HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES NO 258-04RESOLUTION NO. ~ 0 4~
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BAKERSFIELD MAKING FINDINGS APPROVING
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 03-0724 TO
THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE
METROPOLITAN BAKERSFIELD GENERAL PLAN
FOR A SPECIFIC PLAN LINE FOR ALLEN ROAD
OVER THE KERN RIVER. (Ward 4).
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Bakersfield in accordance with the
provisions of Section 65353 of the Government Code, held a public hearing on THURSDAY, August
5, 2004, on General Plan Amendment No. 03-0724 of a proposed amendment to the Circulation
Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan for Allen Road Specific Plan Line over the
Kern River, notice of the time and place of hearing having been given at least ten (10) calendar days
before said hearing by publication in the Bakersfield California, a local newspaper of general
circulation; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield, made application for a general plan amendment of the
Circulation Element for property located generally along Allen Road between Stockdale Highway
and Ming Avenue over the Kern River, as shown in attached Exhibit "D", to adopt a specific plan line
to allow development of a bridge over the Kern River, more specifically stated as follows:
General Plan Amendment No. 03-0724:
The City of Bakersfield made a request to amend the Cimulation
Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan by changing
the circulation map to adopt a specific plan line for the Allen Road
Bridge. Located along Alien Road, generally between Stockdale
Highway and Ming Avenue; and
WHEREAS, for the above-described segment, an Initial Study and Notice of Preparation
(NOP) was conducted and it was determined that the proposed project may have a potential
significant effect on the environment and, therefore, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was
prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, the law and regulations relating to the preparation and adoption of an EIR as set
forth in CEQA and the City of Bakersfieid's CEQA Implementation Procedures, have been duly
followed by the City staff and the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 101-04 on August 5, 2004, the Planning Commission
recommended approval and adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 03-0724 subject to Mitigation
Monitoring Plan found in Exhibit D and this Council has fully considered the findings made by the
Planning Commission as set forth in that Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission found that the proposed specific plan line for Allen
Road will divert the mad away from the existing single family homes north of the Kern River and
west of Allen Road; and
ORIGINAL
WHEREAS, the re-alignment of Allen Road will be consistent with the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the re-alignment of Allen Road is in the best interest of the public and is
compatible with the existing land uses in the general area; 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 headng on WEDNESDAY,
SEPTEMBER 8, 2004, on the above described General Plan Amendment No. 03-0724 of the
proposed amendment to the Circulation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 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, the Council has considered and hereby makes the following findings:
1. The above recitals and findings are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Planning Commission in this matter.
2. That an Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendment No. 03-0724 is
hereby recommended for approval.
3. That the General Plan Amendment No. 03-0724 is hereby approved to change the
Circulation Map to adopt a specific plan line for the Allen Road Bridge.
4. That the re-alignment of Allen Road is in the best interest of the public and is
compatible with the existing land uses in the general area.
5. As to General Plan Amendment No. 03-0724, the recommended amendment to the
Circulation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, consisting of
changes to the circulation map to adopt a specific plan line for the Allen Road
Bridge, as requested by the applicant and shown on attached Exhibit A, located
along Allen Road, between Stockdale Highway and Ming Avenue is hereby
approved.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND FOUND BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF BAKERSFIELD as follows:
1. The above recitals and findings incorporated herein, are true and correct.
2. The Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendment No. 03-0724 is
hereby approved and adopted.
3. That the Findings of Fact in support of findings of significant environmental effects is
attached as Exhibit "A" and the Statement of Overriding Considerations" is attached
as Exhibit "B".
That the Mitigation Monitoring and reporting checklist is attached as Exhibit "C".
The report of the Planning Commission, including maps and all reports and papers
relevant thereto, will be transmitted by the Secretary of the Planning Commission to
the City Council.
2
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA.
The provisions of CEQA have been followed.
The Specific Plan Line for Allen Road is in the public welfare and good planning.
The Specific Plan Line for Allen Road is compatible with both the existing and
proposed land uses in the general area.
The Specific Plan Line is compatible with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan.
The City Council hereby approves and adopts General Plan Amendment No. 03-
0724 of the proposed amendment to the Circulation Element of the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan by adopting a Specific Plan Line for Allen Road over the
Kern River, located along Allen Road, between Stockdale Highway and Ming
Avenue.
This Resolution shall not become effective until the approval of the Third Circulation
Element Amendment Cycle for the year 2004 by the City Council of the City of
Bakersfield.
......... o0o ........
3
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance was I;k~A~ed and adopted by the Council
of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on;blt' 0 8 20~]4 , by the following
vote:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBER COUCH, CARSON, BENHAM, MAGGARD, HANSON, SULLIVAN, SALVAGGIO
COUNCILMEMBER
COUNCILMEMBER
COUNCILMEMBER ~ \ \ ~ '. ) ~
CITY CLERK and Ex O~the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED SEP 0 8 2004
MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED as to form:
VIRGINIA GENNARO
City Attorney
Attachments:
EXHIBIT "A" - Findings of Fact
EXHIBIT "B" - Statement of Overriding Considerations
EXHIBIT "C" - Mitigation Monitoring Plan
EXHIBIT "D" - Location Map
August 9, 2004
S:\GPA 3rd 2004\03-0724 (Allen Bridge)\Staff Report' s\Res gpa 03-0724 _ CC .doc
4
EXHIBIT A
FINDINGS OF FACT
IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS FOR
SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
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:
(1)
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."
The Final EIR for the Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River identifies certain significant environmental
Findings of Fact 1 of 60 Sept
o
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
effects which may occur as a result of the Project. Therefore, findings are set forth herein pursuant to
Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Summary of Mitigation Measures is based in part on the
requirements contained in Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code (see Exhibit B). A Mitigation
Monitoring Program will be adopted as part of the Resolutiom
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project consists of General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 03-0724, Amendment to the
Circulation Element to modify the circulation map of the Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River. The
proposal is to adopt a Specific Plan Line for the Allen Road alignment between Stockdale Highway
and Ming Avenue. A six-lane bridge is planned across both the Kern River and the CVC.
The preliminary design study for the bridge crossing locates the alignment across the river easterly of
the section line for the purpose of avoiding the existing residential development on the west side of
Allen Road, north of the Kern River. The roadway crosses over a levee and bike path on the south
side of the river and over the CVC north of the river requiring separate bridges over the river and the
canal (refer to Exhibit 3-1, Proposed Bridge Alignment and Exhibit 3-2A, 3-2B, Proposed Bridge Cross-
Sections). Right-of-way north and south of Allen Road has been reserved from adjacent property
owners.
The proposed connection is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Circulation
Element cross-section for an Arterial roadway classification. The Arterial roadway designation would
provide an ultimate six-lane divided roadway cross-section within a proposed ROW of 110 feet. The
cross-section of the bridges will accommodate three (3) 12 foot travel lanes, a 5 foot Class II (on
street) bikeway, a 6 foot walkway, and bridge rails in each direction. A Class II bikeway is a bicycle
lane featuring a striped lane on the paved area of the road for bicyclists. A 1 foot wide traffic barrier will
be located along both edges of the bridge decks, and a 4 foot wide striped median will separate each
direction of travel. The overall bridge length over the Kern River (primary structure) is expected to be
approximately 1,100 feet with an estimated bridge deck height of approximately 12 feet above the
Kern River. The height of the structure has been set based on minimum clearances over the CVC.
The overall bridge length over the CVC is expected to be about 100 feet with an estimated bridge deck
height of approximately 8 feet above the canal to accommodate ultimate improvements to the CVC.
The combined structure length is approximately 1,200 feet. Allen Road would tie into the existing
intersection geometry immediately south of Stockdale Highway. Signalized access to the CVC has
been incorporated into the project to facilitate safe ingress and egress of the maintenance vehicles.
The final bridge type has yet to be determined, however, the bddge is expected to be a reinforced
concrete slab-type bridge generally conforming to the Caltrans standard slab bridge design. With this
Caltrans standard slab bridge, span lengths would be up to 44 feet in length, resulting in the need for
up to twenty-eight (28) piers to be located within the limits of the Kern River channel. Additional piers
would be required to support the bridge spanning the CVC. Each of the piers would likely contain up
to twenty-five (25) individual pile-extension supports with a diameter of approximately 16 inches each.
In order to align with the direction of flow within the river and canal, the piers and abutments would be
skewed up to 35-degrees to the bridge alignment. The piers represent permanent impacts to the Kern
River channel, totaling as much as 3,000 square feet in plan area.
Temporary impacts to the channel will be required in order to allow construction of the bddge across
the river. These temporary impacts would result from the need for pile driving equipment, materials,
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact 2 of 60 Sei~ember 2 r~0~4
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
and workers to perform the necessary foundation work within the bottom of the channel. Other
temporary impacts would result from the temporary formwork (a.k.a. "falsework") needed to support
the placement of reinforcing steel and concrete as well as the equipment, materials, and workers
needed to complete the bridge work.
Construction of the bridge may require temporary construction easements on either side of Allen
Road, anticipated to occur equally on both sides. The maximum construction area is 240 feet in width,
extending 120 feet on each side of the Project centerline. Total construction impact area is anticipated
to be approximately 9.4 acres. When completed, the extension will be 110 feet in width, leaving a 65
foot maximum temporary disturbance zone along each side of the roadway.
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 Allen Road
Crossing at the Kern River Project 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-makers, having reviewed and
considered the information contained in the Draft and Final EIRs prepared for the Allen
Road Crossing at the Kern River 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-makers, having reviewed and
considered the information contained in the Draft and Final EIRs prepared for the Allen
Road Crossing at the Kern River and the public record, finds that there are specific
economic, social, or other considerations which make the mitigation measures for Noise
in the Draft and Final EIR's infeasible.
The City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency and decision-makers, finds that significant and
unmitigable impacts on noise may occur with future development in conjunction with
implementation of the Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River. 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:
In accordance with Section 10563(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, as amended, the City of
Bakersfield undertook the preparation of an initial Study. The Initial Study determined
that a number of environmental issue areas may be impacted by the construction and
Findings of Fact 3 of 60 Septem~ _
OR E~hNAL
Alien Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
implementation of the Project. As a result, the Initial Study determined that the Draft
EIR should address the Project's significant impacts.
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 December 19, 2003, and concluding on
January 19, 2004.
During the circulation period for the Notice of Preparation, the City of Bakersfield, as
Lead Agency, advertised and conducted a public scoping meeting on January 15, 2004
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/light and glare, public health and safety,
traffic and circulation, air quality, noise, biological resources, cultural resources, water
resources, geologic and seismic hazards, and public services and utilities. Growth-
inducing impacts, project alternatives and cumulative effects were also analyzed in the
Draft EIR.
During the Draft EIR's public review period, which began on April 2, 2004 and
concluded on May 17, 2004, the City of Bakersfield held a noticed public hearing on
May 6, 2004 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.
FINDINGS REGARDING IMPACTS DETERMINED TO BE INSIGNIFICANT
IN THE INITIAL STUDY/NOTICE OF PREPARATION
The City of Bakersfield conducted an Initial Study in December 1, 2003, 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:
Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
4 of 60
Sept~ber 20[~4~
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
According to the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan EIR, the Kern River Corridor is
identified as one of the most significant scenic resources in Metropolitan Bakersfield. The
Kern River provides prime habitat for many forms of wildlife that make up part of the visual
resources in the City. The river provides the needed moisture for ripadan vegetation that
breaks up the surrounding grasslands. However, the proposed roadway improvements are
consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Circulation Element. The
proposed Project would accommodate planned circulation needs by providing an additional
crossing of the Kern River consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan
Circulation Element and the Kern River Plan Element.
Aside from sparse vegetation, there are no rock outcrops, plant resources, and/or historic
buildings with or immediately adjacent to the proposed alignment. Furthermore, the
General Plan Update designates areas within the northeast portion of Metropolitan
Bakersfield as including scenic resources. Therefore, impacts in this regard would be less
than significant.
Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area ?
Light and glare are not currently generated along Allen Road, south of the CVC. The
proposed Project would include typical street lighting, within the Project area. Compliance
with City of Bakersfield standard design practices would minimize light and glare impacts.
No significant impacts are anticipated.
AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California 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 proposed Project is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan
circulation Element to accommodate planned circulation needs by providing an additional
crossing of the Kern River. The Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Update EIR
indicates that the Project site is not designated as Prime Agricultural Land and no
agricultural activities are currently conducted on-site. As previously mentioned, the
proposed roadway improvements are consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General
Plan Circulation Element to accommodate planned circulation needs. Therefore, impacts in
this regard would be less than significant.
Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
5 of 60
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
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?
The proposed Project would not convert farmland to non-agricultural uses. The existing
use is vacant land, therefore, impacts are less than significant.
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 ?
The proposed Project involves the construction of a new crossing which does not have the
capacity to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Some transportation of hazardous
materials occurs on Rosedale Highway (State Highway 58) within the City of Bakersfield. It
should also be noted that since the Project would reduce future traffic congestion, it would
then likely reduce the number of accidents occurring along the roadways, thus improving
the safe transport of hazardous materials.
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 ESA was prepared for the proposed Project. There are no permanent structures
located on-site, therefore, the presence of lead-based paints (LBPs) and asbestos
containing materials (ACMs) is considered unlikely. The proposed Project is not
anticipated to result in the creation of health hazards with compliance with pertinent health
and safety regulations.
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 not located within 2 miles of a public airport or public use
airport. Furthermore, the proposed Project does not include the construction of habitable
structures. Therefore, a safety hazard for people which utilize the bridge is not expected.
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 ?
Refer to response, above.
Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
6 of 60
Sept~ber 2~1~,~
Alien Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
or emergency evacuation plan ?
Development of the proposed Project would result in improved existing and future Level of
Service (LOS) and accommodate planned circulation needs by providing an additional
crossing of the Kern River. A Traffic Management Plan (TMP) would be implemented to
ensure that construction does not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation
plans.
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wi/d/and
fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wi/d/ands ?
The site is located outside the fire hazard area established by the Kern County Fire
Department (Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan). 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:
Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or ~ 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 Project proposes the construction of a new crossing of the Kern River and would not
substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge. The Project would not have the capacity to increase the amount of water
consumed regionally through increased withdrawals from groundwater sources. Therefore,
no significant impacts are anticipated to occur.
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?
Construction of proposed crossing may result in minor changes in the amount of runoff due
to the impermeable surface area of the Project. Surface runoff velocities, volumes and
peak flow rates would increase as well. The Project would not have the capacity to create
or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of planned stormwater drainage
systems. The proposed crossing is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General
Plan. Less than significant impacts are anticipated in this regard.
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.
Impacts associated with flood and water related hazards are considered to be less than
significant.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
7 of 60
Septe~er 20(;~
O~ .~ ~.~L
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Place within a lO0~year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood
flows?
Refer to response, above.
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.
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.
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
Physically divide an established community?
The proposed Project would not divide the physical arrangement of a community. The
Project would however, provide an additional crossing point for local residents in the area
over the Kern River, thereby improving anticipated future circulation demands. The
proposed crossing is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Circulation
Element.
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 proposed Project is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan
Circulation Element. The crossing would accommodate planned circulation needs by
providing an additional crossing of the Kern River consistent with the General Plan and
Kern River Plan Element.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
8 of 60
Sep~'~mber
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
As indicated in the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, there are no mineral resources
that would be of value located within the proposed Project site. 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?
Refer to response above.
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 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.
For a project within the vicinity of a private 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. The preliminary
design study for the crossing places the alignment across the river easterly of the section
line for the purpose of avoiding existing residential development on the west side of Allen
Road north of the Kern River. The roadway crosses over a levee and bike path on the
south side of the river and over the CVC north of the river. Right-of-way for an easterly
shift in alignment north of the river has been reserved from the high school property on the
east side of Allen Road. South of the Kern River the necessary ROW to accommodate
Allen Road consistent with the City's arterial standards has been dedicated by the adjacent
property owners, including all necessary slope easements. No impacts in this regard would
occur.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
9 of 60
Septe~ber 20~
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Refer to response above.
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 pedormance 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. Implementation of
the proposed Project will result in improved access and mobility of the City and County Fire
Departments to serve the area. This is viewed as an advantageous impact on the
proposed area.
Po/ice protection?
The City of Bakersfield Police Department provides law enforcement and public safety
services for the entire City. The proposed Project would result in a positive affect upon
police protection services within the area.
Schools ?
The Project would not generate students, and therefore would not result in impacts to
school services, no significant impacts are anticipated to public school facilities.
Bakersfield Christian High School is currently under construction, however, would not result
in accessibility impacts to any schools.
Parks?
Neither neighborhood nor regional park facilities would be affected by implementation of
the proposed Project. Therefore, less than significant impacts to other governmental
services are anticipated.
Other public facilities?
Due to the size and scope of the proposed Project, implementation would not significantly
affect other governmental agencies. Less than significant impacts are anticipated in this
regard.
RECREATION.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
10of60
September 2004
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
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 proposed project would not increase the use of existing neighborhoods or regional
parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility
would occur.
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.
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
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
to issuance of grading permits would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
Result in inadequate parking capacity?
No on-site parking is permitted along the crossing in the vicinity of the Project. No
significant parking impacts specific to this Project have been identified.
Conflict with adopted policies, lanes, or programs supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
The proposed Project includes provisions for bicycle lanes consistent with the General Plan
Circulation Element. This is seen as a beneficial project impact.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board?
Improvements associated with the proposed Project do not have the capacity to generate
wastewater or exceed wastewater treatment requirements.
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 ?
Implementation of the proposed Project would not require or result in the construction of
new water or wastewater treatment facilities.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
11 of 60
Septom~er 2004~
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and
resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Refer to response, above.
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?
Referto response, above.
Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid
waste disposal needs ?
The proposed Project would not have the capacity to generate solid waste over a long-term
period and therefore would not impact landfill capacity.
Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
The proposed Project does not involve a solid waste generating land use and therefore,
would not be subject to federal, state, and local statues and regulations related to solid
waste. The City of Bakersfield will be required to comply with AB939 and the City's Solid
Waste Management Plan for waste reduction during the construction Phase of the
proposed Project. No impacts are anticipated in this regard.
VI. FINDINGS REGARDING EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE INSIGNIFICANT
OR LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
The City of Bakersfield finds that based on substantial evidence appearing in 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/LIGHT AND GLARE
Long-term Aesthetic Impacts
5.1-2 Project implementation would permanently alter views of and across the Project site.
Analysis has concluded that less than significant impacts would occur.
Facts Supoortin_o Findinq
As previously stated, implementation of the proposed Project would result in the permanent
view replacement of currently undeveloped land to a bridge crossing resulting in modifications
of views across the site from surrounding properties. The primary concern for aesthetic
impacts are for the existing residents located to the west and south of the proposed crossing.
The change in visual character from open space to developed conditions would be a distinct
visual alteration of the Project site. However, the existing visual quality of the areas adjacent to
the proposed Project is generally considered to be Iow due to the lack of uniform vegetation
Exhibit A -
Findings of Fact 12 of 60 Sept(t~'nber 2Q0~4
O~,N,',L
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
and significant views.
The proposed Project has implemented design features that would minimize bridge elevations,
reduce nighttime light and glare by shielding or directing light away from adjoining areas, and
include features that are similar in character and visually compatible with existing roadway
structures in the vicinity. For example, the bridge height has been set based on minimum
vertical clearance requirements over the CVC (in consideration of the CVC capacity
expansion). The result is a minimized depth of the superstructure and minimization of visual
impact to adjacent residences. Adherence to the City of Bakersfield Municipal and Zoning
Codes would reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
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 Project vicinity would
permanently alter the nature and appearance of the area through loss of open space areas. As
development occurs throughout the Project area, residents and visitors in the area would notice
the visual effects of urbanization. The significance of these visual/aesthetic changes is difficult
to determine, since aesthetic value is subjectively determined and potential impacts are site
specific. Security and street lighting would introduce light and glare potential to the area.
Impacts are typically mitigated separately for each project. 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
Short-term Construction
5.2-1
Project construction activities do not have the potential to encounter known
hazardous materials or wastes. Analysis has concluded that no evidence exists of an
existing or previously remediated recognized environmental conditions in connection
with the proposed Project. A less than significant impact would occur in this regard.
Facts SuoDortin(~ Findinc~
A physical inspection of the proposed alignment indicated that no visible evidence of
hazardous materials/waste are present. A review of local regulatory agency records was
conducted to help determine if hazardous materials have been handled, stored, or generated
on the subject site and/or the adjacent properties and businesses. No hazardous materials
records where found. No areas of environmental concern with respect to hazardous
materials/wastes were identified that would compromise construction or acquisition of
construction easements. Less than significant impacts would occur in this regard.
Exhibit A
13 of 60 Septer~er 2004~.~
Findings
of
Fact
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
5.2-2
Project construction activities do not have the potential to create a significant hazard
to the public through foreseeable upset accidental conditions. Less than significant
impacts are anticipated.
Facts Supportinq Finding
Project construction activities are not anticipated to result in a significant release of hazardous
materials into the environment. However, during the short-term period of Project construction,
there is a possibility of accidental release of hazardous substances such as spilling petroleum-
based fuels used for construction equipment. The level of risk associated with the accidental
release of hazardous substances is not considered significant due to the small volume and Iow
concentration of hazardous materials utilized during the construction phases. The project
contractor will be required to use standard construction controls and safety procedures which
would avoid and minimize the potential for accidental release of such substances into the
environment. Standard construction practices would be observed such that any materials
released are appropriately contained and remediated as required by local, State, and Federal
law.
Long-term Maintenance and Operation
5.2-3
Project implementation would not create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
Less than significant impacts are anticipated in this regard.
Facts Supporting Finding
The Kern County and Incorporated Cities Hazardous Waste Management Plan (HWMP) lists
goals and policies regarding the transport of hazardous wastes. The HWMP recognizes that
the transportation of hazardous waste on rods poses a short-term threat to public health; of
prime concern is the safety of the transportation system for hazardous waste, especially
extremely hazardous waste, in and throughout Kern County. The HWMP seeks to establish
State and Federally maintained roads as candidate Commercial Hazardous Waste Shipping
Routes in and through the County (except those to collect locally generated hazardous
wastes). Given the location of the proposed Project within a newly developing residential area
surrounded by agricultural, institutional and open space uses, Project implementation would
not promote the transport of hazardous materials within the project area.
5.2-4
Project implementation would not create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the long-term use of hazardous substances for the purpose of
long-term bridge maintenance. Compliance with State and applicable local regulations
would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels.
Facts Supportinq Findinq
Due to the scope and nature of the proposed Project, the level of risk associated with long-term
use of hazardous materials on the Project site is considered a less than significant impact. On-
site use of hazardous materials may include cleaning solvents, fertilizers, pesticides, and other
Exhibit
A
Septem~r 2004
Findings of Fact 14 of 60
OF;F ',NAL
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
materials used in the regular maintenance of the bridge structures. With proper use and
disposal, these chemicals are not expected to result in hazardous or unhealthful conditions for
nearby residents or maintenance workers. A less than significant impact would occur in this
regard after compliance with State and applicable local regulations.
5.2-5 Long-term maintenance of the proposed Project would not emit hazardous materials
and thus would not affect any school located within ~-mile of the Project site. Less
than significant impact.
Facts Supportinq Findinq
The proposed Project includes the extension of Alien Road from its current terminous south of
Stockdale Highway to Ming Avenue via a bridge crossing of the Kern River. As previously
mentioned above, the Project does not require quantities of hazardous materials that would
represent a potentially significant hazard to adjacent uses such as the Bakersfield Christian
High School located at the northeast corner of Allen Road/Stockdale Highway. Since the
proposed Project would not involve the use of significant amounts of hazardous materials, no
impacts to this school are anticipated to occur
5.2-7
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 F nding
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
Trip Distribution and Assignment
5.3-2
The proposed Project would result in the redistribution of traffic in the vicinity of the
proposed bridge crossing. Analysis has concluded that due to circulation and access
improvements implemented as part of the City RTIF program, a deterioration in levels
of service within the Project area is not anticipated to occur. Less than significant
impacts are anticipated in this regard.
Facts Suo[~ortina F ndinc]
The KernCOG traffic model projections suggest that the proposed Project will cause an
increase in traffic volumes on Allen Road and Jewetta Avenue in the year 2025. However,
traffic volumes on Jewetta Avenue north of Brimhall Road are not likely to increase as indicated
in the traffic model, due to circuity, poor connectivity and poor access at Rosedale Highway.
All other roadways in the Project area are expected to experience an overall decrease in traffic
volume. This would be a positive impact compared to future conditions without the bridge
Exhibit A Sept~nber 2(~
Findings of Fact 15 of 60
C ,,~,, ~L
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
crossing.
The segment of Allen Road between Stockdale Highway and Brimhall Road does not have
adequate capacity in its present configuration to accommodate year 2005 or year 2025 traffic
volumes, both with or without the Project (refer to Exhibits 5.3-1, to 5.3-4). The roadway
segment, however, will operate at or above LOS C (e.g., LOS A or B) through the year 2025,
with and without the Project, in its ultimate configuration. Widening of this segment of Allen
Road to ultimate arterial standards is anticipated with improvements through the RTIF program,
future adjacent development, and construction of adjacent roadways. Less than significant
impacts are anticipated in this regard.
General Plan Consistency
5.3-3
The proposed Project would be consistent with the City of Bakersfield General Plan
Circulation Element and Kern River Plan Element. Furthermore, the proposed Project
will increase safety by providing an additional crossing of the Kern River, and provide
a direct sequential connection to Stockdale Highway and future extension of Ming
Avenue. Less than significant impacts are anticipated in this regard.
Facts Supportinq Findinq
The proposed Project would provide a local street network that contributes to the quality and
safety of residential neighborhoods and provide a direct sequential connection to Stockdale
Highway and to the future extension of Ming Avenue. Furthermore, the implementation of the
Project is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Circulation Element for an
Arterial roadway classification.
The Project includes a General Plan Circulation Element Amendment to modify the circulation
map of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan to adopt a modified centerline alignment for
Allen Road between Stockdale Highway and Ming Avenue. The amendment places the
proposed bridge alignment across the river easterly of the existing section line for the purpose
of avoiding existing residential development to the northwest and the existing 42" sewer trunk
line placed along the existing section line within Allen Road. Since the Circulation Element is
not at a level of specificity that would reflect final design, such as the proposed eastedy shift,
Project development would implement a key component of the City's Circulation Element by
completing the Alien Road alignment at this location. Therefore, the proposed circulation
amendment is considered internally consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan
and Kern River Plan Element. Less than significant impacts are anticipated in this regard.
Alternative Transportation Systems
5.3-4
Project implementation would incorporate bicycle lanes and sidewalks on either side
of the roadway and provide an additional crossing of the Kern River. This is viewed as
a positive impact from existing conditions. Less than significant impacts are
anticipated in this regard.
Facts Supporting Finding
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
16 of 60
Septemb~i' 2004
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Circulation Element cross-section for
an Arterial roadway classification, the bridge cross-section will accommodate three (3) 12 foot
travel lanes in both directions, and a 5 foot Class II (on street) bikeway, a 6 foot walkway, and
bridge rails in each direction. A Class II bikeway is a bicycle lane featuring a striped lane on
the paved area of the road for bicyclists. Although no public bus mutes am located on or within
a mile of the Project site potential impacts to GET bus routes in the araa would be minimized
by advanced coordination and notifications. Furthermore, the proposed Project would provide
an additional crossing for public transportation including City buses and accommodate planned
cimulation needs of the future. This is viewed as a positive impact to the circulation needs of
the City. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Cumulative Impacts
5.3-5
Development of the proposed Project, along with cumulative projects in accordance
with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 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 and Circulation Study contained within Appendix 15.2 of this
EIR, cumulative impacts related to traffic would be analyzed on a project-by-project
basis. Less than significant impacts are anticipated in this regard.
Facts Supporting Finding
Increases in traffic volumes which are anticipated to occur as development in the City
continues, will significantly impact the existing street system. By year 2025, if left in current
configurations, the operations of half of the roadways and most of the intersection will
deteriorate to a level of service below LOS C during the PM peak hour. The City of Bakersfield
has established a transportation impact fee program for urban areas within the City of
Bakersfield. The Metropolitan Bakersfield RTIF is intended to provide intersection and
roadway segment improvements as development occurs within the City. The RTIF identifies a
significant number of improvements to be accomplished within the Project vicinity over the next
20 years at total cost of $227,245,210. In order to determine the projects impact fee, the total
is multiplied by the percentage of improvements associated with the development of the
Project. Improvements required to maintain or improve the operational level of service of the
roadways and intersections in the project vicinity will be considered on a project-by-project
basis and constructed through the funding of the RTIF program and adjacent developments,
not related to the proposed Project.
AIR QUALITY
Long-term (Operational) Emissions
5.4-2 Long-term mobile emissions would occur as a result of Project implementation.
However, less than significant impacts ara anticipated in this regard.
Facts Supporting Finding
The traffic analysis of the Year 2025 Without Project and Year 2025 With Project scenarios
indicate that three intersections would operate at an LOS F or be reduced to an LOS F
Exhibit A Septeml~e~r 2004
Findings of Fact 17 of 60
O -jS'.h,~AL
Alien Road Crossing at the Kern River EiR
including; Renfro Road at Stockdale Highway, Allen Road at Ming Avenue and Allen Road at
Stockdale Highway. However, CO modeling was not conducted for the intersection of Renfro
Road at Stockdale Highway since, as the Project Traffic Study indicates, the delay time for this
intersection without the Project would be decreased with the Project implementation, which
reveals that the Project would improve and not women the existing LOS at this intersection.
Therefore, CO modeling was conducted for only the Allen Road at Ming Avenue intersection
and Allen Road at Stockdale Highway intersection. These intersections were also chosen due
to their proximity to the Project site and the existence of sensitive receptors (residential uses)
surrounding both intersections.
The traffic analysis provides a worst-case scenario. Intersection turning movements are based
on data supplied by the Project Traffic Study. Because the p.m. peak hour results in higher
intersection capacity utilization (ICU) (i.e., worse LOS) in all cases, the p.m. peak hour was
used in the modeling process. The projected traffic volumes were then modeled using the
CALINE4 dispersion model. The resultant values were then added to an ambient
concentration. For the purposes of this analysis, the ambient concentrations are taken as the
highest one-hour CO measurement in the past five years of monitoring data nearest monitoring
station. Future ambient concentrations would be far lower than present levels based upon
expected trends and advancing technologies. Maximum Year 2025 l-hour CO concentration
with the Project would be 5.6 ppm for the Allen Road and Ming Avenue intersection, which is
well below the State and Federal standards of 20 ppm and 35 ppm respectively (refer to Table
5.4-7, Projected CO Concentrations in the Project Area). Additionally, the maximum Year 2025
eight-hour CO concentration with the Project would be 3.2 ppm for the same intersection,
which is well below the State and Federal standard of 9 ppm. Therefore, the proposed Project
would not result in adverse CO emissions.
Conformity With Air Quality Attainment Plan
5.4-3 The Project would be consistent with the Air Quality Attainment Plan (AQAP) criteria.
Facts Supporting Finding
A potentially significant impact to air quality would occur if the project would conflict with or
obstruct the implementation of the applicable air management or attainment quality plan. The
impact would be temporary in nature due to construction. However, the Project is expected to
improve air quality in the long-term due to improved traffic flow. The primary concern is that
project-related impacts have been properly anticipated in the regional air quality planning
process and reduced whenever feasible. Therefore, it is necessary to assess the project's
consistency with the applicable district air quality management or attainment plan(s).
The proposed roadway improvements are consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General
Plan Circulation Element cross-section for an Arterial roadway classification, which would
provide an ultimate six-lane divided roadway within a proposed right-of-way of 110 feet.
However, a Circulation Element Amendment would be required to adopt a Specific Plan Line
for the Allen Road alignment between Stockdale Highway and Ming Avenue. Thus, the
proposed Project was anticipated by the SJVAPCD prepared Air Quality Attainment Plan
(AQAP) and it would not result in direct or indirect population growth and therefore is consistent
Exhibit A September2004
Findings of Fact 18 of 60
ORigINAL
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
with growth projections in the City. Thus, the proposed Project is considered consistent with
the AQAP.
NOISE
5.5-3
Project implementation would generate an additional crossing over the Kern River
resulting in a redistribution of vehicular traffic on the surrounding roadway network,
thereby resulting in potential noise level increases along the roadways. The
acoustical analysis has concluded that Project implementation would result in less
than significant long-term noise impacts on the surrounding roadway network.
Facts Supporting Findinq
Major roadways were analyzed for year 2005 and 2025 conditions with and without the
proposed Project. The noise levels were calculated at a distance representing typical setbacks
from roadway centers of approximately 75 feet. Changes in traffic noise levels will not be
significant and in some cases would improve over no project conditions due to the
redistribution of traffic on roadways in the vicinity of the Project.
Stationary Noise Impacts
5.5-4 Stationary noise impacts associated with the proposed Project is anticipated to be
minimal. Analysis has concluded that Impacts would be less than significant.
Facts Supportinq Finding
Due to the scope and nature of the proposed Project, a bridge crossing over the Kern River, no
long-term stationary noise impacts have been identified. Stationary noise sources are generally
associated with commercial and industrial developments involving mechanical equipment,
trash compactors, loading areas, parking areas, heating and ventilation units. No noise
generating stationary operations are anticipated to be implemented into the project design.
Therefore, the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Long-term Impacts
5.6-4
The proposed Project would result in permanent long-term impacts to biological
resources compared to existing conditions. Analysis has concluded that no changes
in composition or distribution of vegetation or wildlife would occur, resulting in less
than significant impacts.
Facts SupDortinq Finding
The following impact analysis evaluates long-term operational implications of the proposed
Project on biological resources in the Kern River.
Cumulative Impacts
Exhibit A Septeml~r 2004'4
Findings of Fact 19 of 60 .~_
Alien Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
5.6-6
The proposed Project would result in the cumulative loss of open space resources
within the City. Cumulative projects are mitigated on a project-by-project basis and in
accordance with applicable local and federal requirements and the MBHCP.
Facts Supporting Findinq
Cumulative development within the southwestern portion of Bakersfield would have the
potential to adversely affect area biological resources. Regional loss of native areas is a
significant issue. The Bakersfield area is subject to the provisions of the MBHCP, thus
cumulative impacts have been addressed and considered mitigable to less than significant
~evels.
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. Less than significant impacts
are anticipated.
Facts Supporting F nding
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.
WATER RESOURCES
Cumulative Impacts
5.8-7
The proposed Project, in combination with other cumulative projects, would result in
increased degradation of surface water quality and flooding impacts. 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
Cumulative effects related to hydrology resulting from implementation of the proposed project
and development in the vicinity and surrounding areas may expose more persons and property
to potential water hazards. Cumulative development may also adversely affect downstream
water quality, resulting in impacts to surface and ground water supplies. The potential
cumulative impact is mitigated through required drainage studies to identify potential impacts,
relationship to City and County drainage master plans, and implementation of appropriate on-
site and off-site drainage improvements. Projects are also required to implement NPDES and
BMP measures on a project basis to reduce potential water quality impacts. In addition,
Exhibit A Septe~ermu
200~1~
Findings of Fact 20 of 60 >_ ~
OR~G NAL
Alien Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
projects may require drainage improvements in order to be in compliance with the City General
Plan and Zoning standards in addition to local and regional agency requirements, as part of the
discretionary review process. There are no cumulative impacts associated with the proposed
Project.
GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS
Fault Rupture
5.9-2
Implementation of the proposed Project does not have the potential to expose people
to adverse effects associated with rupture of a known earthquake fault. Analysis has
concluded that impacts associated with fault ruptures are less than significant.
Facts Supportinq Findinq
Active or potentially active faults are located within the southern San Joaquin Valley region.
The south end of the San Joaquin Valley is bordered by four major fault systems all of which
are considered to be active: San Andreas, Garlock, White Wolf, and the Kern Front faults.
Source Type A or B ea~hquake faults are located within 9.32 miles or 6.21 miles respectively
of the Project site. The Seismic Source Type for the site is C per the California Building Code
(CBC) due to the Kern Front Fault having a maximum moment magnitude of <6.5 (6.3) and a
slip rate of <5mm/year. This fault is located 13.2 kilometers from the Project site. It is probable
that these faults will move in the future, however, it is unlikely that ground rupture would occur
at Project site since it is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or within
500 feet of a known active fault trace. Therefore, impacts are considered to be less than
significant in this regard.
Landslides
5.9-5
Implementation of the proposed Project has a Iow potential of exposing people to
seismically induced/ands/ides. Less than significant impacts are anticipated in this
regard.
Facts Supportinq Findinq
The proposed Project site is located in a moderately stable area with the majority of the slopes
less than 5 percent. The streambed area consists of loose sand within the channel with gently
sloping banks, which appear to be stable. No bedrock outcrops are present within ¼-mile of
the site. No evidence of historic landslides or creep was observed in this area. The Geological
Hazard Study indicates a Iow potential for rock falls or landslides to impact the site in the event
of a major earthquake. The proposed Project site is moderately stable, according to the Study,
and less than significant impacts are anticipated in this regard.
Dam Inundation
5.9-6
Implementation of the proposed Project may expose the proposed bridge structure to
a significant risk resulting from a seismically-induced failure of Isabella Dam. Less
than significant impacts are anticipated.
Exhibit A Septer~er 200~
Findings of Fact 21 of 60 >- -
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Facts Supporting Findinq
A break in Isabella Dam caused by an earthquake would result in flooding 60 square miles of
the Bakersfield area. The Project area is located in an area of potential surtaca waters and it is
possible that some flooding would occur at this location during a major earthquake from an
upstream catastrophe including dam failure. As previously mentioned, portions of the
proposed alignment are located within Flood Insurance Map Zones A and B with flooding
expected within and adjacent to the streambed area during a 100 and/or 500 year storm.
Areas north and south of the Project area are in Flood Zone C with minimal flooding expected.
The Safety Element of the City of Bakersfield General Plan has identified policies including a
response plan for dam failure as well as the maintenance of disaster response plans,
development of discretionary approval procedures for critical facilities, and the review of zoning
designations, street widths, and circulation patterns for compatibility with evacuation plans. It
should be noted that implementation of the Allen Road bridge crossing will complete a critical
link in the City's Circulation Element, thereby providing an enhanced evacuation circulation
within this portion of the City. The Project would be designed and constructed in strict
adherence to City policies and review procedures, therefore, less than significant impacts
would occur.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
Fire Protection
5.1 0-1 Implementation of the proposed Project will not result in the need for additional
fire facilities or personnel. Less than significant impact are anticipated.
Facts Supporting Findinq
Due to the scope and nature of the proposed Project, impacts are not anticipated. The
proposed bridge crossing would provide a direct sequential connection to Stockdale Highway
and the future extension of Ming Avenue, whereby, promoting greater fire and emergency
access to those areas. The proposed Project would provide potentially beneficial regional fire
and emergency response effects by providing access to and from the southwest portion of the
City. Current level of fire protection service for the area is adequate with the recent
construction of Station 15 of the Bakersfield Fire Department. Staffing of Station 15 would be
determined by demand and need of the surrounding area.
The proposed Project has the potential of having short-term construction related impacts. If
during construction there is a need to redirect traffic or block access mutes or residential
streets, this could result in potential delays to emergency response times. This temporary
impact would not be considered significant, however, mitigation measures pertaining to
coordination during construction is provided to reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
Police Protection
5.10-2
Implementation of the proposed Project will not result in the need for additional police
facilities or personnel. Less than significant impact.
Exhibit A Septerr~r 2004
Findings of Fact 22 of 60 ~--
ORiGiNAL
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Facts Support ng F ndinq
The level of police services is currently adequate for the City and the Project area. The rapid
growth and development of the City continues to be the largest factor in providing sufficient
police services to the City. The proposed Project is not anticipated to significantly impact police
services in the area. The proposed bridge crossing would provide a direct sequential
connection to Stockdale Highway and the future extension of Ming Avenue, whereby,
promoting greater police access to those areas. Implementation of the proposed Project would
provide potentially beneficial regional police emergency response effects by providing access
to and from the southwest portion of the City.
As with fire protection services, the proposed Project has the potential of having short-term
construction related impacts. If during construction, there is a need to redirect traffic or block
access routes or residential streets, this could result in potential delays to police response
times. Furthermore, construction areas may require additional police monitoring throughout the
duration of Project construction both during day and nighttime periods. These temporary
impacts would not be considered significant, however, mitigation measures pertaining to
coordination during construction are provided to reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
Water Resources
5.10-3
Implementation of the proposed Project would not require the expansion of existing
water distribution or supply facilities with the project area. Less than significant impact
are anticipated.
Facts Supporting Findinq
The proposed Project would not result in any demands for water services. The Project would
not encroach on or displace any existing water facilities. Final engineering design plans will
incorporate design elements for the possible future placement of utilities in the bridge structure.
Sewer Services
5.10-4 Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the increase in demand or
expansion of sewer services. Less than significant impact.
Facts Supporting Finding
The proposed Project would not result in any demands for sewer services. The proposed
Project design places the alignment across the river easterly of the section line for the purpose
of avoiding the existing 42" Allen Road sewer trunk line. Less than significant impacts are
anticipated in this regard.
Natural Gas
5. 10-6 Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in increased demand for
natural gas services. Less than significant impacts are anticipated in this regard.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact 23 of 60 Septenj.'l~er 2004u~
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Facts Supportinq Findinq
Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in increased demand or require
the construction of additional facilities for natural gas services. PG&E is planning a future
extension of a six (6) inch gas distribution main line from an existing line located on Allen
Road, south of the Kern River. The proposed line would be extended north approximately
4,100 feet across the Kern River to connect with an existing gas distribution main on Allen
Road. The Project contractor shall coordinate with PG&E staff prior to construction for
potential issues that may occur with existing lines in the area. Less than significant impacts
are anticipated in this regard.
Electrical Services
5.10-7
Implementation of the proposed Project would require temporary use of electricity
during construction and long-term electric power for street lighting. However,
electricity use would not result in excessive power use that would result in significant
impacts to existing facilities. Less than significant impacts are anticipated in this
regard.
Facts Supporting Findinq
Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in excessive demands in electrical
services or require the construction of additional facilities. During construction, the Project
would require temporary electrical power supply for certain equipment and lighting. The
proposed Project would also require electricity for street lighting along the roadway. The
connections would be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the City of
Bakersfield. The Project contractor shall coordinate with PG&E staff prior to construction for
potential issues that may occur. Less than significant impacts are anticipated in this regard.
VII. FINDINGS REGARDING EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED TO
LESS THAN SIGNFICANT LEVELS
The City of Bakersfield, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR,
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 in the
Final EIR in the following categories: Aesthetics/Light and Glare, Public Health and Safety, Traffic and
Circulation, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Water Resources, Geological
Resources, and Public Services and Utilities.
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.
Exhibit A ,~ ~,~
Findings of Fact 24 of 60 Septerr~er zuu~ ~_
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
AESTHETICS/LIGHT AND GLARE
Short-term (Construction) Aesthetic Impacts
5.1-1 Grading and construction would temporarily alter the visual appearance of the Project area.
Impacts are considered to be shod-term; would cease upon completion of construction
activities and would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the
recommended mitigation measure.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact 25 of 60 September 2004
0
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Facts Supporting Finding
Project construction activities would temporarily 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 Project site. The use of metal storage containers in conjunction with construction
activities 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. 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 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
final 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.
Light and Glare Impacts
5.1-3
The Project would generate additional light/glare beyond existing conditions due to
street lighting and vehicular traffic. Compliance with City codes and recommended
mitigation would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels.
Facts Supporting Finding
The Project would create lightJglare impacts to off-site uses and introduce new sources of
lighting into the Project area. These sources include lighting for streetlights, lighting for street
signs, and lighting from vehicular traffic. On-site light sources may create light spillover and
glare impacts on surrounding land uses in the absence of mitigation. Light spill is typically
defined as the presence of unwanted light on properties adjacent to the property being
illuminated. The streetlights along the bridge crossing would be in compliance with City
standards. The Bakersfield Code Section 17.58.060 indicates that light shall be reflected away
from residential properties and suggests the use of shields to prevent unwanted light on
adjacent residential properties.
Based on the fact that the proposed Project area is located over the Kern River, light spiilover
impacts could be significant in regard to biological resources. However, as discussed in
Section 5.6, Biological Resources, impacts to biological resources as a result of Project
implementation would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of
mitigation measures to minimize light and glare impacts within the Kern River.
Mitigation Measure 5.1-3a, and 5.1-3b of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows
Exhibit A Septeml~r 2004
Findings of Fact 26 of 60
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
5.1-3a
To ensure the lighting does not spill over onto the adjacent uses, all street lighting
shall be shielded or directed away from adjoining uses pursuant to all applicable
lighting standards and requirements of the City Municipal and Zoning Codes.
5.1-3b
Prior to issuing a building permit, the lighting plans shall be approved by the City
Planner and Traffic Engineer to ensure conformance with the City Municipal Code.
The type and location of street lighting standards and the intensity of the lights shall
be approved by the Traffic Engineer and City Planner.
PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
Valley Fever
5.2-6
Grading within the boundary of the Project may lead to the release of fugitive dust
and spores causing Valley Fever. Mitigation which reduces fugitive dust emissions
would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
Facts Support nq Findinq
If Valley Fever spores occur within the boundaries of the proposed Project, with the absence of
mitigation, there is potential for the infection of construction workers and surrounding residents,
as well as the project area. Mitigation measures designed to reduce the amount of fugitive dust
during grading activities would reduce the likelihood of Valley Fever to a less than significant
level (refer to Section 5.4, Air Quality). The long-term covering of portions of the Project
alignment with landscaping material, and or impervious roadway surfaces would reduce the
long-term potential release of Valley Fever spores to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measures 5.2-6a and 5.2-6b of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as foltows:
5.2-6a Refer to Section 5.4, Air Quality, regarding fugitive dust mitigation measures.
5.2-6b
All areas with bare soil exposed as a result of project earthwork activities shall be
landscaped at the earliest time possible or stabilized by watering when winds exceed
25 miles per hour (mph) in order to reduce the potential inhalation of spores causing
Valley Fever.
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
Short-term Construction Impacts
5.3-1
Project implementation would result in temporary circulation impacts associated with
construction of the bridge crossing. Impacts to nearby residents, pedestrians,
bicyclists, and traffic congestion may occur during construction. However, these
impacts are temporary in nature and would cease upon project completion.
Implementation of recommended mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less
than significant levels.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
27 of 60
Septen~r 2004
~_
J, ,~
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Facts Supportinq Findinq
Anticipated impacts to traffic congestion would be minor and cease upon completion of Project
construction. A detailed Traffic Management Plan (TMP) would be prepared by a registered
Civil Engineer prior to construction of the proposed Project. The TMP will delineate all road
closures, provisions to maintain access to adjacent residential properties at all times, prior
notices, adequate sign-postings, detours, sufficient headway for horses and riders to pass by,
provisions for pedestrian, horseback riders, and bicycle transportation, and permitted hours of
construction activity. Proper detours and warning signs would be established along Allen Road
and the existing bike path and riding and hiking trail to ensure public safety. The TMP shall be
devised so that construction would not interfere with emergency response or evacuation plans.
With implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, less than significant impacts are
anticipated.
Mitigation Measures 5.3-1a and 5.3-1b of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.3-1a Short-term mitigation for roadways shall be mitigated by a Traffic Management Plan
(TMP) to be established by the City prior to construction. This Plan shall consist of
prior notices, adequate sign-posting, and detours (including pedestrian, horseback,
and bicycle paths). The TMP shall specify implementation timing of each plan
element (prior notices, sign-posting, detours, etc.) as determined appropriate by the
City Engineer. Adequate access to and from adjacent residential areas shall be
provided at all times. The TMP shall be devised and approved by the City Police and
Fire Departments so that construction shall not interfere with any emergency
response or evacuation plans. Construction activities shall proceed in a timely
manner in an effort to reduce impacts.
5.3-1b
Proper detours and warning signs shall be established to ensure public safety.
Alternative routes for the existing bike path and riding and hiking trail along the Kern
River shall be clearly marked and safety of those that utilize the path shall be
considered at all times. This includes the use of proper lighting (where appropriate),
fencing/shielding, sufficient headway for horses and riders to pass through, proper
storage of equipment and construction supplies, covedng loose piles of soil, silt, clay,
sand debris or other earthen material so as to eliminate any discharge onto the
existing pathway or temporary pathway and immediately hosing down/cleaning such
areas of the existing pathway or temporary pathway that have been affected by
construction debris or sedimentation from the Project. Upon completion of
construction the existing bike path and riding and hiking trail along the Kern River
shall be returned to pre-project conditions.
AIR QUALITY
Short-term (Construction) Emissions
5.4-1 Temporary construction-related dust and vahicle emissions would occur during
construction within the Project area. Analysis has concluded that impacts would
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
28 of 60
Septe~er 200~,
ORIGINAL
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
be mitigated to a less than significant level.
Facts Supportinq F riding
Construction of the Project would generate short-term air quality impacts during grading
and construction operations. The short-term air quality analysis considers cumulative
construction emissions in combination with Project emissions. Temporary impacts from the
Project and cumulative construction activities would include:
Clearing, grading, excavating and using heavy equipment or trucks creates large
quantities of fugitive dust, and thus PM~o;
Heavy equipment required for grading and construction generates and emits diesel
exhaust emissions;
The vehicles of commuting construction workers and trucks hauling equipment
generate and emit exhaust emissions; and
Emissions from the stationary construction equipment used on-site.
The above described emissions from increases in use of power and vehicle emissions are
generated during construction activities. Potential odors generated during construction
operations are temporary in nature and are not considered to be an impact. It should be
noted that emissions produced during grading and construction activities are "short-term" in
nature as they occur only for the duration of construction.
Fugitive Dust Emissions
Short-term air quality impacts associated with Project implementation would primarily result
in fugitive particulate matter emissions during construction. Grading, excavation, trenching,
filling and other construction activities resulting in increased dust emissions. Regulation
VIII of the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) specifies
control measures for specified outdoor sources of fugitive particulate matter emissions.
Rule 8010 contains administration requirements, Rule 8020 applies to construction
activities, and Rule 8070 applies to vehicle and equipment parking, fueling, and service
areas. The SJVAPCD 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 to graded areas.
PM~0 is emitted both during construction activities and as a result of wind erosion over
exposed soil surfaces. Clearing and grading activities comprise the major sources of
construction dust emissions, but traffic and general disturbance of the soil also generates
significant dust emissions. PM~o emissions can vary greatly depending on the level of
activity, the specific operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils,
weather conditions and other factors making quantification difficult. The highest potential
for construction dust impacts would occur during the dry late spring, summer and early fall
months when soils are dry. Despite this variability in emissions, experience has shown that
there are a number of feasible control measures that can be reasonably implemented to
significantly reduce PM10 emissions from construction activities. The SJVAPCD's approach
to analyses of PM~0 impacts is to require implementation of effective and comprehensive
control measures rather than to require detailed quantification of emissions.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
29 of 60
septe~ber
ORIG%",L
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Construction Exhaust Emissions
Exhaust emissions from construction activities include emissions associated with the
transport of materials and supplies to and from the site, emissions produced on-site as the
equipment is used and emissions from trucks transporting excavated materials from the site
and fill soils to the site. The SJVAPCD does not require that construction emissions be
quantified, as the SJVAPCD does not provide any emission thresholds for construction
emissions. However, in order to present a conservative, worst-case analysis, construction
emissions for the proposed Project were modeled with URBEMiS2002 (refer to Appendix
15.4, Air Quality Data, for the assumptions used in the analysis). As Table 5.4-5,
Construction Emissions, illustrates, construction of the proposed Project would result in
approximately 23.9 pounds per day (lbs/day) of ROG emissions, 157 lbs/day of NOx
emissions, 198 lbs/day of CO emissions and 20 lbs/day of mitigated PM~o emissions during
the year 2006. However, since the proposed Project is anticipated to take approximately
15 months to complete, the following emissions are anticipated for the year 2007; 22
lbs/day of ROG emissions, 154 lbs/day of NOx emissions, 176 lbs/day of CO emissions and
6 lbs/day of PM10 emissions.
Table 5.4-5
Projected Construction Emissions
Emissions
Source
Pollutant (poundslday)~
ROG I NOx I CO I PM~0
Y~r2006
UnmitigatedEmissions2 23.9 156.7 197,9 46.3
MitigatedEmissions3 23,9 156.7 197.9 20.1
Year2007
Unmitigated Emissions2
Mitigated Emissions3
ROG = reactive organic gases
CO = carbon monoxide
22.4 154.0 176.4 6.3
22.4 154.0 176.4 6.3
NOx = nitrogen oxides
PM~o = fine particulate matter
Notes:
1. Emissions calculated using the URBEMIS2002 Computer Model.
2. Refert~Appendix15~4~AirQua~ityData~f~rassumpti~nsusedinthisanaiysis~inc~udingquantitiedemissi~nsreducti~n
by mitigation measures.
3. The reduction/credits for construction emission mitigations are based on mitigations included in the UREBMIS2002
computer model and as typically required by the SJVAPCD. The mitigations include the following: proper maintenance
of mobile and other construction equipment and speed limitation on unpaved roads to 15 mites per hour.
Construction Emission Reduction
Fugitive dust and equipment emissions associated with grading and construction is
expected to be short-term and would cease following Project completion. Additionally,
most of the dust generated during construction is composed of inert silicates, rather than
complex organic particulates as would be released from combustion sources, which are
more harmful to health. Dust (larger than 10 microns) generated by such activities usually
becomes more of a local nuisance than a serious health problem.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
30 of 60
Sep~mber'~4
ORIGINAL
Alien Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
The SJVAPCD's recommended approach to mitigating construction emissions focuses on a
consideration of whether all feasible control measures are being implemented. The
proposed Project would be required to develop and implement a PM~0 dust prevention and
control plan in compliance with Regulation VIII. The PM~0 prevention plan would specify
the methods of control that would be utilized and would identify an individual responsible for
authorizing implementation of additional measures, if needed. Therefore, shod-term
construction impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level with implementation
of Regulation VIII Control Measures as outlined in Table 6-2 - Regulation VIII Control
Measures for Construction Emissions of PM~o and Table 6-3 - Enhanced and Additional
Control Measures for Construction Emissions of PM~o in the SJVAPCD's CEQA Guidelines
(refer to Table 5.4-6 - Control Measures for Construction Emissions of PM~o).
Table 5.4-6
Control Measures for Construction Emissions of PM~0
Regulation VIII Control Measures - The following controls are required to be implemented at all
construction sites.
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 chemioal stabilizer/suppressant.
All land cleedng, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and till, and demolition activities shall be
effectively contreiled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking.
With the demolition of buildings up to six stories in height, al~ extedor surfaces of the building shall be wetted dudng
demolition.
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 accomu~atioe of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end
of each workday. (The use of dr,/rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by
sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. Use of b~ower 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 wafer or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
Within urban areas, trackout shal~ 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 thps per day shall prevent carryout and trackout.
Enhanced Control Measures - The following measures should be implemented at construction sites
when required to mitigate significant PM~0 impacts. Theee measures are to be implemented in
addition to Regulation VIII requirements.
Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.
Install sandbags o~ other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope
~lreater than o~e percent.
Source: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quafity Impacts, January
2002.
Implementation of the mitigation measures identified in Table 5.4-6 combined with
measures identified at the end of this Section to reduce equipment emissions would serve
to reduce construction-related emissions to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures 5.4-1a and 5.4-1b of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.4-1a
Construction of the Project requires the implementation of control measures set
forth under Regulation VIii, Fugitive PMt0 Prohibitions of the San Joaquin Valley
Air Pollution Control District. The following mitigation measures, in addition to
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
31 of 60
Septen~er 2004
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EiR
5.4-1b
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 chemica~
stabilizer/suppressant.
All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut
and 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.
Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.
Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to
public roadways from sites with a slope greater than one percent.
The following measures shall be implemented by the construction contractor to
further reduce construction emission exhaust:
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
32 of 60
ORiG',NAL
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Heavy construction equipment shall be property tuned and maintained to
reduce emissions. Construction equipment shall be fitted with the most
modern emission control devices. The construction manager shall monitor
compliance with the measure and is subject to periodic inspection by the
City.
Require vapor control from the transfer of fuel from the fuel truck to vehicles
both during construction and subsequent operations.
Diesel powered equipment shall be located as far away as possible from
sensitive land uses. Specifically, diesel compressors, pumps and other
stationary machinery shall be located to the extent feasible, away from
sensitive receptors.
Construction equipment shall be shut off to reduce idling when not in direct
use for extended periods of time.
Cumulative Impacts
5.4-4
Impacts to regional air quality resulting from the proposed Project and
cumulative projects may impact existing regional air quafity levels on a
cumulative basis. Impacts from projects would be evaluated and mitigated on a
project-by-project basis, resulting in less than significant impacts.
Facts Supportinq Findinq
Based on the SJVAPCD CEQA Guidelines, any project that would have an individually
significant operational air quality impact would also be considered to have a significant
cumulative air quality impact. An adequate cumulative impact analysis considers a project
over time and in conjunction with other related past, present and reasonably foreseeable
future projects who's impacts might compound or interrelate with those of the project being
assessed. The SJVAPCD CEQA Guidelines states that cumulative CO impacts (the only
long-term emissions associated with the proposed Project) are accounted for in the CO
hotspot analysis. As discussed in Impact Statement 5.4-2, Long-Term (Operational)
Emissions, CO impacts would be less than significant. Since the proposed Project
construction emissions would be mitigated to a less than significant level and operation of
the proposed Project would not exceed SJAVPCD thresholds, cumulative impacts would be
less than significant.
Mitigation Measures 5.4-4 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.4-4 SJVAPCD Standards and City Municipal Code requirements would be implemented
on a project-by-project basis.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
33 of 60
Septer~er 200~
O~O;NAL
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Short-term (Construction) Impacts
5.6-1
Construction of the proposed Project would result in temporary impacts to
biological resources in the Project area. Project adherence to all applicable
construction minimization measures outlined throughout the EIR, would reduce
impacts to less than significant levels.
Facts Supporting Finding
Grading activities would disturb soils and result in the accumulation of dust on the surface
of leaves, trees, shrubs, and herbs. The respiratory function of the plants in the area would
be impaired when dust accumulation is excessive. However, most of the vegetation on the
Project site is non-native or representative of historically occurring vegetation types.
Implementation of standard dust suppression measures identified in Section 5.4, Air
Quality, would serve to reduce construction-related dust generation. Therefore, the indirect
effect of impaired respiration by existing plant species on the Project site is considered less
than significant.
The Biological Technical Report indicates that noise levels on the Project site during
construction of the proposed project would not likely increase appreciably above existing
noise levels because of its location adjacent to developing urban areas. Temporary
increases in noise levels are unlikely to impact wildlife because resident animals are
already acclimated to the high noise levels associated with nearby traffic and adjacent
development. The Project is not expected to result in displacement due to increased
disturbance. Therefore, project-related construction noise impacts would be considered
less than significant.
Mitigation Measures 5.6-1 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.6-1
Refer to mitigation measures provided in Section 5.4, Air Quality and Section
5.8, Water Resources.
Special Status Plants
5.6-2
Project construction would permanently impact a total of 9.4-acres, potentially
impacting several special status plant species known to occur in the area.
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.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
34 of 60
Septemb~ ~)4~
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Facts Support ng F nd ng
Twenty (20) special status plant species are known to occur in the proposed project region.
Eleven (11) of these species are not expected to occur due to lack of suitable habitat, or
because the project site is not within the geographic or elevation range of the species. The
remaining nine species have the potential to occur on the project site including the alkali
mariposa lily, California jewel-flower, slough thistle, recurred larkspur, Hoover's woolly-star,
Coulter's goldfields, San Joaquin woolly-threads, oil neststraw, and Mason's neststraw.
Five of these species are covered in the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation
Plan (MBHCP), including those that are listed as Threatened or Endangered by the
resource agencies. Potential impacts associated with the loss of habitat for these species
would be mitigated under the MBHCP. The remaining four species, alkali mariposa lily,
Coulter's goldfields, oil neststraw, and Mason's neststraw, are not covered by the MBHCP.
Spring surveys would be required to determine the presence or absence of Alkali mariposa
lily, California jewel-flower, slough thistle, recurved larkspur, Hoover's woolly-star, Coulter's
goldfields, San Joaquin woolly-threads, oil neststraw, and Mason's neststraw as they all
have the potential to occur on the project site. The California jewel-flower, slough thistle,
recurved larkspur, Hoover's woolly-star, and San Joaquin woolly-threads are all covered
species under the MBHCP. impacts on these species would be potentially significant if
these species were present within the impacts area, and if the size of the population and
status of the species warrant a finding of significance. Impacts on these species would be
mitigated to less than significant with the payment of the MBHCP fee.
The remaining species, alkali mariposa lily, Coulter's goldfields, oil neststraw, and Mason's
neststraw are a~l CNPS List lB species that are not covered by the MBHCP. if present
within the impact area, impacts on these species may be considered potentially significant
depending on the size of the population and status of the species. The emphasis of the
MBHCP is on habitat protection, reflecting a comprehensive ecological approach for
addressing listed species. Preserve design and selection under the MBHCP is intended to
conserve entire communities and ecosystems; therefore, species that are not currently
listed or identified in the MBHCP would be incorporated into preserve systems. Therefore,
mitigation under the MBHCP to reduce impacts on listed species would also be sufficient to
mitigate impacts to non-listed species.
Mitigation Measures 5.6-2 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.6-2
The City shall pay a one-time mitigation fee at the time grading plans are
approved or building permits are issued, The mitigation fee for 2003, which may
be increased to account for inflation (MBHCP 1994), is $1,240 per acre. The
mitigation fee shall apply to the acreage of all vegetation and habitat directly
impacted by the proposed Project (except developed areas). The proposed
Project would impact 12.18 acres of vegetation, which would result in a required
payment of $15,103.20. The funds paid shall be directed towards purchase of
lands as determined appropriate by the MBHCP Implementation Trust Group.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
35 of 60
Septel~er 200~
0RIG!NAL
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Special Status Wildlife
5.6-3 Special status wildlife species are known to inhabit the area and could be
potentially impacted during construction of the proposed Project. 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 Supportinq F ndinq
Invertebrates
The Kern shoulderband is not expected to occur on the Project site. One Mexican
elderberry tree, habitat for valley elderberry longhorn beetles, is present approximately 320
feet west of centerline, which is well outside the impact area. This single tree is not
expected to support a valley elderberry longhorn beetle population, but it is the only
elderberry in the Project's vicinity; therefore, the tree would be avoided during project
construction by maintaining a minimum 100 foot setback. Therefore, the Project is not
expected to impact the Kern shoulderband and elderberry longhorn beetles.
The Monarch butterfly has potential to forage and potentially roost on the Project site.
Impacts to this species would be temporary loss of habitat. Due to the limited amount of
habitat loss relative to the availability of similar habitat in the region, impacts would be
considered less than significant.
Amphibians
The western spadefoot has potential to breed in the riparian herb vegetation type present
on the project site. Impacts on this vegetation type would result in the loss of breeding
habitat for the western spadefoot, if Project construction begins before this herb vegetation
type area is inundated, then similar habitat immediately east of the Project site could be
used for breeding and impacts would be considered less than significant. However, if
project construction begins after this area is inundated and the western spadefoot is in its
breeding season, impacts could include the loss of a large percentage of the adult
population and all offspdng for that year. These impacts could be considered potentially
significant because this species is considered to meet the criteria in Section 15380 of
CEQA. Implementation of recommended mitigation measures, including limitation on
construction activities and development of a relocation program would reduce this impact to
a less than significant level.
Reptiles
The southwestern pond turtle, blunt-nosed leopard lizard, and the giant garter snake are
not expected to occur on the Project site. No impacts on these species are anticipated.
The silvery legless lizard, San Joaquin whipsnake, and California horned lizard all have
potential to occur on the project site. If present, impacts to these species would be due to
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
36 of 60
Septembe>_t"~004 ~
~ rn
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
loss of habitat and direct mortality. Due to the limited amount of habitat loss relative to the
availability of similar habitat in the region, impacts would be considered less than
significant.
Birds
Of the 18 special status bird species in the project region, five are not expected to occur on
the Project site as foraging or nesting species. These species are mountain plover, yellow-
billed cuckoo, southwestern willow flycatcher, white-faced ibis, and least Bell's vireo.
Eight others may forage in the area occasionally but are not expected to nest. These
species are the sharp-shinned hawk, tricolored blackbird, short-eared owl, burrowing owl,
ferruginous hawk, merlin, peregrine falcon, and prairie falcon. The proposed Project would
contribute to an incremental loss of habitat for these species, but these impacts would be
considered less than significant due to the limited amount of potential habitat that would be
impacted relative to the amount of similar habitat present in the Project vicinity.
The loggerhead shrike occurs on the Project site and has a high probability of nesting in the
shrubs on the Project site. The proposed Project would contribute to an incremental loss of
habitat for this species, but these impacts would be considered less than significant due to
the limited amount of potential habitat that would be impacted relative to amount of similar
habitat present in the Project vicinity.
The Cooper's hawk, Swainson's hawk, northern harrier, and white-tailed kite have potential
to nest on or adjacent to the project site. The northern harrier is a ground-nesting species,
while the Cooper's hawk, Swainson's hawk and white-tailed kite would nest in the trees on
the project site. All of them are located outside of the construction limits, therefore direct
impacts on nesting birds that may use trees are not anticipated. However, if the Project
design changes require disturbance to existing trees, measures to avoid impacts are
recommended. According to the Biological Technical Report, impacts on any active raptor
nest (common or special status species) would be considered a violation of the California
Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513. These impacts could cause direct
mortality of nestlings and/or abandonment of the nest. Therefore, any impact on the nest of
this species or common raptor species would be considered potentially significant. Impacts
on raptor nesting would be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of
mitigation measures. The loss of foraging habitat would cumulatively contribute to the
ongoing regional and local loss of foraging habitat for all raptor species. However, this
impact is considered less than significant because a relatively substantial amount of similar
foraging habitat is available in the region.
Mammals
The San Joaquin antelope squirrel, giant kangaroo rat, shod-nosed kangaroo rat, and
Buena Vista Lake shrew are not expected to occur on the Project site. No impact on these
species is anticipated.
The federally and state-listed threatened San Joaquin kit fox is known from the Project
region, and scat from the kit fox was observed on the Project site during focused surveys
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
37 of 60
Septe o~b~
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
conducted for the Biological Technical Report. Impacts to this species would be due to loss
of habitat and considered potentially significant. Although this species is covered under the
MBHCP, focused surveys were conducted so that impacts can be avoided to the furthest
extent possible. The Biological Technical Report indicates during the focused kit fox den
surveys, several potential dens on the project site were detected. These potential dens
primarily consisted of concrete riprap and irrigation pipe in the project site that could be
used by the foxes as refugium. Although these potential dens are not likely regularly used
by kit fox, if a fox seeks temporary shelter in a potential den as construction begins,
individual foxes could be taken. Mitigation for the loss of habitat is covered under the
existing MBHCP. However, loss of individuals may be considered potentially significant
without additional avoidance measures. Therefore, implementation recommended
mitigation to avoid possible take of San Joaquin kit fox individuals during construction
would reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
Rodent burrows of the type and size used by kangaroo rats are present throughout the
project area, many showing signs of recent use by kangaroo rets. Although no trepping
was conducted during the wildlife survey, Tipton kangaroo rat is known from this area and it
is likely that the species is present on the project site as several burrows that could be
occupied by Tipton kangaroo ret were observed on the project site. Impacts to this species
would be due to loss of habitat and direct mortality. Mitigation for the loss of habitat and
Tipton kangaroo rat individuals is covered under the existing MBHCP. Therefore, impacts
on this species would be considered less than significant with implementation of
recommended mitigation measures.
The Tulare grasshopper mouse, San Joaquin pocket mouse and American badger have
potential to occur on the project site. If present, these impacts would be due to loss of
habitat and direct mortality. Impacts would be considered less than significant due to the
limited amount of habitat loss relative to the availability of similar habitat in the region.
The pallid bat and Yuma myotis also have potential to occur on the project site for foraging.
The loss of foreging habitat would cumulatively contribute to the ongoing regional and local
loss of foraging habitat for these bat species. This impact is considered less than
significant because a relatively substantial amount of similar habitat is available in the
region.
Impacts on habitat for special status species, including San Joaquin kit fox, will be
mitigated through the payment of a one-time mitigation fee due and payable to the City of
Bakersfield at the time greding plans are approved or building permits are issued. The
mitigation fee is currently $1,240 per acre, although it may be increased in the future to
keep pace with inflation. The mitigation fee will apply to the acres of all vegetation types
directly impacted by the proposed project. The mitigation fee will not apply to acres of
vegetation indirectly impacted by the chosen alternative. Although the project was not
previously included in the MBHCP area, the MBHCP Implementation Trust Group has
approved the proposed project to participate in the MBHCP. Therefore, less than significant
impacts are anticipated.
Mitigation Measures 5.6-3a-¢ of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
38 of 60
Septer~er 2004¢
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
5.6-3a
5.6-3b
5.6-3c
A focused survey shall be conducted on the project site for the western
spadefoot toad prior to construction and during the breeding season (February
through May). The survey results will be submitted to CDFG within 45 days
after completion of the last survey. If it is determined that the western spadefoot
toad is not present on the project site, then no further mitigation is necessary.
However, if the western spadefoot toad is located on the project site then a
relocation program shall be developed. The relocation program shall include a
detailed methodology for locating, capturing, and relocating individuals prior to
construction. The program shall identify a suitable location for relocation of the
western spadefoot toad prior to capture. The relocation program shall stipulate
that a biologist with the necessary permits for handling the western spadefoot
toad be retained to relocate toads. Prior to implementation of the relocation
program, the program and the biologist(s) implementing the program shall be
subject to approval of the CDFG.
Seven days prior to the onset of construction activities, a qualified biologist shall
survey within the limits of project disturbance for the presence of any active
raptor nests (common or special status). Any nest found during survey efforts
shall be mapped on the construction plans. If no active nests are found, no
further mitigation would be required. Results of the surveys shall be provided to
the CDFG.
If nesting activity is present at any raptor nest site, the active site shall be
protected until nesting activity has ended to ensure compliance with Section
3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code. Nesting activity for raptors in the
region of the project site normally occurs from February 1~ to June 30th. To
protect any nest site, the following restrictions on construction are required
between February 1st and June 30th (or until nests are no longer active as
determined by a qualified biologist): (1)clearing limits shall be established a
minimum of 300 feet in any direction from any occupied nest and (2) access and
surveying shall be restricted within 200 feet of any occupied nest. Any
encroachment into the 300/200 foot buffer area around the known nest shall
only be allowed if it is determined by a qualified biologist that the proposed
activity shall not disturb the nest occupants. Construction during the non-nesting
season can occur only at the sites if a qualified biologist has determined that
fledglings have left the nest.
Impacts on San Joaquin kit fox habitat would be fully mitigated through payment
of the mitigation fee for the MBHCP (Mitigation Measure 5.6-1). The MBHCP
also contains guidelines for addressing project impacts on known fox dens, but
not potential dens. Although only potential dens occur within the project site, the
following measures shall be completed implemented to further reduce impacts
on this species:
When construction begins, a qualified biologist shall be present on site to
inspect the excavation of debris piles, riprap, and abandoned pipe for the
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
39 of 60
Septem~r 20~'4~,
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
presence of San Joaquin kit fox to avoid take. Monitoring and excavation
shall be according to USFWS and CDFG approved guidelines;
Pets shall not be permitted on the project site during project activities,
except if confined or leashed;
Ali food-related trash, such as wrappers, cans, bottles, and food scraps,
shall be disposed of in closed containers only and regularly removed from
the project site;
All spills of hazardous materials within endangered species habitats shall
be cleaned up immediately, and no equipment maintenance or refueling
shall occur within the Kern River floodplain;
All construction activities shall be conducted during daylight hours;
All project-related vehicles shall observe a speed limit of 20 mph or less on
the Project site, except on existing paved city roads;
All trenches left uncovered over night shall be ramped to allow animals
that fall into the trench to escape;
The boundaries of the project site shall be delineated using orange snow
fencing to ensure that adjacent habitats will not be impacted
Jurisdictional Impacts
5.6-5
Project construction will impact jurisdiction under the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
and California Department of Fish and Game. With implementation of permit
conditions imposed by the agencies, including the provision for providing
compensatory mitigation, impacts within the Kern River subject to ACOE and CDFG
review would be less than significant.
Facts Supportinq Findinq
Construction activities within jurisdictional areas of the Kern River will be subject to
approval by the ACOE 404 Permit, the CDFG 1602 SAA and the 401 Water Quality
Certification from the RWQCB.
The proposed bridge is anticipated to require up to 28 separate piers, each with 25
separate piles, 16 inches in diameter to support the roadway. Approximately 0.04-acres of
ACOE jurisdictional waters (nonvegetated) and 0.31-acres of CDFG jurisdiction would be
permanently impacted by the implementation of the proposed bridge crossing of the Kern
River. These impacts are as a result of the concrete piles and associated bridge
abutments. Approximately 2.68-acres of ACOE jurisdiction (non-wetland) and 6.03-acres of
CDFG jurisdiction would be temporarily impacted during construction of the bridge
structure. Temporary impacts consist of work areas, false work, and temporary access.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
40 of 60
Septer~3er 200~
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Based on the amount of jurisdictional impacts, it is anticipated that the proposed
improvements can be authorized via Nationwide Permit (NWP) 14, Linear Transportation
Projects, and NWP 33, Temporary Construction, Access, and Dewatering. Prior to
obtaining the NWP, a 401 Water Quality Certification must be obtained from the RWQCB.
A 1602 SAA is required from the CDFG prior to any alteration of the Kern River; generally,
all regulatory permits can be processed concurrently. The City will be required to provide
compensatory mitigation at a minimum 3:1 ratio for impacts to the primary floodplain
consistent with the MBHCP, including any additional ratios deemed appropriate by the
aforementioned regulatory agencies. Implementation of mitigation measures would reduce
impacts to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures 5.6-3a-c of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.6-5
Prior to commencement of construction activities, the City shall obtain a 404
permit from the ACOE, a 1602 SAA from the CDFG, and a Section 401 Water
Quality Certification from the RWQCB. For impacts to non-wetland waters,
typical mitigation/minimization measures required by the regulatory agencies
(ACOE, CDFG and RWQCB) may include, but not be limited to the following:
On-site preservation enhancement.
Off-site preservation through the purchase of suitable habitat or
participation in an existing mitigation bank.
On-site treatment of flows from developed surfaces prior to such flows
entering waters of the U.S. (i.e., mechanical filters, bio-swales, or other
similar post-construction BMPs).
No work will be performed within the Kern River during periods of water
flow.
Specific replacement ratios and other mitigation/minimization measures, in addition to the
3:1 ratio required under the terms and conditions of the MBHCP, shall be developed and
implemented by the City in consultation with the regulatory agencies during the permit
process.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
5.7-1
Implementation of the proposed Project may cause a significant impact to
unknown archaeological or historical resources on-site. Implementation of the
recommended mitigation measures would reduce impacts to unknown
archaeological resources to a less than significant level
Facts Supporting Finding
No potentially significant cultural resources were identified in or adjacent to the proposed
Project's APE. Similarly, no resources were identified in the APE during previous studies
that involved the Project area. An isolated historic artifact found at the intersection of the
Allen Road and Ming Avenue alignments does not constitute a significant resource and has
been mitigated through recordation and collection by a qualified archaeologist. Therefore,
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
41 of 60
Septem~er 200~d.~_
Alien Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
the project will not adversely affect any known cultural resources that are included in or
appear to be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (under the
National Environmental Policy Act [NEPAl) or the California Register of Historic Resources
(under CEQA).
Major river systems such as the Kern River were important to people during the prehistoric
era. In the project vicinity, this sensitivity is indicated by six prehistoric archaeological sites
and two isolated artifacts recorded within 0.5 to 1.0-mile of the APE. However, it is still
possible that erosional or depositional processes, along with other impacts have obscured
cultural remains that may be present. While it is unlikely that significant village or habitation
sites exist within the area, there is always the potential, regardless of how remote, that
cultural resources may yet be unearthed during construction. The portion of the APE north
of the Kern River is heavily disturbed and largely built over, and no monitoring seems
necessary there.
Ground-disturbing activities for the project may involve deep grading or drilling for piers or
pylons to support the proposed bridge. Implementation of the proposed Project therefore
has the potential to disturb or destroy undocumented archaeological or historical resources.
Measures such as proper monitoring of Project grading activities and testing of any
resources found as a result of Project development would reduce potential impacts to
undocumented archaeological resources to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures 5.7-1a,b of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.7-1a If archaeological resources are discovered during excavation and grading
activities on-site, the contractor shall stop all work and the City shall retain a
qualified archaeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate
course of action. Salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5
of the CEQA 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.
5.7-1b If human remains are discovered as a result of the project during any earth
removal or disturbance activities, all activity shall cease immediately and the
Kern County Coroner's Office must be notified immediately under state law and
a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor shall be contacted.
Should the Coroner determine the human remains to be Native American, the
Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98.
Paleontological Resources
5.7-2
Implementation of the proposed Project may cause a significant impact to buried
paleontological resources on-site. Implementation of the recommended
mitigation measures would reduce impacts to unknown paleontological
resources to a/ess than significant level.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
42 of 60
Septe ~r~er 2004~
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Facts Suooortina Findinq
As previously discussed above, the vicinity of the project is immediately underlain by
Quaternary (Holocene and Pleistocene) alluvium and gravels that are unlikely to contain
significant vertebrate fossil remains. Current records at the NHMLAC and BVMNH do not
indicate any recorded fossil localities in the area. However, deep excavations that extend
into lower (older) Quaternary (Plio-Pleistocene) deposits could encounter such remains.
Ground-disturbing activities for the project may involve deep grading or ddlling for piers or
pylons to support the proposed bridge structure. As a precautionary measure, a qualified
paleontologist would be retained to inspect the excavations and resultant spill soils for the
presence of fossil remains. If potentially significant fossil remains are identified,
appropriate paleontological measures would be implemented to salvage the materials for
study at a local institution such as the BVMNH. Implementation of the recommended
mitigation measure would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measures 5.7-2 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.7-2
A qualified paleontologist shall be retained to examine earthwork spoils
generated during construction activities. If paleontological resources are
discovered on the site, the contractor shall stop all work and the paleontologist
shall evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action.
WATER RESOURCES
Flooding
5.8-1
Implementation of the proposed Allen Road/Kern River Bridge project may result
in potential flooding impacts. Analysis has concluded that with incorporation of
specific engineering requirements, less than significant impacts would occur.
Facts Supporting Findinq
Project implementation may result in minor changes to the course or direction of fresh
water currents of the Kern River. The Kern River Designated Floodway Study &
Calculations for the Allen Road Bridge Project was prepared by Meyer Civil Engineering,
Inc. to observe effects the proposed Project would have on the designated floodway of the
Kern River. The study recommended several design specifications to be implemented to
the bridge, abutments, and embankments. They include the following:
Alignment of the pier bents and abutments should parallel average channel flow
direction.
Abutments should not encroach into the sand channel.
Profile of the bridge can be set on a minimum height of 1 foot freeboard from the
under-deck to the 500 year water surface.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
43 of 60
Septemb~ 2004
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Downstream protection of the north levee at the point where it changes direction to
the west should be assured. This bend in the levee protrudes into the direction of
an extended vector of the flow through the bridge. This will require placement of a
rocked slope face that extends approximately 50 feet upstream and 50 feet
downstream of the bend in the existing levee.
The south levee height should be increased approximately 0.3 feet between River
Stations 12.18 and 12.25, (as seen in the study) approximately 375 feet in length, to
provide a minimum of 3 feet of freeboard for the 100 year flow. Since this levee was
recently constructed and has been certified, additional compacted fill can be added
over the roadway and on the south side of the slope.
Although the proposed bridge alignment is situated within the 100 year floodplain (primary
floodplain of the Kern River), with implementation of the design elements recommended
above the construction of the six (6) lane all-weather bridge will not increase the potential of
water-related hazards such as flooding to nearby residents and property. Construction of
the bridge will provide a safe and desirable crossing over the Kern River. As previously
mentioned, the proposed Project is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General
Plan Circulation Element and Kern River Plan Element. A less than significant impact would
occur after compliance with applicable State and local and implementation of
recommended design elements.
Mitigation Measures 5.8-1 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measures are as follows:
5.8-1
Prior to the approval of final project plans and specifications, the City Engineer,
or his designee, shall confirm that recommended design elements have been
incorporated so that the project site will be adequately protected from the 100-
year storm, will not adversely impact downstream properties, and is designed in
conformance with applicable City and County requirements.
Groundwater
5.8-2
Project implementation would not contribute to the depletion of groundwater
supplies or interfere with current groundwater recharge activities on the adjacent
Berrenda Mesa Water District property. With implementation of mitigation
measures, less than significant impacts would occur.
Facts Suooortinq Findinq
As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the proposed Project will include specific
design elements to facilitate safe access and the continued delivery of water to the
Berrenda Mesa Water District (District) recharge basins located immediately west of Allen
Road, south of the Kern River. The City will continue to work with the District to ensure that
post-construction unauthorized access to basins is restricted from Alien Road and Ming
Avenue. In addition, the City shall ensure that ali appropriate measures are incorporated
into the project design to protect the existing water well and cellular phone tower while
allowing access for maintenance and operation of the facilities.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
44 of 60
Septerr~er 200~,
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
The Project will not alter the direction or rate of flow, or substantially deplete the quantity of
groundwater resources, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations. Due to the scope and nature of the
proposed Project, the construction of a six (6) lane all-weather bridge over the Kern River,
impacts to groundwater supplies or groundwater recharge is not anticipated. Existing
culverts and control structures that divert and regulate water to the District's recharge
basins would be lengthened and/or relocated if determined necessary during development
of final design plans. Drainage of the bridge deck will also be managed so that no runoff
occurs into the Kern River, CVC or onto the Berrenda Mesa property. The bridge design
may include new catch basin locations that will be tied into existing storm drain lines
located north and south of the bridge as required. Therefore, implementation of the
proposed Project will not contaminate a public water supply, interfere with groundwater
recharge or substantially degrade water quality. A less than significant impact would occur
in this regard after compliance with State and applicable local regulations.
Mitigation Measures 5.8-2a,b of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.8-2a
Prior to the approval of final project plans and specifications, the City Engineer,
or his designee, shall confirm that safe access from Allen Road and Ming Avenue
for the ongoing maintenance and operation of the groundwater banking project
on Berrenda Mesa property is maintained.
5.8-2b
Prior to the approval of final project plans and specifications, the City Engineer,
or his designee, shall confirm that drainage from the bridge deck is managed so
that no runoff occurs into the Kern River, Cross Valley Canal, or onto the
Berrenda Mesa Property.
WATER QUALITY
Short-Term (Construction) Impacts
5.8-3
Site preparation and construction operations would temporarily increase the
potential for pollutants, debris and sediments to enter the Kern River and/or
other water resources. Implementation of required mitigation measures, less
than significant impacts would occur.
Facts Supportinq Findin~l
Implementation of the specified requirements (i.e., compliance with the NPDES
requirements and completion of a SWPPP) would reduce construction-related impacts to a
less than significant level. To address temporary impacts on water quality during
construction, the project contractor would adhere to the conditions of the NPDES Permit -
Statewide Stormwater Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) for the State of
California, Department of Transportation (Caltrans), (Order No. 99-06-DWQ, NPDES No.
CAS000003), which applies to roadway properties, facilities, and activities. This permit
incorporates, by reference, the statewide general NPDES permit for Waste Discharge
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
45 of 60
September 2004 ~
ORIGINAL
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Requirements (WDRs) for Discharges of Stormwater Runoff Associated with Construction
Activity (Order No. 99-08-DWQ, NPDES No, CAS000002). The proposed Project would
include mitigation measures which, when implemented, would reduce potential water
quality impacts to less than significant levels,
Mitigation Measures 5.8-3 a, b of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.8-3a Prior to the approval of final project plans and specifications, the City Engineer,
or his designee, shall confirm that the plans and specifications stipulate that
prior to the issuance of grading permits, on-site drainage shall be in compliance
with the NPDES guidelines.
5.8-3b Prior to approval of the project plans and specifications, the City Engineer, or his
designee, shall confirm that the plans and specifications stipulate that prior to
the issuance of any grading permits, the project applicant shall be responsible
for filing a Notice of Intent (NOI) and for filing the appropriate fees pursuant to
the NPDES program. The project contractor shall incorporate stormwater
pollution control measures into a SWPPP. BMPs shall be implemented to the
maximum extent possible. Evidence that proper clearances have been obtained
through the SWRCB, including but not limited to the coverage under the NPDES
statewide General Stormwater Permit for Construction Activities, must be
demonstrated.
5.8-4 Pile driving activities associated with bridge construction may cause structural
damage to the Allen Road sewer trunk line resulting in discharges of sewerage
into the aquatic environment. Design and construction techniques will serve to
reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant levels.
A 42-inch sewer trunk line exists under the canterline of Allen Road north of the CVC. This
sewer line extends under the CVC and crosses the Kern River following the existing section
line at a depth of approximately 10 feet below ground surface (bgs). Due to the pipeline
sharing the same centerline as Allen Road, alignment of the bridge structure has been
shifted to the east with the goal of avoiding damage and/or rupture to the sewer line/casing.
A breach of the structural integrity of this facility could result in the inadvertent
contamination of the CVC, Kern River, and underlying groundwater aquifer. Although final
pier locations have yet to be determined, the Advanced Planning Study (APS) prepared for
the Allen Road bridge structure was developed in consideration of this facility. Should
project construction require the placement of piers in close proximity to the Allen Road
sewer, pier spacing will be set in such a manner as to create sufficient separation between
the pier and sewer line. Pier placement in the immediate vicinity of the sewer line would
require pre-drilling to an elevation greater than 10 feet to avoid significant ground shaking
associated with pile driving activities. Implementation of the above recommended
construction techniques combined with the provision for an on-site inspector during
construction activities and development of an emergency contingency plan would serve to
reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures 5.8-4 a,b of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
46 of 60
September 2004
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.8-4a
An on-site inspector shall be present during pile driving activities to observe pier
placement and drilling operations. The inspector shall verify that all necessary
safety procedures are deployed to minimize the potential for accidental rupture
of the Allen Road sewer trunk.
5.8--4b
A pipeline rupture emergency contingency plan shall be developed by the
Project contractor and approved by the City prior to issuance of construction
permits. The plan shall identify those procedures that must be followed in the
event of an accidental release of sewerage. At minimum, the plan should
provide for the following emergency provisions:
Immediately notify the operator of the situation;
The on-site inspector shall have the authority to halt or suspend all
construction activities until all appropriate corrective measures are
completed; and
All materials released shall be appropriately contained and disposed of
as required by State and Federal requirements.
Long-Term Hydrology and Drainage Impacts
5.8-5
Long-term operation of the proposed bddge over the Kern River may result in
increased pollutant loads within the Kem River. Incorporation of recommended
post construction BMPs would serve to reduce long-term hydrology and
drainage impacts to less than significant levels.
Facts Supportinq F ndinq
Urban runoff resulting from short-duration or Iow intensity storms typically carry pollutants to
receiving waters, including sediments, heavy metals, trash and debris, and oils and
greases. Additionally, the runoff has the potential to increase nutrients, organic substances,
and oxygen-demanding substances in receiving waters. Without appropriate design
features and mitigation measures, impacts could adversely affect the downstream
watercourses and habitats. To prevent potentially contaminated runoff from reaching
downstream waters, adequate water quality treatment must be applied in accordance with
the RWQCB regulations. The primary objective of the water qualify element of the BMPs is
to ensure that the project-generated pollutants do not exceed the applicable water quality
standards of the receiving water established by the RWQCB.
Structural and non-structural BMPs are an integral element of post-construction storm
water management practices. The proposed Project would primarily utilize a variety of
structural and non-structural post-construction BMPs to reduce long-term water quality
impacts to the Kern River, CVC, and adjacent Berrenda Mesa Water District recharge
basins. As mentioned above, drainage from the bridge should be managed so that to
runoff occurs into the Kern River, CVC or onto the adjacent Berrenda Mesa property (refer
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
47 of 60
Septemb~r 2004
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
basins. As mentioned above, drainage from the bridge should be managed so that no
runoff occurs into the Kern River, CVC or onto the adjacent Berrenda Mesa property (refer
to Mitigation Measure 5.8-2a and 5.8-2b). Cumulative deployment of BMPs described
below in Mitigation Measure 5.8-5 would serve to reduce long-term water quality impacts to
less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures 5.8-5, of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.8-5
The following BMPs shall be utilized for development of the Allen Road Bridge
over the Kern River:
Routine Structural BMPs:
Protect Slopes/Embankments - Graded slopes within the project right-of-
way shall be vegetated to minimize erosion;
Runoff Minimizing Landscape Design;
Efficient Irrigation; and
Catch Basin Stenciling
Non-Structural BMPs:
Activity Restrictions;
Spill Contingency Plan;
Litter Control;
Catch Basin Inspection; and
Street Sweeping.
Cross Valley Canal
5.8-6
The proposed Allen Road Bridge/Cross Valley Canal interface would require
specific design considerations to accommodate existing operation and
maintenance activities as well as the planned future capacity increase for the
canal. With implementation of recommended design considerations impacts to
the Cross Valley Canal are considered to be less than significant.
Facts Supportincl Findin.q
The CVC serves as the only connection from the California Aqueduct to urban Bakersfield,
and conveys much of Bakersfleld's drinking water supply, as well as water for farming to
water districts located north, west, and south of the City. The proposed Allen Road
bridge/CVC interface would require specific design considerations to accommodate existing
operation and maintenance activities as well as the planned future capacity increase for the
canal.
The KCWA requires safe access for operation, maintenance, repair, and construction
purposes to the CVC east and west of Allen Road. Similar to other areas along the CVC
where roadway crossings have been necessary, the City has incorporated safety stop lights
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
48 of 60
Septemb~ 2~
OR~C, tNAL
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
easement will also need to be secured from the KCWA, granting certain rights and
obligations to the City of Bakersfield.
Future plans for the CVC at this location calls for the cross-sectional area of the CVC to be
enlarged to accommodate an approximate 60% increase in flow capacity. This separate
undertaking by the KCWA will require that the concrete liner and northern canal
embankment be raised up to several feet above its existing elevation. The City will continue
to work with the KCWA to set the Allen Road/CVC crossing elevation and eliminate any
conflict with the ultimate vertical elevation of the CVC at this location.
Although ultimate design elements will be verified during the final engineering phases,
elements noted above would serve to limit construction and operational conflicts at the
CVC to reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures 5.8-6 a,b,c, of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.8-6a
Prior to the approval of final Project plans and specifications, the City Engineer,
in conjunction with Kern County Water Agency staff, shall confirm that key-
controlled, safety stop lights are installed to provide continued, safe access by
Agency staff and contractors to the CVC right-of-way.
5.8-6b
Pile driving activities near the CVC shall be coordinated with and approved by
the Kern County Water Agency prior to commencement of construction
activities. To ensure that the existing concrete liner of the CVC will not be
damaged, construction measures such as deployment of a level circuit shall be
established by the Project contractor to ensure that the CVC liner and
embankments are maintained at their pre-construction elevations.
5.8-6c
Prior to the approval of final Project plans and specifications, the City Engineer,
in conjunction with Kern County Water Agency staff, shall confirm that the final
bridge deck elevation does not conflict with the ultimate vertical elevation of the
CVC.
GEOLOGICAL AND SEISMIC HAZARDS
Soils
5.9-1
Grading activities would be required to prepare the site for development,
subsequently resulting in the exposure of soils to short-term erosion by wind and
water. Implementation of recommended mitigation measures would reduce
impacts to less than significant levels.
Facts Supporting Finding
According to the Geological Hazards Study, the Project area contains soils that are highly
susceptible to erosion. Grading operations and the resultant manufactured embankments
could increase the potential for erosion and siltation both during and after the construction
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
49 of 60
Septe ml~ r~0~O~,.p~
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
phase of the Project. In order to mitigate the potential effects of erosion on-site, temporary
and permanent erosion control measures would be required, such as the use of sandbags,
hydroseeding, landscaping, and/or soil stabilizers. The Contractor will be required to
submit a Storm Water Pollution Control Plan (SWPPP), which includes erosion control
measures in order to comply with the NPDES requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act
(CWA). Implementation of appropriate grading measures and a Storm Water Pollution
Control Plan would reduce the potential impacts to less than significant levels. Refer to
Section 5.8, Water Resources, and Mitigation Measures 5.8-3a and 5.8-3b, for detailed
discussion regarding construction practices to protect the Kern River and other sensitive
water resources during temporary ground disturbance activities.
Mitigation Measures 5.9-1, of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.9-1
Refer to Section 5.8, Water Resources, regarding soil erosion and water quality
mitigation measures. No additional mitigation measures are required.
Seismic Ground Shaking
5.9-3
Implementation of the proposed Project may expose the proposed bridge
structure to strong ground shaking during a seismic event. Implementation of the
recommended mitigation measures, compliance with the Uniform Building Code
and the goals and policies contained in the Safety Element set forth in the
General Plan would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels.
Facts Supporting F ndinq
Given the highly seismic character of the area, moderate to severe ground shaking
associated with earthquakes on the nearby faults can be expected within all parts of the
City. As mentioned above, a number of active faults are located within a 50 mile radius of
the proposed bridge crossing. Ground shaking is likely at this site in the event of a major
earthquake from one of the nearby faults. Local commuters may be exposed to seismic
ground shaking if it occurs during the short pedod of time that they drive on the bridge
structure. The Geological Hazard Study concludes that the Upper-Bound Earthquake
ground-motion for this site is estimated at 0.314g with a 10 percent chance of exceedance
every 100 years and a statistical return period of 949 years. The proposed Project would
be designed and constructed to withstand this magnitude of an earthquake. Based on
predicted maximum horizontal accelerations at the site and given the soil types identified in
the Geological Hazard Study, ground failure is not likely to occur at the Project site.
Implementation of applicable Uniform Building Code criteria would reduce impacts to less
than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures 5.9-3 of the Final EIR, reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.9-3
No mitigation measures beyond adherence to the latest Uniform Building Code and
the goals, policies and implementation measures identified in the General Plan are
required.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
50 of 60
Septern~r 2 0 ~4~
ORIGINAL
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
5.9-3
No mitigation measures beyond adherence to the latest Uniform Building Code and
the goals, policies and implementation measures identified in the General Plan are
required.
Liquefaction
5.9-4
Implementation of the proposed Project may expose the proposed bridge
structure to substantial adverse effects associated with liquefaction. These
impacts are concluded as less than significant with implementation of the
recommended mitigation measures.
Facts Supportinq Findinq
As indicated previously, during groundwater recharge periods, shallow groundwater is
expected to be less than 50 feet below ground surface (bgs) in the Project area.
Groundwater was not encountered in the top 30 feet bgs in the soil borings conducted at
Bakersfield Christian High School in January 2002, however, based on surface lithology
observed within the streambed area and the potential for surface or shallow groundwater
the liquefaction potential at the Kern River crossing appears to be moderate to high during
groundwater recharge periods. Implementation of the proposed Project would be in
conformance with standard construction and design parameters set forth in the Uniform
Building Code. A detailed geotechnical investigation conducted as part of the final design
process would reflect appropriate recommendations in the Project's grading/design plans in
order to mitigate potential liquefaction hazards. In addition, conformance with applicable
City criteria, as well as adherence to standard engineering practices would reduce the
effects of liquefaction to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures 5.9-3 of the Final EIR, reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.9-4
A detailed liquefaction potential study shall be conducted as part of the design level
geotechnical investigation. Final grading and bridge design shall be based on
detailed geologic and geotechnical evaluations of existing site conditions combined
with a comprehensive assessment of final engineering plans by a professional
Registered Geologist. Prior to the approval of final project plans and specifications,
the City Engineer, or his designee, shall confirm that recommended geotechnical
recommendations have been incorporated into the bridge structure design to
adequately mitigate the effects of liquefaction.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
Solid Waste
5.10-5 Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in increased demand for
solid waste services. Short-term construction impacts resulting from construction
debris would increase solid waste on a temporary duration. With implementation of
applicable recycling programs, impact would be reduced to less than significant
levels. Less than significant impact with implementation of mitigation measures.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
51 of 60
September~004
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the increased demand for solid
waste services. The Project will generate construction debris on a short-term temporary
basis during construction. The Project also proposes a limited amount of deconstruction to
accommodate the proposed improvements and the anticipated deconstruction materials
and raw construction debris are not anticipated to be significant. The County charges up to
a $36 per ton fee at landfills for disposal of construction waste. Recycling of construction
debris would reduce potential waste to landfills in the County and contribute to the recycling
goals set forth by the City of Bakersfield and AB 939. Project implementation would
therefore not impact existing landfill capacities.
Mitigation Measures 5.10-5 of the Final EIR, reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.10-5
All construction debris and construction related debris shall be separated into
recyclable and non-recyclable items to the greatest extent possible. All
recyclable debris shall be transported to appropriate recycling facilities so as to
reduce potential waste to County landfills. To the maximum extent possible,
recyclable materials and materials consistent with waste reducing goals of the
City shall be used for all aspects of construction.
VIII. FINDING REGARDING INFE-~-$!BILITY OF MITIGATION MEASURES FOR
SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
The City of Bakersfield, having reviewed and considered the information contained in 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), that specific economic, legal, social,
technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation measures identified in the Final
EIR and, therefore, the Project will cause significant unavoidable impacts in the category of noise.
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. Analysis has concluded that
temporary construction noise would result in a significant and unavoidable short-
term impact.
Facts Supportinq Finding
Construction activities generally occur in a short and temporary duration, lasting from a few
days to a period of several months. Groundborne noise and other types of construction
related noise impacts would typically occur during the initial site preparation, which can
create the highest levels of noise. Generally, site preparation has the shortest duration of
all construction phases. Activities that occur during this phase include earthmoving and
soils compaction. High groundborne noise levels and other miscellaneous noise levels can
be created during this phase due to the operation of heavy-duty trucks, backhoes and other
heavy-duty construction equipment.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
52 of 60
Septemb~ 2004
OR?N!
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
In addition to construction noise from a Project site, the construction periods would also
cause increased noise along access routes to the site due to movement of equipment and
workers on the site. The primary heavy construction equipment/vehicles are expected to
be moved on-site during the initial construction period and would have a less than
significant short-term noise impact affect on nearby roadways. 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 one dBA.
Project construction time is estimated to last 10 to 15 months. Construction noise impacts
are considered short-term impacts occurring only during periods of project construction and
ceasing upon project completion. The proposed Project is anticipated to utilize
earthmoving equipment, materials handling equipment, stationary equipment, impact
equipment used during clearing, excavation, grading, structure, roadway and utility
construction operations. Noise generated by equipment and experienced at nearby
sensitive receptors could be produced by diesel powered motor graders, tractors, forklifts,
loaders, rollers, asphalt pavers, generators, flatbed trucks, delivery trucks, and construction
worker vehicles. Construction activities would potentially impact noise sensitive land uses
in the immediate area and generate noise levels in the 80 dBA range at 50 feet from the
source equipment. Table 5.5-6 below, indicates maximum level dBA of anticipated
equipment to be utilized during construction of the proposed project.
Table 5.5-6
Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Type of Equipment Maximum Level dBA @ 50 Feet
Scrapers 88
Bulldozers 87
Backhoe 85
Pneumatic Tools 85
Source: Brown-Bunfin Associates, inc.
Pile Driving
Pile driving noise is seen as unique from normal construction noise characteristics and
therefore discussed as a separate entity. Pile driving noise is described as a very loud
impulsive sound, resulting from a large hammer dropping on reinforced concrete piles. The
impact of the hammer is short in duration (under I second), however, the impacts are
repetitive, occurring about once every 2 seconds. According to the noise assessment, pile
driving may occur for 2 to 4 months during construction of the proposed project. Typical
pile drivers are driven by a diesel engine, and produce a maximum hammer energy of
55,000 fi-lb/blow.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
53 of 60
Septem~_~r 200~ ~72-
OR,E, NAL
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Noise level measurements conducted on pile drivers by BBA involved two sets of
simultaneous, side-by-side measurements to read A-weighted Lmax and SEL values, and C-
weighted Lmax and SEL values. The C-weighted noise levels provide better correlations
with human response for very high sound levels. The results are shown below, in Table
5.5-7.
Table 5.5-7
Measured Pile Drive Noise Levels
(At 100-Feet)
Activity Lpk A-L.~x A-SEL C-L.~x C-SEL
Tapping 107 - 113 95 - 99 87 - 91 96 - 101 90 - 95
Driving I 115 - 118 95 - 99 88 - 92 99 - 101 92 - 95
Source: Brown-Buntin Associates, Inc.
Although, the pile driving activities will be temporary, noise from the use will be very
noticeable in the adjoining residential areas and is considered a significant and unavoidable
impact. Refer to Mitigation Measures 5.5-1b through 5.5-1e for construction measures that
would serve to minimize effects of pile driving to the best extent possible.
Effects of ground vibrations from pile drivers were also observed. Caltrans has developed
specific criteria for evaluating the effects of various vibration levels on people and buildings,
based upon peak particle velocity in inches/second, as seen in Table 5.5-8, Effects of
Various Vibration Levels on People and Buildings. Caltrans has adopted a 0.2 inches per
second threshold for architectural damage for traffic and construction noise sources. The
results of the pile driver vibrations measurements indicated a peak particle velocity
between 0.055 and 0.077 inches per second. The measurement is approaching
"perceptible" to human reaction and considered to be "the recommended upper level of
which ruins and ancient monuments should be subjected." Vibrations from pile driving
activities should not be considered significant since there are no risks of building damage
and vibrations will not be an annoyance to human reaction, according to Caltrans criteria.
Table 5.5-8
Effects of Various Vibration Levels on People and Buildings
Peak Particle Velocity Human Reaction Effect on Building
Inches/Second
Vibrations unlikely to cause
0 - 0.0059 Imperceptible by People damage of any type
Threshold of perception Vib,,,t. lu,~s unlikely to cause
0.0059 - 0.0188 possibility of intrusion damage of any type
Recommended upper level of
0.0787 Vibrations perceptible which ruins and ancient
monuments should be subjected
Level at which continuous Virtually no risk of architectural
0.0984 vibrations begin to annoy people damage to normal buildings
Threshold at which there is a dsk
Vibrations annoying to people in of architectural damage to
0.1968 buildings normal dwellings
Source: Brown Bunfln Associates, Inc. from Survey of Ea~lh-borne Vibrations due to Highway construction and
Highway Traffic, Caltrans 1976.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
54 of 60
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Mitigation Measure 5.5-1a-e of the Final EIR would serve to minimize effects of pile driving
construction noise to the best extent possible. Temporary construction noise impacts
would remain a significant and unavoidable impact. The measures are as follows.
5.5-1a
Project construction will result in temporary but significant and unavoidable
impacts. Prior to issuance of grading permits for the proposed project, the
contractor shall provide evidence acceptable to the City Public Works Director
that (1) ali construction equipment, fixed or mobile, operated within 1,000 feet of
a dwelling unit shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained
mufflers, (2) construction activities shall be limited to the designated daytime
hours as specified by the City of Bakersfield, currently 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. on
weekdays and 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. on weekends. No construction is allowed on
federal holidays. These restrictions apply to all trucks, vehicles, and equipment
that are making or involved with material deliveries, loading or transfer of
materials, equipment service, and maintenance of any devices for or within the
Project construction site, (3) pile driving operating hours shall be confined to 7
a.m. to 5 p.m and effective mufflers shall be fitted to internal combustion
engines. Nearby residents shall be notified when pile driving is anticipated.
5.5-1b
During pile driving activities, the contractor shall use noise mitigation measures
that are approved by the City Public Works Director, such as: noise attenuation
blankets and/or temporary portable noise attenuation barriers.
5.5-1c
During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that
emitted noise is directed away from noise sensitive receptors, to the satisfaction
of the Building Official.
5.5-1d
Prior to approval of the project plans and specifications by the City Public Works
Director, the construction contractor shall incorporate feasible muffling features
into all construction vehicles and equipment and into construction methods, and
shall maintain all construction vehicles and equipment in efficient operating
condition.
5.5-1e
Prior to approval of the project plans and specifications by the City Public Works
Director, the project plans and specifications should stipulate that stockpiling
and construction vehicle staging areas shall be located as far away as practical
from noise sensitive receptors during construction activities.
Long-term Operational Impacts
5.5-2
Project implementation would create a new crossing over the Kern River and
introduce increased vehicular noise adjacent to existing sensitive uses. Analysis
has concluded that with the incorporation of recommended noise attenuating design
features, long-term vehicular- related noise would not exceed the City's 65 dB
CNEL compatibility standard at adjacent residences; however, the resultant
increase in the ambient noise environment is considered significant and
unavoidable.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
55 of 60
September,'<2004
OR',GINAL
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Facts Supporting Finding
City Noise Compatibility Standard
Project implementation would result in an additional crossing over the Kern River thereby
increasing vehicular generated noise in the vicinity of existing residential areas. Currently,
only local vehicle traffic travels on Allen Road from Stockdale Highway to the CVC. The
Environmental Noise Assessment indicates that with Project implementation, by the year
2025, the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on Allen Road between Stockdale Highway and Ming
Avenue is estimated to be over 20,000 vehicles per day (vpd).
The major source of vehicle-generated sound along roadways is generally caused by tire
interaction with asphalt, which is ultimately affected by vehicle speed. Traffic noise levels at
the existing residences south of Stockdale Highway adjacent to Allen Road were calculated
using the FHWA Noise Model. In future year 2025, the noise levels will range from
approximately 63 to 68 dB CNEL depending on the elevation of Allen Road. At locations
where Allen Road will be approximately the same elevation as the adjoining homes, the
existing 5 to 6 foot wall located behind the homes will provide some traffic noise
attenuation. At these locations, the year 2025 traffic noise levels will be approximately 63
to 64 dB, satisfying the City's 65 dB CNEL compatibility standard. However, portions of the
proposed bridge crossing will be above adjoining residential areas where the road
approaches the CVC. The existing perimeter block walls will provide almost no noise
reduction benefit in those areas, and resulting traffic noise levels will be approximately 68
dB CNEL at the existing homes, north of the Kern River. This noise level exceeds the
City's 65 dB CNEL compatibility standard.
In order to reduce noise generated by typical tire/asphalt interface, the Project proposes to
incorporate a 3 to 5 foot solid bridge railing located above the elevation of the road surface
on the west side of the bridge. This barrier would serve to reduce traffic noise impacts to
below 65 dB CNEL at residences adjoining the west side of Allen Road, north of the Kern
River, and reduce the incremental increase in traffic noise levels caused by the proposed
Project. The resulting noise levels with mitigation will be less than significant. In addition,
refer to Section 5.1, Aesthetics, for discussions relative to potential visual impairments
associated with the proposed bridge railing.
The Bakersfield Christian High School is located at the southeast corner of Stockdale
Highway and Allen Road. The nearest buildings of the high school are located
approximately 300 feet from Allen Road. The year 2025 traffic noise levels from Allen
Road will be approximately 59 dB CNEL. This noise level will satisfy the City General Plan
standards and no significant long-term noise impacts are anticipated.
Residential developments are planned for or are currently under construction, south of the
Kern River, east of Allen Road. Plans for these developments include a 6 foot wall to be
constructed at the rear lots adjoining Allen Road. The year 2025 traffic noise level at these
lots adjoining Allen Road will be approximately 63 dB CNEL. The noise level will satisfy the
City's General Plan standard and include adequate mitigation as part of the development~
design.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact
56 of 60
.6 AKa-^
Septe~er 200~p
Or
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Changes in Ambient Noise Levels
As previously mentioned above, the Environmental Noise Assessment indicates that with
Project implementation, by the year 2025, the forecast ADT on Allen Road between
Stockdale Highway and Ming Avenue is projected to exceed 20,000 vpd. This is a direct
function of the development of General Plan approved land uses within the southwestern
portion of Bakersfield.
According to the CEQA Guidelines, a substantial increase in noise levels caused by a
project may also be considered a significant impact. Based on the background noise level
measurement that was conducted at a typical residence, an increase in noise levels
ranging from approximately 9 to 14 dB will occur at several homes located directly adjacent
to Allen Road nodh of the Kern River. Smaller increases in traffic-related noise levels will
occur at homes that are located further from Allen Road. Although the City's 65 dB noise
criteria is met with incorporation of the recommended bridge barrier rail, an increase in
noise levels greater than 5 dB is considered to be a significant cumulative noise impact by
the City's General Plan.
Mitigation Measure 5.5-2 of the Final EIR reduces noise levels within the City's 65 CNEL
standard, however the increase in noise levels greater than 5 dB is considered to be
significant and unavoidable. The measure is as follows:
5.5-2
A solid bridge railing on the west side of the Allen Road Bridge crossing shall be
constructed from approximately Station 45+00, just south of the Hillary Way
intersection, to Station 38+00, south of the CVC in the Kern River flood plain (as
indicated in the Environmental Noise Assessment). The top of the railing shall be at
least 3 feet above the elevation of the road surface from Station 45+00 to Station
44+00, and at least 5 feet above the elevation of the road surface from Station
44+00 to Station 38+00. The railing shall reduce traffic noise impacts to below 65
dB CNEL at residences adjoining the railing, and reduce the incremental increase in
traffic noise levels caused by the Project.
Cumulative Impacts
5.5-5
With cumulative projects, the proposed Project would increase the ambient
noise levels in the Project vicinity. Analysis has concluded that significant and
unavoidable cumulative noise impacts are anticipated.
Facts Supporting Finding
Implementation of the proposed Project would result in a significant and unavoidable
cumulative noise impact for existing residents located along Allen Road between Stockdale
Highway and the Kern River.
IX. FINDING REGARDING ALTERNATIVES
The City of Bakersfield, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR,
appendices to the Final EIR and the administrative record, finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code
Exhibit A _<< ~'~'",~_~'
Findings of Fact 57 of 60 Septembi~' 2004
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
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 Alternative
The No Project Alternative undertakes no roadway improvements along Allen Road. This Alternative
serves as the baseline against which to evaluate the effects of the proposed Project and other project
Alternatives. The No Project Alternative would produce no immediate environmental impacts;
consequently, no mitigation would be required.
The No Project 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 a new bridge
structure and impervious surfaces. Maintaining the Project site in its existing condition would also
eliminate potential impacts to biological resources, water quality, significant shod-term construction
noise impacts, any unknown cultural resources that may exist and would not alter the visual
characteristics of the Project site.
Implementation of the No Project Alternative would avoid the environmental impacts identified for the
proposed project, however, this Alternative would not preclude the potential for implementation of the
roadway extension at some future date. The connection of Alien Road from Stockdale Highway to
Ming Avenue has been envisioned in local and regional planning documents. Given the level of
existing and planned development in southwest Bakersfield, it may be anticipated that the Alien Road
crossing of the Kern River would be proposed for construction at a future date.
The No Project Alternative was rejected as not being environmentally superior to the proposed project.
The No Project Alternative does not meet the project objectives of implementing the bridge crossing
and improving local circulation. This Alternative would also be inconsistent with the General Plans for
the City of Bakersfield and County of Kern. The No Project Alternative does result in less visual,
cultural resource, biological resource, and long-term noise impacts; however, these impacts can be
mitigated to a level of less than significant for the proposed Project. Although the proposed Project
results in a significant and unavoidable shod-term construction noise impact, this condition would be
temporary and would cease upon Project completion.
No Centerline Shift Alternative
The No Centerline Shift Alternative retains the existing Allen Road centerline immediately north of the
CVC. As a result, the proposed Allen Road Bridge crossing of the Kern River would be congruent with
the existing section line that is shared with the existing Allen Road centerline and Allen Road Sewer
Trunk alignment north and south of the Kern River. This Alternative results in no shift of the bridge
alignment east of the section line. The following discussion evaluates the potential environmental
impacts associated with the No Centerline Shift Alternative as compared to impacts from the proposed
Project.
Under this Alternative no Circulation Element Amendment to modify the circulation map of the
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan would be required. This alignment Alternative is also
considered consistent with local and regional planning documents. Implementation of the No
Exhibit A .
Findings of Fact 58 of 60 Septem~'~r 200,~'~,
O~G~N,~,L
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Centerline Shift Alternative would ultimately require significant right-of-way (ROW) from adjacent
residents west of Allen Road, north of the Kern River and physically impact up to three (3) occupied
residential units. This Alternative would require partial property acquisitions and potentially require full
property takes. This is considered a significant impact.
The No Centerline Shift Alternative did meet the Project objectives of improving traffic and provides an
additional crossing of the Kern River. Although, implementation of this Alternative would be consistent
with the existing General Plan designation for Allen Road, not all of the stated Project objectives would
be satisfied. As stated in Section 3.4, Project Objectives, the City proposes to construct a direct
sequential to Stockdale Highway and the future extension of Ming Avenue while providing a local
street network that contributes to the quality and safety of residential neighborhoods. This Alternative
was found to be environmentally inferior and would have the potential for significant visual, residential
acquisition/relocation, and utility impacts. This Alternative was rejected because it offered no
advantages over the proposed Project.
Reduced Bridge Length Alternative
The Reduced Bridge Length Alternative would result in the construction of the Allen Road Bridge along
the same alignment as described for the proposed Project. This Alternative results in a significantly
shorter bridge structure (approximately 600 feet) when compared to the proposed project
(approximately 1,100 feet). Reducing the bridge structure would ultimately require longer bridge
abutments within the primary floodplain of the Kern River. The following discussion evaluates the
potential environmental impacts associated with the Reduced Bridge Length Alternative as compared
to impacts from the proposed Project.
Similar to the proposed Project, this Alternative would require an amendment to the Circulation
Element to modify the circulation map of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan would be required.
This alignment Alternative is considered consistent with local and regional planning documents. It
should be noted that these documents are not at the level of specificity that would reflect final design,
such as a centerline shift proposed for the Project and Reduced Bridge Length Alternative.
The Reduced Bridge Length Alternative would result in increased impacts to wildlife moveme, n! w. it~in
the Kern River, higher mitigation costs, and be inconsistent with the MBHCP goal of minimizing
impacts within the primary floodplain of the Kern River. Therefore, this Alternative does not meet the
project objective of accounting for sensitive environmental habitats. This Alternative is not considered
environmentally superior to the proposed Project and in fact would have the potential for incrementally
greater impacts to biological resources.
Environmentally Superior Alternative
The purpose of the alternatives evaluation is to try to develop Project alternatives that reduce or
eliminate significant impacts. 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 Alternative (Existing Conditions), in this
case, is not the environmentally superior alternative for its inability to meet the Project's objectives.
The proposed Project is the Environmentally Superior Alternative. Several impacts would be similar to
the other Alternative alignments addressed above; however, impacts associated with biological
Exhibit A ~, ~' '
Findings of Fact 59 of 60 Septemb~'
O~',CL'N/~L
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EiR
resources, visual, utilities, and ROW acquisition were determined to be significant when compared to
the proposed Project. Total avoidance of sensitive biological resources is not feasible with any
Alternative other than the No Project Alternative because of the location of the resources in the Kern
River in relationship to the existing terminus of Allen Road. Similarly, except with the No Project
Alternative, any Alternative would result in increased noise levels along Allen Road and construction
air quality and noise impacts. The proposed Project was developed in an effort to shorten the bridge
abutments; and thereby, minimize the impacts to biological resources and the primary floodplain of the
Kern River. Additionally, with mitigation, the impacts to biological resources, water resources, and
long-term noise are reduced to a level of less than significant. Short-term construction noise, although
considered significant and unavoidable, would be temporary, ceasing upon completion of Project
construction activities.
Exhibit A
Findings of Fact 60 of 60 Septemo~¢
ORIG!NAL
EXHIBIT "B"
STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
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 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 Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River indicated the project
would result in contributions to noise (short-term construction, long-term operational, and cumulative)
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 Allen Road Crossing at the Kern
River and the public record. The project benefits include the following:
Provide a local street network that contributes to the quality and safety of residential
neighborhoods.
Provide a direct sequential connection to Stockdale Highway and the future extension of Ming
Avenue.
Accommodate planned circulation needs by providing an additional crossing of the Kern River
consistent with the City of Bakersfield General Plan Circulation Element and the Kern River Plan
Element.
Exhibit B
Statement of Overriding Consideration
S e pt e m ber 2>_~04~ ~ ~ ~"~_~
Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River EIR
Accommodate planned new development while accounting for sensitive environmental habitats.
The Lead Agency makes the following finding, pursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, with
regard to the Statement of Overriding Considerations for Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River:
California 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 adverse noise (short-term construction, long-term
operational, and cumulative) impacts associated with Allen Road Crossing at the Kern River
Project, which can not be eliminated or reduced to a level less than significant.
S:\GPA 3rd 2004\03*0724 (Allen Bddge)\Staff Report s\y Statement of Overriding Final EIR.doc
Exhibit B
Statement of Overriding Consideration
2
September 2 ~O~4~ ~ ~f~ ,~
Z~u
~o-c
·
._~
E ~.. ~ o
,o.c
OR,.
~ ~ ~ ~ .-
C
~ c
ORiGiNAl
OS;G
C
EXHIBIT "D"
BAKERSFI ELI~
Project Vidn'~=m~
ALLEN ROAD CROSSING ATTHE KERN RIVER - EIR
Proposed Bridge Alignm~e~
Exh~it :1-1 ~
ORIGINAL