Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES NO 181-93RESOLUTION RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE NORTHEAST SEWER TRUNKLINE AND ADOPTING SECTION 15091 AND SECTION 15093 ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS. WHEREAS, the project site is located in Kern County, in the area of the County known as the northeast Metropolitan Bakersfield area mostly within the City of Bakersfield; and WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the project; and WHEREAS, the Northeast Sewer Trunkline Phase I project is included within the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan area; and WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield has proposed the project in accordance with the adopted implementation program for the 2010 General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Northeast Sewer Trunkline project is intended to support the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan Land Use Element; and WHEREAS, this project is a joint City of Bakersfield/Porter-Robertson Engineering plan to bring urban infrastructure to the northeast Bakersfield metropolitan area; and WHEREAS, this project is an implementation measure of the Public Facilities Element; and WHEREAS, this project will protect groundwater quality by eliminating the use of septic tanks; and WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield proposed an Initial Study, incorporated by this reference, determined that the project had the potential to adversely affect the environment, and determined than an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), would be required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation of an EIR was mailed to all responsible and affected agencies and interested persons in May 7, 1993, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.4. ,~ ORIG~J~L WHEREAS, a Draft EIR for the project was prepared in accordance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the CEQA Implementation Procedures of the City of Bakersfield; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion of a Draft EIR was forwarded to the State Clearinghouse on September 1, 1993, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21161; and WHEREAS, the City distributed copies of the Draft EIR to the public agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the project and to other interested persons and agencies and sought the comments of such persons and agencies; and WHEREAS, the City also distributed a Notice of Availability for Public Review of a Draft EIR to interested individuals and groups to provide additional public notice of the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, notice inviting comments on the Draft EIR was given in compliance with the State Guidelines Section 15085; and WHEREAS, a public hearing on the Draft EIR was held by the City of Bakersfield Planning Commission on October 7, 1993, to solicit comments on the report; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Impact Report was prepared and considered for certification by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission amended the environmental document in response to concerns raised at the October 7, 1993, public hearing; and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 60-93 on October 7, 1993, the Planning Commission recommended certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report; and WHEREAS, written and oral comments on the Draft EIR have been received and responses to those comments have been prepared; and WHEREAS, mitigation measures 21, 22, and 23 were removed from the Final EIR by the City Council on the grounds mitigation measures No. 1 and No. 2 are dust suppression related, are typically used in construction activities which disturb soil and have been determined to be very effective; and WHEREAS, the environmental record prepared in conjunction with the project includes the following: ORIGIN,~[ a) The Draft and Final EIR' b) All staff reports, memoranda. maps, letters, minutes of meetings, and other documents prepared by City staff relating to the project; c) All testimony, documents, and other evidence presented by the City and consultants working with the City relating to the project; d) The proceedings before the Planning Commission relating to the project and EIR, including testimony and documenting evidence introduced at the public hearing; and e) Matters of common knowledge to the City Council which it considers including, but not limited to, the following: 1) The City of Bakersfield Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan; 2) City of Bakersfield Zoning Ordinance; 3) City of Bakersfield Municipal Code; and 4) Other formally adopted policies and ordinances of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD does hereby resolve as follows: The above recitals are true and correct. 2. All required notices have been given. 3. The Final EIR for the sewer trunkline is adequate and has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the CEQA Implementation Procedures for the City of Bakersfield and that the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR. 4. Potentially Significant Impacts That Have Been Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance: The following impacts are those identified by the EIR as significant. As to each impact, the City Council hereby finds that changes or alternatives incorporated into the project avoid impacts or mitigate impacts to less-than-significant level, as set forth in Exhibit "A". A. Impacts to public facilities. 3 ORIG{NAL C. D. E. Impacts to soils. Impacts related to flood hazards and riparian areas. Impacts to State and Federally listed species. Impacts to State designated oil field. 5. Impacts which have not been mitigated to a level of insignificance: The following impacts have been identified by this EIR as significant. As to each impact, the Council has made Findings of Overriding Consideration, set forth in Exhibit "A", which set forth the basis for approving a project which will have significant environmental effects. A. Exposure of people to geologic hazards. B. Reduction of Open Space. C. Growth Inducing (for an area primarily undeveloped). 6. Metropolitan Bakersfield Northeast Sewer Trunkline Final Environmental Impact Report is hereby certified. ORIGINAL I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on NOV 1 0 L~3 , by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMEEi4'3 ....... . ,~ .~TT. EDWARDS. DeMONO, ~ll~,l, BRUNNI, ROWLES, SALVAGGIO NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS ABSTAIN: CO~UNG,LMEMSERS A~.CSENT: COUNCILMEMBER8 CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the Council of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED tlO¥ 1. 0 l~J~ BOB PRIC~~}~/' MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED as to form: LAWRENCE M. LUNARDINI CITY ATTORNEY of the City of Bakersfield BY: MG:pjt November 19, 1993 res\rstl.cc ORIGINAL EXHIBIT "A" ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Section 15091 - State CEQA Guidelines Significant Effect: Impacts to public facilities. the adopted Orangewood and Breckenridge Hills Planned Drainage Area including the drainage retention system in Section 29 T.29S, R.29E. and the necessary expansion of Sewer Treatment Plant No. 2. Proposed Finding: Changes or alternatives have been required or incorporated into the project which avoid or lessen the significant environmental effect to less than significance as identified in the Final EIR. Supportive Evidence: Preliminary project design proposed the trunkline through four parcels of record, owned by Kern County planned for a future major drainage detention basin. The trunkline location was deemed incompatible with the planned drainage basin and the trunkline alignment was modified to circumvent the drainage facilities entirely. This sewer trunkline will connect with Sewer Treatment Plant No. 2. The connection to sewer treatment plant will necessitate future expansion to accommodate new development in the northeast. Sanitation districts are empowered by the California Health and Safety Code to charge a fee for the privilege of connection. Payment of the connection fee will finance the needed expansion of the existing plant. Authoritive References: Northeast Bakersfield Sewer Trunkline Phase I Final Environmental Impact Report: Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan; Final Environmental Impact Report: City of Bakersfield Zoning Ordinance: and City of Bakersfield Land Division Ordinance. Significant Effect: Construction of the sewer trunkline will disrupt 88 acres for access roadway, trench and spoil areas over an area of steep slopes and some flood ways. Proposed Finding: Changes or alternatives have been required or incorporated into the project which avoid or to insignificantly lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Supportive Evidence: The project alignment goes through an area with 13 different soil ~types. Some soil types are subject to erosion problems. i.e. blowing dust. soil erosion. steep slopes and severe flooding potenual. Mitlganon tor me project has included watering soils during construction. coverage of soils during transport. the use of imported soils for backfill. revegetation for all slopes in excess of 10c3 or secured through alternative soils measures recommended by a soils engineer. The alignment was also modified to lessen construction activities in stream beds. C)~ °°'~'eO,~, ORIGINAL Authoritive References: Northeast Bakersfield Sewer Trunkline Phase I Final Environmental Impact Report: Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan: Final Environmental Impact Report: City. of Bakersfield Zoning Ordinance: and City of Bakersfield Land Division Ordinance. Significant Effect: Construction of sewer trunkline is in areas subject to flooding and is proposed to cross a riparian wetland habitat. Proposed Finding: Changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the project which avoid or lessen the significant environmental effect to less than significant as identified in the Final EIR. Supportive Evidence: Construction will require considerable earth movement within a major drainage swale within the Breekenridge Hills Specific Plan Area. The project has been designed to reduce soils erosion in the flood hazard areas including: 1) Use of check structures to act as dams with several proposed streambed crossings, to minimize scouring and other erosion effects during flooding. 2) Minimizing the amount of construction activities within the streambed area, including restricting stream crossings and aligning the pipelines for placement above the flood prone swales. The original alignment was proposed to cross a riparian area just east of the Rio Bravo Airport. Modification of the alignment has Circumvented this area. Authoritive References: Northeast Bakersfield Sewer Trunkline Phase I Final Environmental Impact Report; Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan: Final Environmental Impact Report: City of Bakersfield Zoning Ordinance: and City of Bakersfield Land Division Ordinance. Significant Effect: Ultimate buildout of the proposed general plan will expose additional persons to groundshaking hazards which exist region-wide. Proposed Finding: Changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the project xvhich avoid or lessen the significant environmental effect to less than significant as identified in the Final £1R. Supportive Evidence: Development of the sewer trunkline will encourage growth in the northeast Bakersfield Metropolitan Area. Seismic events will impact greater number of persons. but this impact is not limited to the area but exists regionly. This problem has long been recognized and is addressed via the building standards contained in the Uniform Building Code. All construction within the metropolitan area must meet the requirements of the seismic zone number 4 - the most stringent such standards in the United States. In addition, should construction be proposed within an Alquist-Priolio Seismic Study Zone other more intensive building requirements must be met. This impact was identified in the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan FEIR and is addressed in the Safety Element. Several of the adopted policies of this element and objective subsections address specific geologic hazards. The policies require adoption of stricter Seismic performance standards for buildings, require site specific geotechnical studies within Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones, require special groundwater studies where liquefaction is a threat, and require critical facilities within dam failure inundation area to mitigate threats to their "functional capabilities." Other gubsections address building whose susceptibility to geologic hazards is most critical: critical facilities and hazardous buildings. The plan also contains 39 implementing programs which describe specification to be taken in order to fulfill the plan's goals and objectives. More detail concerning these implementation programs and their ability to meet the plan's stated objectives is provided in the adopted Safety Element. Authoritative References: Northeast Bakersfield Sewer Trunkline Phase I Final Environmental Impact Report: Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan: Final Environmental Impact Report: City of Bakersfield Zoning Ordinance: and City of Bakersfield Land Division Ordinance. Significant Effect: Impacts to sensitive riparian area and to several State and Federally listed threatened and endangered species. Proposed Finding: Changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the project which avoid or lessen the significant environmental effect to less than significant as identified in the Final EIR. Supportive Evidence: Construction of the sewer will disturb 88 acres of land inhabited by the blunt-nosed leopard lizard. State Fish and Game has required ten (10) measures to mitigate the impacts to this species. Three other measures have been added to mitigate potential impacts to burrowing owls. a nesting area for tricolor blackbirds and an alteration of the alignment to avoid a riparian area east of the Rio Bravo Airport. Finally. the City of Bakersfield must obtain a Section 2081 permit and a Section 10(a) permit from State Fish and Game and Federal Fish and Wildlife. respectively. as part of an individual habitat conservanon plan solely for tills project. ORIG~N^L Authoritative References: Northeast Bakersfield Sewer Trunkline Phase I Final Environmental Impact Report: Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan: Final Environmental Impact Report: City of Bakersfield Zoning Ordinance: and City of Bakersfield Land Division Ordinance. Significant Effect: The sewer line will impact a state designated oil field. Proposed Finding: Changes or alternatives have been required or incorporated into the project which avoid or lessen the significant environmental effect to less than significant as identified in the Final EIR. Supportive Evidence: After consultation with the State Division of Oil and Gas and Geothermal Resources, it has been decided that three mitigation measures (#18. #19, #20) completely reduce the impacts this trunkline would have on the existing operations within the oilfield. Authoritative References: Northeast Bakersfield Sewer Trunkline Phase I Final Environmental Impact Report; Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan; Final Environmental Impact Report; City of Bakersfield Zoning Ordinance; and City of Bakersfield Land Division Ordinance. Significant Effect: Urbanization of this area will remove open space to a · significant degree. Mitigation provided by the 2010 Plan EIR may reduce this impact. however. the plan identified the net impact to aesthetics as significant and unavoidable. Proposed Finding: Changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the project which avoid or lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. Supportive Evidence: Development of this area with urban uses will result in reduced visual value. The public will be subiect to reduced visual values because the hills will be developed. Several measures of reducing visual impacts are incorporated in the 2010 General Plan including. dedication of park acreage per 1,000 population proposed. landscaping requirements for all new development. no construction in areas with slopes greater than 30~. no development within primaD, floodplains, etc. Despite these measures the aesthetic impact of development is regarded as significant per the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR. Authoritative References: Northeast Bakersfield Sewer Trunkline Phase I Final Environmental Impact Report: Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan: Final Environmental Impact Report: City of Bakersfield Zoning Ordinance: and City of Bakersfield Land Division Ordinance. Significant Effect: The project is growth inducing which is typically regarded as a "potentially" significant environmental effect for CEQA purposes. Appendix G of CEQA list projects which normally have a significant effect on the environmental if it will."...extend a sewer trunk line with capacity to serve new development." Clearly, this project falls within that category. Proposed Finding: Specific economic. social. or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. Supportive Evidence: Development of the sewer trunkline will enable the development of 9,773 dwelling units (capacity). Alternative Nos. 3, 5 and the no project alternative discuss a reduction in sewer capacity and therefore a reduction in growth inducing impacts. The fiscal, short-term and long-term impacts of this alternative would be significant. Elimination of sewer service to an area planned for growth would prohibit the development of multiple family residences which 'cannot typically utilize septic tanks, which is inconsistent with the Housing Element. Not providing sewers to an area proposed for urban uses is inconsistent with the Land Use Element which requires urban growth to be supported by the necessary infrastructure including a centralized sewer system. Development served by septic tank systems will contribute to groundwater degradation which is why the Regional Water Quality Control Board has limited the use of the existing community sewer system utilized by the Rio Bravo area residential developments. This program is an implementation measure of the adopted Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan which stresses the need for the full range. The whole point of this project is to support growth. Authoritative References: Northeast Bakersfield Sewer Trunkline Phase I Final Environmental Impact Report: Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan: Final Environmental Impact Report: ~.ity o~ 13al~ersneta z. omng uramance: an~ ~ty o~ BailersneJd Laut~ Division Ordinance. sa\bu MG:pjt October 28. 1993 ORIGINAL STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS SECTION 15093 - STATE CEQA GUIDELINES A. General Finding of C)verridint, Considerations The City of Bakersfield has carefully balanced the benefits of the Northeast Sewer Trunkline - Phase I against any adverse impacts identified in the EIR. The City of Bakersfield acknowledges the existence of certain impacts. identified and analyzed in the EIR as being significant or potentially significant. which have not been eliminated. lessened or mitigated to a level of insignificance. The City of Bakersfield further acknowledges that the EIR identifies certain unavoidable and irreversible environmental impacts which cannot be avoided if the project is implemented. Not withstanding such unmitigated. partially mitigated, unavoidable and/or irreversible impacts. the City of Bakersfield acting pursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines. hcreby determines and finds that the benefits of the project outweigh the adverse impacts. and theretbre the project should be approved. Without limiting the generality of the unmitigated impacts referenced above, the City of Bakersfield specifically acknowledges that specific impacts in the following areas are either significant and unavoidable or not mitigated to a level of insignificance. Such areas include, without limitation: growth inducement (the fact that the growth rate for the northeast Bakersfield area, as mitigated by general plan, should increase significantly), aesthetic (the conversion of open space to urban development and the loss of the hillside view shed to urbanization) and geologic hazards (the increase of population in an area subject to severe ground shaking episodes. not limited to the project area but this risk exists area-wide). The City of Bakersfield has carefully reviewed all of the environmental documentation and considered each of these unavoidable impacts. as well' as each of the impacts that have not been mitigated to the point of insignificance. in reaching its decision to approve the trunkline alignment and as lead agency to certify the Final EIR as complete pursuant to Section 15090 of the CEQA Guidclincs. B. Specific Findings Benefits'Outweigh Impacts - The unmitigated. partially mitigated. unavoidable and/or irreversible adverse environmental impacts of the project are acceptable in light of the economic. fiscal. social. environmental. land use and other considerations set ti)rth herein because the benefits of the project outweigh sui:h adverse environmental impacts of the project. Rejected Alternatives - The alternatives which arc discussed in the EIR but rejected are infeasible in part because such alternatives would impose limitations and restrictions on the project so as to prohibit the attainment of specific land use. public facility and other benefits of the project which the city finds outweigh the unmitigated impacts of the Balance of Com!oetin~, Goals - The City of Bakersfield finds it is imperative to balance competing goals in approving the project and the environmental documentation for the project. Not cvery environmental concern has been fully satisfied because of the need to satisfy competing concerns to a certain extent. Accordingly. in some instances the city chooscs to accept certain environmental impacts because to eliminate them would undulv Statement of Overriding Consideratkms Page 2 compromise the Land Use. Public Services and Facilities Elements goals as specified in the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. The City of Bakersfield finds and determines that the project. as appropriately mitigated. and the supporting environmental documentation provide tbr a positive balance of the competing goals and that the land use. public services. and other benefits to be obtained by approving the project outweigh any environmental and related potential impacts of the project. Background and Objectives Approximately 17 years ago the City of Bakersfield undertook a large annexation in northeast Bakersfield adjacent to the City of Bakersfield to provide for the logical. incremental growth pattern for the provision of a full range of housing types. In addition. the desire to provide upscale housing was expressed which included a tennis club. a private airport. a golf course, lakes and high quality housing. The auoptcd General Plan Goals~Policy have cxprcssly stated the riced to minimize the loss of prime agricultural lands to urbanization. Northeast Bakersfield is not designated as prime agricultural soils and will provide an area tbr urbanization which. with this project. will have the necessary sewer Service to support such development. It is expressly an implementation measure of the adopted Public Service and Facilities Element that urban development should be served by a centralized sewer collection system. Overriding Environmental, Public Facilities and Land Use Considerations Pursuant to the Final EIR. the conditions of project approval and the findings made by the city. most of the significant impacts of the project have been mitigated to a level of insignificance. However. some of the impacts cannot be mitigated and a number of the alternatives suggested have proved infcasible. This Statement of Overriding Considerations sets tbrth the city's determination that notwithstanding the potential remaining unmitigated environmental impacts of the project. the environmental, land use and public facility benefits of the project outweigh any remaining environmental detriments of the project. The City of Bakersfield finds that the construction of the sewer trunkline is a critical step in providing the necessary public infrastructure to a large area designated tbr urban development. This project is a goal of the Public Services and Facilities Element to provide an adequate sewer service to serve the needs of planned development in the 2010 General Plan area. This project will achieve that goal.