qualified wildlife biologist;
Dens shall be completely excavated and subsequently back-filled and
compacted to prevent later use by kit foxes prior to onset of project
construction;
- Dens shall be monitored for three (3) days prior to excavation to ensure
that dens are not occupied by kit foxes when excavated;
170.
Endangered and Other Protected Species - Federal Law and Regulations, By Richard Littell, 1992, page
S:tZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
40 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
- If a kit fox is found inadvedently inside a den during excavation, the
animal(s) shall be allowed to escape unhindered.
5.6-1c The MBHCP requires certain take avoidance measures for the San Joaquin Kit
Fox. MBHCP guidelines regarding tracking and excavation shall be followed to
prevent entrapment of kit fox in dens. Specific measures during the construction
phase of the Project shall be implemented and include the following:
A preconstruction survey shall be conducted on the proposed Project site
prior to site grading to search for any additional native kit fox dens;
All pipes, culverts or similar structures with a diameter of four inches or
greater shall be kept capped to prevent entry of kit fox. If they are not capped
or otherwise covered, they shall be inspected daily prior to burial or closure to
ensure no kit foxes, or other protected species, become entrapped;
Excavations shall either be constructed with escape ramps or be covered to
prevent entrapment, or the site(s) could be protected during construction,
such as with a wildlife exclusion fence, which would eliminate the possibility
of ranging animals from being harmed during construction; and
All food, garbage and plastic shall be disposed of in closed containers and
regularly removed from the site to minimize attracting ranging kit fox or other
animals.
5.6-1d Prior to Grading Permit issuance, the Project applicant shall comply with the
following Burrowing Owl (raptor) nest mitigation:
If site grading is proposed during the raptor nesting season (February through
September), a focuses survey for raptor nests shall be conducted by a
qualified raptor biologist prior to grading activities in order to identify active
nests in areas potentially impacted by project implementation;
If construction is proposed to take place during the raptor nesting/breeding
season (February through September), no construction activity shall take
place within 500 feet of an active nest until the young have fledged (as
determined by a qualified biologist). Any nests that must be removed as a
result of project implementation shall be removed during the non-breeding
season (October-January);
Preconstruction surveys shall include a survey for Burrowing Owl. If active
Burrowing Owl burrows are detected outside of breeding season (September
1 through January 31), passive and/or active relocation efforts may be
undertake, if approved by CDFG and USFWS. If active Burrowing Owl
burrows are detected during breeding season (February 1 through August
31), no disturbance to these burrows shall occur without obtaining
appropriate permitting through the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
S: ~ZoneChange lPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
41 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
If construction is initiated during the nesting season and active eggs or nests are
identified in the preconstruction survey, the applicant shall consult with the
USFWS and California Department of Fish and Game to conduct issuance of a
Migratory Bird Permit and burrow closure prior to the nesting season.
5.6-1e
The presence of any previously unidentified protected species which are not
addressed in the MBHCP, including those protected under the Federal Migratory
Bird Treaty Act, shall be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist prior to
construction. The USFWS and CDFG should be notified of previously
unreported protected species. Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife shall
be reported immediately to the CDFG and USFWS.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
ARCHAEOLOGICAL/PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES IMPACTS
5.7-1
Implementation of the proposed Project may cause a significant impact to
unknown archaeological, historical, or paleontological resources on-site.
Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would reduce impacts
to unknown cultural resources to a less than significant level.
Facts Supporting Finding
No cultural resources were found during the field survey and records search, therefore
there would be no impacts in this regard. However development of the proposed Project
may disturb or destroy undocumented archaeological, historical, or paleontological
resources. Recommended mitigation measures would ensure proper monitoring of
Project grading activities and testing of any resources found as a result of Project
development. Implementation of recommended mitigation measure would reduce
impacts to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 5.7-1 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measures are as follows:
5.7-1
If archaeological or paleontological resources are discovered during excavation
and grading activities on-site, the contractor shall stop all work and the developer
shall retain a qualified archaeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding
and appropriate course of action. Salvage operation requirements in Appendix K
of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines shall be followed and the
treatment of discovered Native American remains shall comply with State codes
and regulations of the Native American Heritage Commission.
BURIAL SITES
5.7-2
Implementation of the proposed Project has the potential to disturb human
remains. Implementation of the recommended mitigation would reduce impacts
to a less than significant level.
S:~oneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
42 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
Facts Supporting Finding
Human remains in a previously unknown burial site could potentially be encountered
during construction activities associated with the proposed Project. Any alterations to
human remains associated with project implementation would be considered a
significant adverse impact. However, implementation of the mitigation which details the
appropriate actions necessary in the event human remains are encountered would
reduce impacts in this regard to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 5.7-2 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measures are as follows:
5.7-2
Should any human bone be encountered during any earth removal or
disturbance activities, all activity shall cease immediately and a qualified
archaeologist and Native American monitor shall be immediately contacted, who
shall then immediately notify the Director of Development. The Director of the
Department of Development Services shall contact the Corner pursuant to
Section 5097.98 and 5097.99 of the Public Resources Code relative to Native
American remains. Should the corner determine the human remains to be Native
American, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted
pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.
VIII. FINDINGS REGARDING INFEASIBILITY OF MITIGATION
MEASURES FOR SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
The City of Bakersfield, having reviewed and considered the information contained of the Final
EIR, Technical Appendices and the administrative record, finds, pursuant to California Public
Resources Code 21081 (a)(3) and CEQA Guidelines 15091 (a)(3), that specific economic, legal,
social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation measures identified
of the Final EIR and, therefore, the Project will cause significant unavoidable impacts in the
categories of Air Quality (Long-Term Operational Emissions and Noise (Existing Plus Project
Mobile Noise Impacts).
AIR QUALITY
LONG-TERM OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
5.4-2
The Project may result in an overall increase m the local and regional pollutant
load due to direct impacts from vehicle emissions and indirect impacts from
electricity and natural gas consumption. This impact is considered significant
and unavoidable for ROG and NOX.
Facts Supporting Finding
Mobile Source - Ozone
The Bakersfield area is a non-attainment area for federal air quality standards for ozone
and particulates. Nitrogen oxides and reactive organic gases are regulated as ozone
S:tZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
43 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
precursors. The District regulates air quality in the Bakersfield area. The District has
prepared an Air Quality Attainment Plan to bring the San Joaquin Valley into compliance
with the California Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone. The District has established a
significance level for ROG and NOx of 10 tons per year each, but has not established
levels of significance for other pollutants.
Project-related mobile source mitigated emissions for ROG and NOx would be
considered significant based on the District's levels of significance as summarized on
Table 5.4-5, Long-Term Project Emissions, of the Final EIR.
Area Source Emissions
The proposed Project would result in personal product use, and would create electrical
demands and heating demands resulting in natural gas combustion. Electrical demand
would result in electrical generation emissions from local power plants. As indicated in
Table 5.4-5, Long-Term Project Emissions, of the Final EIR, area source emissions
generated by the Project at buildout would not individually exceed SJVAPCD thresholds.
However, as discussed below, area source emissions combined with vehicular
emissions would cause operational emissions to exceed SJVAPCD thresholds for ROG
and NOx.
Potential Effect on Sensitive Receptors
Air quality impacts of the Project are not likely to affect sensitive receptors. The nearest
receptor is W.A. Kendrick School, which is located approximately 0.5-mile north of the
Project site. There is also a residential area bordering the Project site to the north and
east, which could contain sensitive receptors.
Potential Impacts from Odors and Hazardous Air Pollutants
The Project consists of general commercial land uses. The generation of odors and
hazardous air pollutants is generally associated with certain types of industrial and
agricultural activities. Therefore, the Project is not expected to result in the generation of
odors or hazardous air pollutants.
Total Project Operational Emissions
As shown in Table 5.4-5, the mobile source and area emissions associated with the
proposed Project would generate pollutant emissions in excess of SJVAPCD thresholds.
Thus, implementation of the proposed Project would create a significant and
unavoidable individual Project impact from ROG and NOx emissions.
Mitigation Measure 5.4-2 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measures are as follows:
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
44 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
5.4-2a
The Project shall comply with Title 24 of the California Energy Efficient
Standards for Residential and Non-Residential Buildings. These
requirements, along with the following mitigation measures, shall be
incorporated into the project design:
Use of Iow-NOx emission water heaters.
Provision of shade trees to reduce building cooling requirements.
Installation of energy-efficient and automated air conditioners.
Exterior windows shall all be double-paned glass.
Energy-efficient (Iow-sodium) parking lights shall be used.
5.4-2b
Transpodation control measures and design features shall be incorporated
into the Project to reduce emissions from mobile sources. The following
control measure is recommended to provide a strategy to reduce vehicle
trips, vehicle use, vehicle miles traveled, and vehicle idling and traffic
congestion for the purpose of reducing motor vehicle emissions: Streets and
traffic signals for intersections and street segments that may impact the
surrounding local roadway system due to Project-generated traffic shall be
improved. Specific mitigation measures for improving the level of service on
congested roadways is presented in Section 5.3, Traffic and Circulation, of
the Final EIR.
NOISE
EXISTING PLUS PROJECT MOBILE NOISE IMPACTS
5.5-2
Project implementation would generate additional vehicular travel on the
surrounding roadway network, thereby resulting in noise level increases along
the roadways. Analysis has concluded that the Project would contribute to a
significant and unavoidable noise impact along portions of Panama Lane.
Facts Supportinq Finding
Project implementation would result in additional traffic on adjacent roadways, thereby
increasing vehicular generated noise in the vicinity of existing residential uses.
Vehicular noise along three roadways were modeled to estimate existing plus Project
noise levels from vehicular traffic. These roadways include Panama Lane, Wible Road,
and South H Street. Roadways selected for analysis are those in close proximity to the
site and which have abutting residences.
Comparing opening day traffic noise levels with and without project, Table 5.5-8, Traffic
Noise Levels at Residences Nearest Roads at Opening Day, of the Final EIR, shows
that the Project would cause traffic noise levels to increase by 1.5 dB along Panama
Lane from Wible Road to Highway 99 and from Highway 99 to South H Street. This
would be a significant noise impact at homes not protected by a wall.
S:tZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
45 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
It should be noted that the 1.5 dB increase in traffic noise levels along Panama Lane
from Wible Road to south H Street, which is considered to be significant, occurs in the
front yards of residences not protected by a wail. Therefore, the worst-case assumption
has been made that both front or back yards of single-family residences are "noise-
sensitive" in the City of Bakersfield. The construction of sound walls along these streets
(where they do not presently exit) would not be feasible since walls would interfere with
private access driveways for three homes along Panama Lane. Therefore, Project
implementation would result in a significant and unavoidable noise impact along podions
of Panama Lane.
IX. FINDING REGARDING ALTERNATIVES
The City of Bakersfield, having reviewed and considered the information contained of the Final
EIR, appendices to the Final EIR and the administrative record, finds, pursuant to Public
Resources Code 21081 (a)(3) and CEQA Guidelines 15091 (a)(3) that (i) the Final EIR
considers a reasonable range of project alternatives and mitigation measures and (ii) specific
economic, location and/or other considerations make infeasible the alternatives as follows:
NO PROJECT/NO DEVELOPMENT
The No Project/No Development Alternative would disregard the proposed Project
application and retain the existing Bakersfield 2010 General Plan Land Use and Zoning
designations for the Project site. This Alternative assumes that the site would continue
to remain undeveloped and preclude any practical use of the site.
The No Project/No Development Alternative would not result in any of the environmental
impacts associated with the construction and development of the proposed Project. This
Alternative would avoid potential impacts resulting from alteration of the Project site's
physical characteristics and construction of new structures and impervious surfaces.
Maintaining the Project site in its existing condition would also eliminate potential
impacts to biological resources, any unknown cultural resources that may exist and
would not alter the visual characteristics of the Project site.
Retaining the property in its current vacant condition does not meet the objectives of the
applicant or the City. Allowing the site to remain undeveloped would preclude any
practical use of the site, and would prevent an acceptable investment return. This
alternative is not considered feasible since the property is under private ownership, is
zoned for development and is located along SR-99. Some form of development is likely
to occur in the near future.
NO PROJECT/EXISTING DESIGNATION
The No Project/Existing Designation Alternative involves development of the Project site
based upon the existing General Plan and Zoning designations. The existing land use
designations for the Project site are Low Density Residential (LR) and Open Space Park
(OS-P) and the site is zoned Mobile Home Park (MH) and General Commercial (C-2).
For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that approximately 237 units could be
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
46 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
developed on the 33.94 acres designated MH6. With an average household size of
2.137, this could result in a population increase of 504 people.
While this Alternative would be consistent with the site's existing land use designation,
this Alternative would differ from several development goals and policies set forth by the
Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. In order to help stimulate economic
development in the area, an "Enterprise Zone" has been established in the older
residential area, in order to create jobs, stimulate new industrial and commercial
development and encourage private investment. Therefore, developing this site for
commercial uses can be considered consistent with this goal for the Urban Southeast
area.
Environmental affects could differ with the development of the Project site as a Mobile
Home park when compared to commercial uses. The visual character of the site would
differ with development of a mobile homes park versus two large commercial retailers
and supporting infrastructure (i.e., parking lots, loading docks, etc.). Development under
the current General Plan and Zoning designations could result in fewer impacts to the
surrounding community in regards to traffic, noise, public health and safety, and air
quality. Additionally, there would be a loss of three acres of open space/park affecting
the future availability of recreational resources. Issues associated with development of
the vacant lot include impacts to biological resources and cultural resources which would
still occur as a result of any development on the site.
Implementation of this Alternative would be consistent with the existing General Plan
and Zoning designation, but would not meet the Project objectives. As described in the
Land Use Element of the General Plan, the Urban Southeast is in need of commercial
development that has a distinguished focus and assists in stimulating new commercial
development and encourages private investment in order to help create jobs.
Development of this site as a mobile home park would increase residents in the area but
would provide limited economic growth for the area. In addition, it is assumed that site
development would not be in accordance with the PCD provisions of the Municipal
Code. As stated in Section 3.4, Project Objectives, the applicant proposes to develop
the vacant and underutilized lot in a unique and innovative way by providing a consistent
Project theme, in order to spur economic development in the area. Under this
Alternative, this objective would not be met.
GRAND CANAL/GATEWAY SITE
The Grand Canal/Gateway site is identified as General Commercial (GC) on the Land
Use Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. The site is located on
the east side of State Route (SR-99), west of South "H" Street, north of the Berkshire
Road alignment and south of the Arvin-Edison Canal. Access to the property from SR-
99 is at Panama Lane. The surrounding land uses are a mixture of commercial,
6 Section 15.50.080.E of the Bakersfield Municipal Code allows one mobile home per lot with a maximum
density of seven lots per acre.
? U.S. Census Bureau, Census 1990, Table DP-l, Profile of General Demographic Characteristics for
Bakersfield City, California.
S:~ZoneChangetPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
47 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
industrial, residential and agricultural uses. The site is currently vacant, however, some
grading/clearing has occurred. A large trench which bisects the property was initiated by
a previous developer in order to create a canal feature for the Grand Canal project.
Due to the similar site locations and surrounding uses, environmental issues would, for
the most part, have similar impacts regarding the development of the Grand
Canal/Gateway site or the proposed Project site. Impacts to environmental issues
associated with the development of a vacant site such as aesthetics, geologic hazards,
hydrology, land use, and disturbance of biological resources, cultural resources, and
mineral resources would all be similar when developing either the Grand Canal/Gateway
site or the proposed Project. Impacts to issues such as air and utilities would be similar,
as they pertain to the extent of the development. Noise impacts would be greater with
the proposed project.
The Grand Canal/Gateway site was considered a viable alternative due to the fact that it
was a sizable (over 67 acres) vacant lot able to accommodate a large commercial center
and would be located near SR-99. Locating at this site would also help induce economic
development in the Urban Southeast area. However, due to the sites southerly location,
it would be difficult to achieve the objective of establishing an economically sound
commercial center. Access to the Grand Canal/Gateway site is hindered by its location,
separated from the majority of other supporting commercial centers and residential
population. The site's location also limits its visibility to local traffic traveling within the
City. These conditions would have limited the viability of the proposed Project and
therefore did not meet the Project objectives.
BEAR MOUNTAIN SITE
This alternative site is located at the southeast corner of Bear Mountain Boulevard and
SR-99, south of the incorporated City limits. The site is partially developed with a
Recreational Vehicle Park and is zoned Highway Commercial - Precise Development
Combining (CH - PD). The site is outside the service area of the City and therefore
adequate infrastructure is not available.
Due to the more remote location of this site and the lack of existing infrastructure
facilities, development of this site would result in increased environmental impacts when
compared to the proposed Project. Effects on traffic and air would be greater due to the
increased distance vehicles must travel to reach the site. Development of this site could
also result in greater impacts aesthetically, due to the extensive development required in
what is considered a rural area. Additionally, development of this site for commercial
uses would result in the loss of the Recreational Vehicle Park currently located on the
site, which could negatively impact the recreational facilities in the area. Finally,
development of this site would result in greater growth inducing impacts as public
facilities and services would be extended to the site. The limited accessibility of the site
would also affect public safety since the site is outside the City limits and therefore police
protection would be the responsibility of the County Sheriff Department. This could pose
additional strain on the Sheriffs Department.
S:~oneChangelPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding.doc
48 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
Impacts to other environmental resources such as agriculture, biological resources,
cultural resources, and public health and safety, are anticipated to be similar to that of
the proposed Project, resulting in less than significant impacts. This alternative would
also require a General Plan Amendment and zone change. Finally, the significant and
unavoidable impacts regarding air quality and noise would be similar with development
of this site.
This Alternative fails to meet several of the Project Objectives and site criteria for
development of the commercial center. The remote location of the site combined with
limited accessibility and demand due to the lack of residential development in the vicinity
of the site limits the economic viability for sustaining a large commercial center.
Additionally, the site's extreme southern location limits the visibility to local Bakersfield
traffic, which is the population base assumed to support the commercial center. The site
is also outside the Metropolitan Bakersfield service area. As a result, this would put
additional strain on County services and utilities. Finally, utilities would have to be
extended to the site contributing to growth inducing impacts.
REDUCED DENSITY
The Reduced Density Alternative addresses a development scenario similar to the
proposed Project but with only one of the major buildings being constructed. This
Alternative involves a 50 percent reduction in the total square footage for both the Wal-
Mart and Lowe's retail centers. The total of 379,196 building square feet would be
reduced to 189,598 square feet for one building. The building would be redesigned
within the site in order to allow for a greater buffer from the surrounding residential uses.
Similar to the proposed Project, the Reduced Density Alternative would require a GPA
and zone change to allow commercial uses on-site. As implementation of this
Alternative would result in a 50 percent reduction in commercial square footage, the
development intensity would be less when compared to the proposed Project. It should
be noted that the General Commercial designation has an allowable Floor Area Ration
(FAR) of 1.0 for commercial uses. The proposed Project has a FAR of 0.23, which is
significantly less than the site's maximum potenfial. The Reduced Density Alternative
would further reduce the FAR on-site.
The Reduced Density Alternative would partially fulfill the Project Objective to develop a
vacant and underutilized lot in a unique and innovative way in order to spur economic
development in the area. A Planned Commercial Development (PCD) enables a
cohesive identity for the subject site, and provides a consistent Project theme,
development standards and design guidelines. By developing the site as a PCD, which
allows for design flexibility, the commercial center is more able to respond to market
needs and therefore able to help the surrounding area develop economically. Although
the PCD provisions would be implemented, this alternative would not achieve the
economic benefits identified under the project description.
S:~ZoneChangetPanama991cclEx-Fact- Finding. doc
49 February 13, 2003
Exhibit "4" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR
CEQA Section 15126(d)(2) indicates that if the "No Project" Alternative is the
"Environmentally Superior" Alternative, then the EIR shall also identify an
environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. The No Project/No
Development Alternative (Existing Conditions), in this case, would not result in the
environmental impacts associated with construction of the proposed Project. Among the
other alternatives assess in this EIR, the Reduced Density Alternative would result in a
reduction in environmental impacts when compared to the proposed Project while still
meeting some of the Project Objectives. This Alternative would result in reduced noise
and air pollutant emissions, and would generate a reduce number of average daily trips.
As a result, the Reduced Density Alternative could be considered the Environmentally
Superior Alternative. It should be noted that the proposed Project has been designed at
a considerably less Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.23 in comparison to the allowable FAR
of 1.0 for the General Commercial designation.
S:~ZoneChangelPanama991cctEx-Fact- Finding.doc
50 February 13, 2003
EXHIBIT "5"
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT/
ZONE CHANGE #02-0193
Pursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, decision-makers are required to balance
the benefits of a project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to
approve a project. In the event the benefits of a project outweigh the unavoidable adverse
effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable". The CEQA
Guidelines require that, when a public agency allows for the occurrence of significant effects
which are identified in the Final EIR but are not at least substantially mitigated, the agency shall
state in writing the specific reasons the action was supported. Any statement of overriding
considerations should be included in the record of project approval and should be mentioned in
the Notice of Determination.
To the extent the significant effects of the project are not avoided or substantially lessened to a
level of insignificance, the City of Bakersfield, having reviewed and considered the information
contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the project, and having reviewed and
considered the information contained in the public record, and having balanced the benefits of
the project against the unavoidable effects which remain, finds that such unmitigated effects to
be acceptable in consideration of the following overriding considerations discussion.
The City of Bakersfield finds that all feasible mitigation measures have been imposed to lessen
project impacts to less than significant, and furthermore, that alternatives to the project are
infeasible because they have greater environmental impacts, do not provide the benefits of the
project, or are otherwise socially or economically infeasible as fully described in the project
findings.
The environmental analysis undertaken for the General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-
0193 indicated the project would result in contributions to air (long-term emission) and noise
(existing plus project mobile noise) impacts that would represent a significant adverse
environmental effect on a project basis.
The City of Bakersfield as Lead Agency and decision-maker for the project has reviewed and
considered the information contained in both the Draft and Final EIRs prepared for General Plan
Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193 and the public record. The project benefits would include
the development of a vacant and underutilized lot in a unique and innovative way in order to
spur economic development in the area. By amending the General Plan and changing the zone
designation to a PCD, the site planning and design would allow for a cohesive identity for the
subject site, and provide a consistent Project theme, development standards and design
guidelines that allow design flexibility to better respond to market needs. As stated in Section
17.54.010 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code, the PCD "enables the developer to obtain
approval of a specific, detailed plan for a commercial development which ensures that the
uniqueness of the Project design being proposed is preserved."
Page 1 of 2
Exhibit "5" General Plan Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193
The Lead Agency makes the following finding, pursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA
Guidelines, with regard to the Statement of Overriding Considerations for General Plan
Amendment/Zone Change #02-0193:
Cafifornia Administrative Code, Title 14, Section 15093(a) states: "If the benefits
of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects,
the adverse environmental effects may be considered 'acceptable'." Based on
the above discussion and on the evidence presented, the City of Bakersfield
therefore finds that the benefits of the proposed project outweigh the air (long-
term emission) and noise (existing plus project mobile noise) impacts associated
with General Plan Amendment~Zone Change #02-0193 Project, which can not be
eliminated or reduced to a level less than significant.
5:~oneL;nange\Panama99\cc\bx-rStatemt L~vemde.doc
Page 2 of 2
hebruaW 13,2803
0
0
o
0
0
o
EXHIBIT "7"
ZONE CHANGE 02-0193
C-2 TO P,C.D
EXHIBIT "8"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
(P.C.D. ZONE)
zc ¢,~02-0193
ALL THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 30 SOUTH, RANGE 27
EAST, M.D.M. iN THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTIQN 24, SAID POINT BEING THE INTERSECTION OF
THE WEST LINE OF TRACT No. 4117 FILED IN MAP BOOK 29 AT PAGE 111 IN THE KERN
COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE, WITH THE CENTERLINE OF PANAMA LANE; THENCE
N 00"02'26" E ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 55.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE 1) CONTINUING ON SAID WEST LINE OF TRACT No. 4117, N 00°02'26" E,
1266.76 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT No. 4117;
THENCE2)
ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARIES OF TRACT No. 3828-B FILED IN MAP
BOOK 24 AT PAGE 92, AND TRACT No. 4181-A FILED IN MAP BOOK 32 AT
PAGE 24, IN THE KERN COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE, N 89053'39'' W,
1322.31 FEET;
THENCE3)
ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT No. 4182 FILED IN MAP BOOK
29 AT PAGE 183 IN THE KERN COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE,
N 89°53'33" W, 299.34 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID
TRACT AND THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE ROUTE 99;
THENCE4)
ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY S 13048'24'' E, 580.19 FEET TO THE
BEGINNING OF A 2460.00 FOOT RADIUS TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE
EASTERLY;
THENCE 5) SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
04°35'46" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 197.34 FEET;
THENCE 6) S 24013'03'' E, 148.27 FEET;
THENCE7)
S 21°47'01" E, 219.84 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF PARCEL MAP No.
5885 FILED IN BOOK 25 OF pARCEL MAPS AT PAGE 173 IN THE KERN
COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE;
THENCE8) ALONG SAID NORTH LINE S 89°53'30'' E, 1142.46 FEET TO THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL 5 OF SAID PARCEL MAP;
THENCE 9) S 00°06'30" W, 175.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID
PARCEL 5;
CONTAINS 37.52 ACRES, MORE OR LESS
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING DOCUMENTS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
)
County of Kern )
Hall, a full, true and correct copy of the following: Ordinance No.
Bakersfield City Council at a meeting held on the 26th day of
entitled:
PAMELA A. McCARTHY, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
That she is the duly appointed, acting and qualified City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield;
and that on the 27th day of February, 2003 she posted on the Bulletin Board at City
4112 , passed by the
February 2003 and
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 17.06.020 (ZONE
MAP NO. 123-24) OF TITLE SEVENTEEN OF THE
BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE BY CHANGING THE
ZONING FROM AN MH (MOBILE HOME)ZONE TO PCD
(PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT) ZONE ON
37.5 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST
SIDE OF STATE ROUTE 99, NORTH OF PANAMA LANE
(FILE#02-0193)
/si PAMELA A. McCARTHY
City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield