Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES NO 53-98RESOLUTION NO. 5 3 - 9 8 RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS AND CERTIFYING THAT THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA, THE STATE EIR GUIDELINES AND THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD CEQA IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES REGARDING BUENA VISTA (GPA/ZC P96-0589) AND KERN RIVER RANCH (GPAIZC P97-0074). WHEREAS, Castle & Cooke California, Inc. filed an application for a concurrent general plan application (P96-0589) for that site located between the Kern River Canal, White Lane (extended), Buena Vista Road and Allen Road (extended) to allow urban development of 691.37 acres, and Caresella Properties, Inc. filed an application for a concurrent general plan application for that site located between the Kern River, Stockdale Highway, Kern River Canal, Buena Vista Road and Allen Road (extended) to allow urban development of 281.92 acres as shown on Exhibit "B" more specifically stated as follows: General Plan Amendment No. P96-0589: The proposed Land Use Element Amendment consists of changes from R-IA (Resource Intensive Agriculture) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 412.50 acres, to LMR (Low Medium Density Residential) on 198.07 acres, to HMR (High Medium Density Residential) on 44.62 acres, and to GC (General Commercial) on 36.18 Acres. The Circulation Element Amendment consist of deleting the West Beltway Freeway alignment which transverses the subject site in a north-south orientation, deletion of adopted north-south and east-west collector alignments, and the realignment of such collectors. Deletion of the West Beltway Freeway alignment is for the purpose of acknowledging the Beltway alignment as recently adopted by the Kern County Board of Supervisors. Zone Change No. P96-0589: The Zone Change/Ordinance Amendment consists of changing the existing zoning district from A-20A (Agriculture twenty-acre minimum lot size) to R-1 (One-Family Dwelling) to R-2 (Limited Multiple-Family Dwelling) on 242.69 acres, and to C-2 (Regional Commercial) on 36.18 acres. General Plan Amendment NO. P97-0074: The Land Use Element Amendment consists of changes frem R-IA (Resource Intensive Agriculture) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 267.41 acres, to GC (General Commereial) on 13.04 Acres, and from HR (High Density Residential) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 1.47 acres. The Kern River Plan Element Amendment consists of changes from 8.1 (Intensive Agriculture to Map Code 5.35 (Residential, maximum 7.25 units per acre) on 267.41acres and to 6.2 (General Commercial) on 13.04 acres. ORIGINAL The Circulation Element Amendment consists of deleting the West Beltway Freeway alignment which transverses the subject site in a north-south orientation, and the adoption collector alignments. Deletion of the West Beltway Freeway alignment is for the purpose of acknowledging the Beltway alignment as recently adopted by the Kern County Board of Supervisors. Zone Change No. P97-0074: The Zone Change/Ordinance Amendment consists of changing the existing zoning district from A-20A (Agriculture twenty-acre minimum lot size) to R-1 (One-Family Dwelling) on 267.41 acres, and to C-2 (Regional Commercial) on 13.04 acres. WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield is the Lead Agency for the project; and WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield retained the professional consulting services of Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates to prepare the Initial Study, Environmental Impact Report and related documents; and WHEREAS, for the above-described segment, an Initial Study was conducted and it was determined that the proposed project would have a significant effect on the environment and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be prepared; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation was filed with the State Clearinghouse on July 9, 1997 for a 30 day review period in accordance with CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public scoping hearing on August 7, 1997 to receive input from the public and agencies on the Initial Study and scope of the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was prepared and circulated to interested parties and agencies and a notice of availability was sent to property owners within 300 feet of the project site on November 24, 1997 in accordance with CEQA for a 45 day review period to end on January 9, 1998; and WHEREAS, the Notice of Completion was filed with the State Clearinghouse and the Draft EIR was submitted to the State Clearinghouse (SCH# 97071024) on November 24, 1997, to start the 45 day review period to end on January 9, 1998, in accordance with Section 15084 of the CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Bakersfield in accordance with the provisions of City Council Resolution No. 76-97, held a public hearing in the latter half of the public review period on MONDAY, DECEMBER 15, 1997 and THURSDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1997, on the adequacy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR was prepared and notice of its availability was made to interested parties and agencies; and 2 ORiGiNAL WHEREAS, on March 19, 1998, the Planning Commission considered the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, the environmental record prepared in conjunction with the project includes the following; 1. The Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report; All staff reports, memoranda, maps, letters, minutes of meetings and other documents prepared by the consultants relating to the project; All testimony, documents and evidence presented to the city by consultants working with the city relating to the project. The proceedings before the Planning Commission relating to the project and DEIR, including and documenting evidence introduced at the public hearings; and WHEREAS, the law and regulations relating to the preparation of Environmental Impact Reports as set forth in CEQA and City of Bakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures, have been duly followed by the city staff and the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15132, the Final EIR consists of the following: 1. The Draft EIR; Comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR either verbatim or in summary. A list of persons, organizations and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR. The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR for the project was prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15132; and WHEREAS, in accordance with The CEQA Guidelines Section 15151 the Planning Commission considered the following direction regarding "standards for adequacy of an EIR:" CEQA Guideline Section 15151: An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision-makers with information which enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in the light of 3 g. ORIGINAL what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have looked not for perfection but for adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure; and WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Guideline Sections 15151 and 15090, the Final EIR for adequacy, completeness and good faith effort at full disclosure and has been prepared in compliance with CEQA; and WHEREAS, on March 19, 1998, the Planning Commission considered the Final EIR and adopted Resolution No. 27-98 making CEQA findings and recommending certification of the Buena Vista/Kern River Ranch Program Final Environmental Impact Report prior to recommending approval of the project; and WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15090 the lead agency (City of Bakersfield) shall certify that: (a) The Final Environmental Impact Report has been completed in compliance with CEQA; and (b) The Final Environmental Impact Report was presented to the decision- making body of the Lead Agency and that the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information contained in the final EIR prior to approving the project. WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Section 15091 findings and supporting rationale regarding identified significant environmental effects is attached hereto as Exhibit "E;" and WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Section 15092, the City of Bakersfield finds that except for air quality impacts, agriculture impacts and aesthetics/light/glare impacts, all other impacts on the environment identified as significant in said EIR have been eliminated or the effects have been substantially lessened where feasible as shown in findings under Section 15091; and WHEREAS, furthermore in accordance with CEQA Section 15092, the City of Bakersfield determined that the remaining significant impact to air quality, agriculture and aesthetics/light/glare found to be unavoidable under Section 15091 are acceptable due to overriding considerations as described in Section 15093, as shown in attached Exhibit "D;" and WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Section 15093, a Statement of Overriding Considerations with supporting reasons is recommended for adoption as shown on attached Exhibit "D;" and 4 ORiGiNAL WHEREAS, In accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, Exhibit measures; and WHEREAS, the Buena Vista/Kern River Ranch Program Final Environmental Impact Report is incorporated by reference into- and becomes a part of this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY FOUND AND RESOLVED as follows: 1. The above recitals, incorporated herein, are true and correct and constitute the findings in this matter. 2. 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. 3. The Final EIR has been prepared in compliance with CEQA and is certified with mitigation measures as shown on Exhibit "A". 4. The Final EIR was presented to the decision-making body of the Lead Agency and the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to approving the project. 5. File the Notice of Determination. Upon approval of the project, the Planning Department is hereby directed to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk of Kern County, pursuant to the provision of Section 21152 of the Public Resources Codes and the State CEQ^ Guideline adopted pursuant thereto. ......... 000 ........ I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on APR 2 2 1~1/t , by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEI,~ER DeMOND, CARSON, SMITH, McDERMOTT, BD~"L'E~', SULUVAN, SALVAGGIO NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ~ ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER ~ N~S~NT: COUNCILMEM~R CITY CLERK and Ex OfficiO/Clerk of the Council of the City of Bakersfield 5 .~ '~, APPROVED APR 2 2 1996 MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED as to form: JUDY $KOUSEN CITY ATTORNEY RED:pjt April 9, 1998 0589/reir-cc 6 OF~I61NAL EXHIBIT ',A" Summary of Mitigation Measures EXHIBIT "A" SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES Public Health and Safety Agricultural Use of Property/Adjacent Properties 5.3-1 Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the project applicant shall perform soil tests to determine concentrations of pesticide and fungicide residues which may be present within the project sites. Should contaminant levels be in excess of acceptable Federal, State and/or County levels, the project applicant shall identify and implement remedial action, subject to approval by the City of Bakersfield and responsible regulatory agencies to reduce contaminants to acceptable levels. Oil Fields 5.3-3a The following Mitigation Measure applies to the Buena Vista project site only: Pursuant to the Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources, active wells and associated equipment within the project area shall be enclosed by an eight-foot block wall, with barbed wire on the inside at the seven-foot level. Appropriate gates shall be installed and climbable landscaping around the perimeter of the facility shall be avoided. The inside grade of the facility shall be constructed so that potential spillage will be confined to the enclosure. Improvements are the responsibility of the project applicant/developer. 5.3-3b Sufficient access to the existing and abandoned wells shall be maintained in order for the Division of Gas, Oil and Geothermal Resources (Division) to investigate the condition of the wellheads and check for leakage. If any reabandonments are required, the Division shall furnish necessary specifications to the property owner. 5.3-3c If any abandoned or unrecorded wells are uncovered, or damaged during excavation or grading activities, remedial plugging operations pursuant to Division of Gas, Oil and Geothermal Resources requirements would be required. 5.3-3d Prior to issuance of building permits, all oil contaminated soil shall be remediated to the satisfaction of the Local Unified Program Agency (the Office of Environmental Services - Bakersfield City Fire Department) in conjunction with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board and/or California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Valley Fever 5.3-5 At the initial construction meeting prior to grading activities, all construction workers must be informed as to the symptoms of Valley Fever. Flooding/Kern River 5.3-7a The following Mitigation Measure applies to the Kern River Ranch project site only: Prior to recording of any Final Map with parcels less than 20 acres for land located within Zone ^, a levee shall be constructed. The location and dimensions of the levee proposed in the northern portion of the Kern River Ranch project site shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Bakersfield Public Works Department. The levee shall be located outside the limits of the primary and secondary floodways. '' F)R;Gi,X[AL Exhibit "A" Summary of Mitigation Measures Page 2 5.3-7b The following Mitigation Measure applies to the Kern River Ranch project site only: Prior to recordation of a final map with less than 20 acres for land located within Zone A, as defined on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) "Flood Rate Insurance Map," the developer shall comply with the requirements of FEMA or revise the FEMA map. The Kern River Ranch project applicant shall furnish to the City of Bakersfield all documentation required by FEMA. Aesthetics/Light and Glare Traffic and Circulation Trip Generation and Distribution 5.5-1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant(s) shall comply with the Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation Impact Fee Program. The project applicants shall participate in the improvements required on a pro-rata fair-share basis as provided in Table 8, BUENA VISTA & KERN RIVER RANCH: INTERSECTION PRO-RATA SHARE OF MITIGATION/REQUIRED MITIGATION, of the Supplemental Traffic Impact Study for Buena Vista & Kern River Ranch Cumulative Impact, dated June 1997. To accommodate 2020 cumulative traffic plus Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch project traffic volumes, the above referenced fees shall be used to provide the following improvements: Intersection Improvements Rosedale Highway and Renfro Road: add eastbound through lane and westbound through lane (LOS C); Rosedale Highway and Fruitvale Drive: add southbound left turn lane and southbound right turn lane (LOS C); Brimhall Road and Allen Road: add eastbound left turn lane, westbound left turn lane, northbound through lane, and southbound through lane (LOS C); Brimhall Road and Calloway Ddve: add southbound right turn lane (LOS C); Stockdale Highway and Heath Road: provide exclusive turn lanes for southbound approach (LOS B); Stockdale Highway and Renfro Road: add eastbound lane (LOS C); Stockdale Highway and Allen Road: add northbound left turn lane, northbound through lane, southbound left Turn lane, southbound through lane, eastbound left turn lane, eastbound right turn lane, and westbound left turn lane (LOS C); Stockdale Hiahwav and Buena Vista Road: add westbound left turn lane and eastbound right turn lane (LOS C); Kern River Ranch Entrance #1 and Buena Vista Road: add eastbound left turn lane, eastbound right turn lane, northbound left turn lane, and southbound right turn lane (with Kern River Ranch) (LOS B); Deer Peak Drive and Buena Vista Road: add northbound through lane, southbound through lane and southbound left turn lane (LOS B); Ming Avenue and Allen Road: add westbound left turn lane, northbound right ,b~( turn lane, and two southbound left turn lanes (LOS B); x. - ORiGiNAL Exhibit "A" Summary of Mitigation Measures Page 3 Ming Avenue and Buena Vista Road: full expansion per City of Bakersfield's Standard Detail T-4 (LOS C); Ming Avenue and Ashe Road: add northbound left turn lane (LOS C); Chamber Boulevard and Buena Vista Road: provide two left turn lanes/one through lane/one dght turn lane for eastbound approach, one left turn lane/one through lane/one right turn lane for westbound approach, one left turn lane/two through lanes/one right turn lane for northbound approach, and one left turn lane/two through lanes/one right turn lane for southbound approach (with Buena Vista) (LOS C); White Lane and Buena Vista Road: add two eastbound left turn lanes, eastbound right turn lane, northbound through lane, northbound right turn lane, southbound left turn lane, southbound through lane, and southbound right turn lane (LOS C); and Panama Lane and Gosford Road: add northbound left and southbound left (LOS A). Segment Improvements Rosedale Highway (Calloway Drive to Fruitvale Avenue): widen to six lanes (LOS A); Brimhall Road (Jewetta Road to Calloway Road): widen to four lanes (LOS A); Stockdale Highway (Buena Vista Road to Old River Road): widen to six lanes (LOS A); Stockdale Highway eGosford Road to Ashe Road): widen to six lanes (LOS A); Stockdale Hi(~hway (Real Road to VVible Road): widen to six lanes (LOS A); Ming Avenue (Allen Road to Buena Vista Road): widen to four lanes (LOS B); Taft Highway (Buena Vista Road to Old River Road): widen to four lanes (LOS A); Allen Road (Hageman Road to Rosedale Highway): widen to four lanes (LOS A); Allen Road (Rosedale Highway to Stockdale Highway): widen to four lanes (LOS c); Allen Road (Stockdale Highway to Ming Avenue): widen to four lanes (LOS C); Buena Vista Road ~Stockdale Highway to Ming Avenue): widen to six lanes/add median (LOS A); Buena Vista Road (Ming Avenue to VVhite Lane): widen to six lanes/add median (LOS B); Buena Vista Road (VVhite Lane to Pacheco): widen to four lanes (LOS A); and Gosford Road (Pacheco Road to Panama Lane): widen to four lanes (LOS A). Traffic Signal Warrant 5.5-2a The applicant(s) shall participate in the improvements required on a pro-rata fair-share basis as provided in Table 8, BUENA VISTA & KERN RIVER RANCH: INTERSECTION PRO-RATA SHARE OF MITIGATION/REQUIRED MITIGATION, of the Supplemental Traffic Impact Study for Buena Vista &Kem River Ranch Cumulative Impact, dated June 1997. Exhibit "A" Summary of Mitigation Measures Page 4 To accommodate Year 2020 cumulative traffic with projects condition, traffic signals are projected to be required at the following intersections and the above referenced fees shall be used to provide the following improvements: Stockdale Highway and Heath Road; Stockdale Highway and Renfro Road; Kern River Ranch Entrance #1 and Buena Vista Road; Deer Peak Drive and Buena Vista Road; Chamber Boulevard and Buena Vista Road; Pacheco Road and Gosford Road; and Ming Avenue and Allen Road. 5.5-2b The traffic signals required as a result of the proposed project shall include an interconnect of the signals to function in a coordinated system with existing and planned signals. Noise Long-Term Noise Impacts 5.6-2a To reduce significant traffic noise impacts to below 65 dBA CNEL at proposed residential locations adjacent to collector and arterial roadways, the project applicant(s) shall incorporate sound barriers, along cited roadways. Since lot design and grading plans are not yet available, the exact height and location of barders cannot be accurately determined at this time. However, barriers (i.e., berms, sound walls) between six and eight feet may be required to reduce noise levels to acceptable levels. 5.6-2b Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the proposed commercial uses, the project applicant shall demonstrate that project commercial noise source impacts on nearby residences are below those indicated in the City's houdy noise level performance standards. To demonstrate commercial noise source impacts are below the City's standards, the project applicant may need to include project design features such as setbacks, barriers, building location/orientation, acoustical design of buildings, etc. Air Quality Short-Term Impacts 5.7-1a Prior to the approval of a grading plan for any residential tract, multiple family project, and commercial project, the project applicant shall submit a letter to the City of Bakersfield Planning Department from the SJVUAPCD stating the dust suppression measures that shall be completed during construction activities in order to comply with SJVUAPCD Regulation VIII. ,75 Exhibit "A " Summary of Mitigation Measures Page 5 5.7-1b Prior to the approval of a grading plan for any residential tract, multiple family project, and commercial project, the project applicant shall submit a letter to the City of Bakersfield Planning Department from the SJUAPCD stating the measures that shall be completed dudng asphalt paving in order to comply with SJVUAPCD Rule 4641. 5.7-1c The construction grading plans shall include a statement that all construction equipment shall be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacture's specifications. 5.7-1d The construction grading plans shall include a statement that work crews shall shut off construction equipment when not in use. Lona-Term Impacts 5.7-2 The project applicant shall incorporate the following in building plans: Solar or low-emission water heater shall be used. Central water heating systems shall be used. Double-paned glass shall be used in all windows. Energy efficient low-sodium parking lot lights shall be used. One (1) bicycle rack shall be provided in each of the proposed commercial areas. Cumulative Impacts 5.7-4 Mitigation measures beyond those contained in applicable plans and policies would be implemented on a project-by-project basis. No additional mitigation measures are required. Biological Resources Sensitive Resources 5.8-1a Prior to the issuance of a grading permits, the project proponents shall comply with all appropriate terms and conditions of the MBHCP to the City. The MBHCP requires certain take avoidance measures for the San Joaquin kit fox. MBHCP guidelines regarding tracking and excavation shall be followed to prevent entrapment of kit fox in dens. Specific measures during the construction phase of the project shall be implemented and include the following: A preconstruction survey shall be conducted prior to site grading to search for native kit fox dens (specifically tracking shall be conducted at the potential active den located in the southeastern portion of the Kern River Ranch project site). All pipes, culverts or similar structures with a diameter of four inches or greater shall be kept capped to prevent entry of kit fox. If they are not capped or otherwise covered, they shall be inspected daily prior to burial or closure to ensure no kit foxes, or other protected species, become entrapped. Exhibit "A " Summary of Mitigation Measures Page 6 Excavations shall either be constructed with escape ramps or be covered to prevent entrapment. Or the site(s) could be protected during construction, such as with a wildlife exclusion fence, which would eliminate the possibility of ranging animals from being harmed dudng construction. All food, garbage, and plastic shall be disposed of in closed containers and regularly removed from the site to minimize attracting ranging kit fox or other animals. With the exception of Swainson's hawk (see following mitigation measure), impacts to special- status species on the project site are covered under the terms and conditions of the MBHCP and associated Implementing Agreement. The compensation and avoidance requirements of the MBHCP and buffer zones proposed as part of this project are consistent and follow an ecosystem management approach for endangered species, and provide adequate compensation of the Swainson's hawk and all other potentially occurring special-status species. 5.8-1b Prior to issuance of grading permit(s), the project applicant(s) shall comply with the following raptor nest mitigation requirements: If grading is proposed to occur during the raptor nesting season (February through September), a focused survey for raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified raptor biologist prior to grading activities in order to identify active nests in areas potentially impacted by project implementation. If construction is proposed to take place during the raptor nesting/breeding season (February through September), no construction activity shall take place within 500 feet of an active nest until the young have fledged (as determined by a qualified raptor biologist). Trees containing nests that must be removed as a result of project implementation shall be removed during the non-breeding season (October through January). 5.8-1c The following mitigation measures applies to the Kern River Ranch project site only: Construction directly adjacent to sensitive riparian habitat potentially occupied by threatened, endangered and other protected species may result in take of listed species ranging through the construction site. During construction and development on the Kern River Ranch project site, the following mitigation measure is recommended to help prevent indirect or direct take of species within the primary floodplain directly adjacent to the project area, for which the MBHCP does not cover take or provide compensation or mitigation: River Access Management: The area alongside the Kern River riparian corridor should be fenced-off, and signs put up, during construction to protect it and prevent damage to vegetation, burrows and nests from heavy equipment, construction vehicles, and to control public access. The off-site adjacent sycamore specimen tree is located within (¢RIG h'4,~.L Exhibit "A" Summary of Mitigation Measures Page 7 this area just north of the carrot field and special attention should be made to prevent damage to this tree. Trees and shrubs should be planted along the Kern River interface to help mitigate for noise, provide protective cover, and minimize adverse impacts of night lighting on a wildlife species which inhabit the adjacent floodplain and river riparian habitat. 5.8-1d The presence of any previously unidentified protected species which are not addressed in the MBHCP, including those protected under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act, should be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist prior to construction. The Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish & Game (CDFG) should be notified of previously unreported protected species. Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately to the CDFG and USFWS. Cultural Resources Paleontology 5.9-1 If archeological or paleontological resources are discovered during excavation and grading activities on-site, the contractor shall stop all work and the developer shall retain a qualified archeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action. Salvage operation requirements in Appendix K of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines shall be followed and the treatment of discovered Native American remains shall comply with State codes regulations of the Native American Heritage Commission. Archaeology 5.9-2b The following measure applies to the Buena Vista project only: An archaeological monitor shall be present at CA-KER-3962 during any subsurface construction activities. If significant cultural resources are discovered during monitoring, more testing or data recovery may be required. 5.9-2c The following measure apolies to the Kern River Ranch oroject only: An archaeological monitor shall be present at CA-KER-3964 during any subsurface construction activities. If significant cultural resources are discovered during monitoring, more testing or data recovery may be required. 5.9-2d Should human remains be discovered at any time on any portion of the project, work shall halt and the coroner be notified immediately (Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). In the absence of an archaeological monitor, a qualified archaeologist and the local Native American community, shall also be notified. Exhibit "A " Summary of Mitigation Measures Page 8 Public Services and Utilities Schools 5.10-3a The following mitigation measure applies to the Buena Vista project only: Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any residence within the project area, the applicant shall submit fees to the Kern County High School District and Panama- Buena Vista Union School District in the amount of $4.06 per square foot of assessable space (as defined in Section 65995 of the Government Code) for each such residence. This amount shall increase in even numbered years according to the adjustment for inflation determined by the State Allocation Board for Class B construction. Payment would not be required to a district which has certified in writing that alternative mitigation measures have been undertaken with respect to the project to adequately address school overcrowding. 5.10-3b The following mitigation measure applies to the Kern River Ranch project site or~ly: The following shall apply to the Kern River Ranch portion of the project located within the Rosedale Union School District. In accordance with the Kern County Plan, the Kern High School district has identified that the mitigation required of projects such as this is an inflation-indexed $1.42. Payment shall not be required to the Kern High School District if it has certified in writing that alternative mitigation measures have been undertaken with respect to the project to adequately address school overcrowding. With respect to the Rosedale Union School District, residential property would require either annexation of the property into the CFD 92-1; or, prior to issuance of a building permit within this portion of the project area, the Rosedale Union School District must be paid the following amounts as applicable: (a) $6637.47 per single-family residence; or (b) $2,504.75 per multi-family residence; or (c) $0.5954 per square foot of commercial/industrial "gross floor area"; OF (d) such higher or lower amount that is then equal to such higher amount that may have been lawfully established by CFD 92-1 as the amount required to prepay its Single Payment and Annual Special Taxes. Exhibit "A" Summary of Mitigation Measures Page 9 5.10-3c The following mitigation measure applies to the Kern River Ranch project site in lieu of 5.10-3b in the event that the Kern County Board of Supervisors orders the transfer of territory within the project site to the Panama-Buena Vista Union School District pursuant to Education Code Section 35765: "Prior to issuance of a building permit for any residence within the project area, the Kern High School District and Panama-Buena Vista Union School District must be paid the amount of $4.06 per square foot of assessable space (as defined in Section 65995 of the Government Code) for each such residence for the purpose of providing school facilities. This amount shall increase in even numbered years according to the adjustment for inflation determined by the State Allocation Board for Class B construction at its January meeting, which increase shall be effective as of the date of that meeting. Payment shall not be required to a district which has certified in writing that alternative mitigation measures have been undertaken with respect to the project to adequately address school overcrowding." Pit 3/2/98 0589/ea~mm EXHIBIT ',B" Maps .... O, EXHI31T 'B' KERN RIVER RANCH-BUENA VISTA PROJECT BOUNDARY /R26L R27E KERN RIVER RANCH ,BUENA VI$1'A' ,/, · /, WHITE LANE 13 EXHIBIT "C" (No Exhibit "C") ~ %AK¢~x~ OF~IGINAL EXHIBIT "D" Statement of Overriding Considerations EXHIBIT "D" 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 dsks 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 above. The environmental analysis undertaken for the Buena Vista/Kern River Ranch project indicated the project would result in contributions to agriculture and air quality impacts that would represent a significant adverse environmental effect on a project and cumulative basis. The environmental analysis has also concluded that the project would result in significant aesthetic/light and glare impacts on a cumulative basis. Furthermore, the analysis indicated that while mitigation measures would be effective in reducing the level of air quality impacts, the project's emissions would still contribute to a violation of state and federal clean air standards. 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 Buena Vista/Kern River Ranch project and the public record. The project benefits include the following: Creation of a high quality, master-planned residential community that allows for the development of a vadety of residential types and densities; Provide a residential community that is compatible with existing and planned land uses in the area. As stated on Page 11-12 of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and referenced in Section 5.5-1, Land Use and Relevant Planning, of this Program EIR, the project site is situated within the southwest area mixed use activity center which has anticipated retail, office and residential development; ORIGINAL Exhibit 'D" Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 2 Accommodate new development that is sensitive to the natural environment, and accounts for environmental hazards; and Provide a local street network that contributes to the quality and safety of residential neighborhoods. The Lead Agency makes the following finding, pursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, with regard to the Statement of Overhding Considerations for the Buena Vista/Kern River Ranch project: California Administrative Code, Title 14, Section 15093(a) states: ~lf 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 I~resented, the City of Bakersfield therefore finds that the benefits of the proposed project outweigh the adverse agriculture, aesthetics/light and glare and air quality impacts associated with the Buena Vista/Kern River Ranch project, which can not be eliminated or reduced to a level less than significant. pit 3/2/98 0589/ed ORIGtNAL EXHIBIT "E" CEQA Statement of Facts and Findings EXHIBIT "E" STATEMENT OF FACTS AND FINDINGS SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT, FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO SAID EFFECTS, AND STATEMENT OF FACTS IN SUPPORT THEREOF, ALL WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED BUENA VISTA/KERN RIVER RANCH PROJECT I. INTRODUCTION The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Public Resources Code Section 21081, and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 provide that: ~No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental ~mpact report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects of the environment that would occur/f the project is approved or camed out unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings: ao 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 are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. Go Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final environmental impact report.' The Final EIR for the Buena Vista/Kern River Ranch project identifies certain significant environmental effects which may occur as a result of the project° Therefore, findings are set forth herein pursuant to Section 15091 ofthe CEQA Guidelines. As certain significant impacts cannot be reduced to less than s~gnificant levels, a Statement of Overnding Considerations is provided. The Summary of Mitigation Measures, is based in part on the requirements contained in Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. A Mitigation Monitoring Program will be adopted as part of the project Resolution. II. PROJECT SUMMARY The Buena Vista Project and the Kern River Ranch Project are individual and separate General Plan Amendment and Zone Change applications. Both of these projects consist of proposed amendments to the Land Use Element and Circulation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and amendments to the Land Use Zoning Ordinance of the City. The Kern River Ranch project would also require an amendment to the Kem River Plan Element. The Buena Vista Project and the Kern River Ranch Project are in close proximity and are separated by the Kern River Canal, which is at a width of 120 feet. Due to this proximity, one Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for the two applications. ORIGi,~IAL Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 2 Buena Vista - GPA/ZC P96-0589 This project is 691.37 acres in size and is located between the Kern River Canal, White Lane, Buena Vista Road and Allen Road. The proposed Circulation Element amendment includes deleting the adopted West Beltway Freeway alignment which transverses the subject site in a north-south orientation, and relocating segments of adopted north-south and east-west collector alignments. The Land Use Element amendments include changing the existing land use designation from R-IA (intensive Agriculture, Minimum 20 Acre Parcel Size) to LR (Low Density Residential, less than or equal to 7.26 dwelling units/net acre) on 412.50 acres, to LMR (Low Medium Density Residential, greater than 4 and less than or equal to 10 dwelling units/net acre) on 198.07 acres, to HMR (High Medium Density Residential, greater than 7.26 and less than or equal to 17.42 dwelling units/net acre) on 44.62 acres and to GC (General Commercial) on 36.18 acres. The Zone Change/Ordinance amendments include changing the existing zoning district from A-20A (Agriculture, 20 acre minimum lot size) to R-1 (One-family dwelling, 6,000 square feet minimum lot size) on 412.50 acres, to R-2 (Limited Multiple-family dwelling, minimum lot area 6,000 square feet, minimum lot area of 2,500 square feet/dwelling unit) on 242.69 acres and to C-2 (Regional Commercial) on 36.18 acres. Kern River Ranch - GPA/ZC P97-0074 The Kern River Ranch site is located between the Kern River, Kern River Canal, Stockdale Highway, Buena Vista Road and Allen Road. The Land Use Element Amendment area is 281.92 acres. The area of the Kern River Plan Element Amendment and the Zone Change Amendment is 280.45 acres. The Circulation Element Amendment includes deleting the adopted West Beltway Freeway and adoption of a collector alignment. The Land Use Element Amendments include changing the existing tand use designation from R-IA (Resource Intensive Agriculture, minimum 20 acre parcel size), to GC (General Commercial) on 13.04 acres, from HR (High Density Residential, greater than 17.42 and less than or equal to 72.6 dwelling units/net acre) to LR on 1.47 acres and from RI-A to LR on the remaining 267.41 acres. The Kern River Plan Element Amendments include changing the existing land use designations from 8.1 (Intensive Agriculture) to 5.35 (Residential, maximum 7.25 units per net acre) on 267.41 acres and to 6.2 (General Commercial) on 13.04 acres. Proposed zone change amendments include changing the zoning distdct from A-20A (Agriculture, 20 acre minimum lot size) to R-1 (One-family dwelling, 6,000 square feet minimum size) on 267.41 acres and to C-2 (Regional Commercial) on 13.04 acres. 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 Buena Vista/Kern River Ranch Project and the public record. The Lead Agency makes the following findings, pursuant to CEQA and CEQA Guidelines: The City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency and decision-maker, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the Draft and Final EIRs prepared for the~AKE; Buena Vista/Kern River Ranch project ancl the public record, finds that changes~- ~.,~, alterations to the project will avoid or substantially lessen potentially signifiq~nt environmental impacts. These changes or alterations are related to ~he ORIGINAL Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 3 implementation of the mitigation measures detailed in the Summary of Mitigation Measures of this document. The City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency and decision-maker, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the Draft and Final EIRs prepared for the Buena Vista/Kern River Ranch project and the public record, finds that there are specific economic, social, or other considerations which make the mitigation measures for Agriculture, Aesthetics/Light and Glare and Air Quality contained in the Draft and Final EIRs infeasible. The City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency and decision-maker, finds that significant and unmitigable cumulative impacts on agriculture, aesthetics/light and glare and air quality may occur with future development projects in conjunction with the Buena Vista/Kern River Ranch project. 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: Although having determined that an EtR would be prepared to address the project, in accord with Section 15063(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, as amended, the City of Bakersfield as Lead Agency undertook the preparation of an Initial Study. The completed Initial Study determined that a number of environmental issue areas may be im13acted by the construction and operation of the Buena Vista/Kern River Ranch project. Furthermore, the Lead Agency determined that an EIR would be prepared to address the project's potential impacts on those environmental issue areas identified in the Initial Study requiring further analysis. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 15082 of the State CEQA Guidelines, as amended, the City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency, circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to public agencies, special disthcts, and members of the public requesting such notice for a 30-day period commencing July 9, 1997 and ending August 8, 1997. The aforementioned Initial Study was circulated with the NOP. Based on the Initial Study, no impacts upon earth resources and public facilities were anticipated upon project implementation, and as a result, these issues were not addressed in the Draft EIR. During the circulation period for the Notice of Preparation, the City of Bakersfield as Lead Agency, advertised and conducted a public scoping meeting on August 7, 1997. A Draft EIR was prepared which analyzed project-related impacts related to the following environmental issue areas: land use and relevant planning; agricult~r~K.~-4~ public health and safety, aesthetics/light and glare, traffic and circulation, nois..~,, air~ quality, biological resources, cuitura resources and public services and uti~ties. ~ ,qRIGINAL Ea:hibit ~ ' Statement of Fact~ and Findings Page 4 Project altematives, growth-inducing impacts, and cumulative effects were also analyzed in the Draft EIR. During the Draft EIR's public review pedod which began on November 25, 1997 and concluded on January 8, 1998, the Bakersfield Planning Commission held a noticed public headng at regularly-scheduled meeting of December 18, 1997 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 pedod, 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 Responses to Comments document, the Lead Agency's responses to the comments received from public agencies were transmitted to those public agencies for consideration at least 10 days prior to the Final EIR's certification. V. FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The City of Bakersfield, acting as Lead Agency for the environmental review of the project, finds that changes or alterations must be incorporated into the project in the form of mitigation measures in order to avoid or substantially lessen potentially significant environmental effects as identified in the Draft and Final EIR. Issues analyzed in the Draft and Final EtR included land use and relevant planning; agriculture, public health and safety, aesthetics/light and glare, traffic and circulation, noise, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources and public services and utilities. The Land Use and Relevant Planning section conclude no significant impacts for consistency with Relevant Planning Policies and compatibility with the exception of agricultural land conversion and consistency with the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD's Air Quality Attainment Plan. Issues pertaining to agnculture and air quality have been addressed in their respective Final EIR Sections and Findings have been presented in this Statement of Facts and Findings. It is also noted that the Final EIR has concluded less than significant impacts/mitigation not required for Lake Isabella flooding potential, short-term aesthetic impacts, long-term aesthetic impacts, stationary noise sources, wastewater, electricity, natural gas, solid waste and communications. This section documents the Lead Agency's findings with respect to the environmental analysis, the facts in support of the findings, and those changes and alterations that have been made to the project to reduce or eliminate potentially significant effects. Agriculture Potential Impact Loss of Aqdcultural Land 5.2-1 Development of the Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch project sites would result in the combined loss of 973.29 acres of Class I and II (prime) agricultural soils if irrigated, and subclass VIIc and VIs, if not irrigated. Significance: Unavoidable Significant Impact. Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 5 Finding (c) Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final environmental impact report. Facts in Support of Finding No feasible mitigation measures are available to mitigate the conversion of farmland to urban uses. Except for the 'No ProjectJNo Development" and 'Alternative Site' Alternatives, the alternatives that were analyzed in the EIR could not avoid the significant and unavoidable impacts on farmlands. Although the "No Project/No Development" and 'Alternative Site" Altematives would reduce farmland conversion impacts, they were rejected from further consideration because they do not meet the objectives of the proposed project. Page 3-1 of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR states that development in accordance with the 2010 General Plan will extend existing urban development in all directions. Page 3-1 of the 2010 General Plan concludes that conversion of pdme agricultural lands to urban uses will result in a reduction of the regional agricultural economy and is considered to be a significant adverse impact. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact was adopted by the City Council when the General Plan EIR was certified. The 2010 General Plan currently designates the Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch sites as RI-A (Resource Intensive Agriculture, minimum 20-acre parcel size). As defined by the California Land Conservation Act, pdme agricultural soils include Class I and II soils, which are located on the project site. The proposed amendments to the General Plan would convert the intended use of the project sites from agricultural to urbanized and developed conditions. Since each of the sites were designated RI-A when conclusions were rendered in the 2010 General Plan EIR for Agricultural Resources, the Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch Projects result in impacts which exceed the assumptions/conclusions previously stated, thus resulting in an unavoidable significant impact. The unavoidable adverse impact on farmland is considered to be acceptable in light of the Statement of Overriding Consideration provided herein as Exhibit ~2'. Potential Impact Conflicts Between Prooosed Urban Uses and A(3dcultural Activities 5.2-2 As phases of the proposed project are developed, future residents may be impacted by adjacent farming activities, which may include noise associated with harvesting, blowing dust and pesticide applications. Potentially significant impact. Compliance with local, State and Federal policies and standards would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Exhibit ~ ~ Statement of Facts and Findings Page 6 Finding Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding Development phasing, which accommodates the market demands as well as the existing crop cultivation and harvest scheduling, would allow for the continued use of pdme agricultural land on the Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch sites until buildout of the project sites occurs. However, conflicts may arise from the infringement of the new residential uses within the project area, adjacent to on-going agricultural activities. Impacts of residential uses on adjacent agricultural areas can extend up to one-half mile, thereby affecting off-site farming operations. Existing rastdctions and limitations placed on the grower, such as noise attenuation standards, air pollution control measures and pesticide/ fertilizer application practices would minimize the level of significance of impacts. Similarly, the construction of residential subdivisions are also regulated by local and state development standards. Standards include buffer and setbacks from adjacent agricultural operations pursuant to adopted polices set forth by the City of Bakersfield (Section 17.08.150 (a) of the City's Municipal Code requires that residential structures be set back a minimum of 50 feet from agricultural zones). Other standards include traffic, noise and air mitigation to lessen the impact to the existing land uses (for further discussion refer to Sections 5.5, TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION, 5.6, NOISE, and 5.7, AIR QUALITY, of the Final EIR). Phasing of development within the boundaries of the project sites would not eliminate the use of pesticides on adjacent agricultural lands, should they remain in agriculture production. When pesticides are used, the application is required by law to be confined to the target and to avoid contamination of non-targeted property (California Food and Agricultural Code §11501, 3 CCR 600, 6614). The Kern County Agricultural Commissioner enforces these pesticide control laws by issuing permits and responding to allegations of exposure to fugitive pesticides and resulting injuries. If a violation is found, the Agricultural Commissioner can cite the violator, levy a civil penalty, or revoke a pesticide use permit. For additional discussion regarding the use of pesticides refer to Section 5.3, PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY, of the Final EIR. Potential Impact Cumulative Ironacts 5.2-3 Development of the proposed project, as well as the buildout of City's General Plan, would result in the cumulative loss of pdme farmland. Significance: Unavoidable Significant Impact. The Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR has identified the loss of prime agricultural land as a significant unavoidable impact. Finding (c) Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers make infeasil~Lle the Exhibit ~' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 7 mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final environmental impact report. Facts in Support of Finding No feasible mitigation measures are available to mitigate the conversion of farmland to urban uses. Except for the "No ProjectJNo Development' and 'Alternative Site' Alternatives, the alternatives that were analyzed in the EIR could not avoid the significant and unavoidable impacts on farmlands. Although the "No ProjectiNg Development' and "Alternative Site' Alternatives would reduce farmland conversion impacts, it was rejected from further consideration because they did not meet the objectives of the proposed project. Page 3-1 of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR states that development in accordance with the 2010 General Plan will extend existing urban development in all directions. Page 3-1 of the 2010 General Plan concludes that conversion of pdrne agricultural lands to urban uses will result in a reduction of the regional agricultural economy and is considered to be a significant adverse impact. A statement of overriding considerations for this impact was adopted by the City Council when the General Plan EIR was certified. The 2010 General Plan currently designates the Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch sites as RI-A (Resource Intensive Agriculture, minimum 20-acre parcel size). As defined by the California Land Conservation Act, pdme agricultural soils include Class I and II soils, which are located on the project site. The proposed amendments to the General Plan would convert the intended use of the project sites from agricultural to urbanized and developed conditions. Sinca each of the sites were designated RI-A when conclusions were rendered in the 2010 General Plan EIR for Agricultural Resources, the Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch Projects result in impacts which exceed the assumptions/conclusions previously stated, thus resulting in an unavoidable significant impact. The unavoidable adverse impact on farmland is considered to be acceptable in light of the Statement of Overriding Consideration provided herein as Exhibit "2". Public Health and Safety Potential Impact Agricultural Use of Procartv/Adjacent Prooerties 5.3-1 Due to the histodc use of the sites for agricultural purposes, there is a potential for pesticide residues (including DDT) to be present in the shallow soil of both project sites. Significance: A potentially significant health hazard may occur which can be reduced to a less than significant level with implementation of mitigation measures. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project wh~ mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. ~.,PlGINA~ Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 8 Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of project design features and the following mitigation measure as identified in the Final EtR and incorporated into the project. 5.3-1 Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the project applicant shall perform soil tests to determine concentrations of pesticide and fungicide residues which may be present within the project sites. Should contaminant levels be in excess of acceptable Federal, State and/or County levels, the project applicant shall identify and implement remedial action, subject to approval by the City of Bakersfield and responsible regulatory agencies to reduce contaminants to acceptable levels. Potential Impact A(~dcuttural Use of ProDertv/Adiacent Prooerties 5.3-2 Agrfcultural uses within the development areas could create human health effects, particularly dudng pesticide application operations. Significance: Potentially significant impacL Compliance with local and State requirements would reduce impacts to a less than significant level Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding The potential impact of the continued use of agricultural chemicals within the development areas would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the following standards: 1 ) agricultural chemicals are required to be used and stored in accordance with all applicable Federal, State and local regulations and guidelines; and 2) the use of buffers or barriers between agricultural and urban uses would provide a separation dudng pesticide application operations. These buffers or barriers can take the form of open spaca, roadways, utility 'coredors, canal, easements, six-foot high masonry walls, fences or landscape setbacks. Pursuant to Section 17.08.150 (a) of the Bakersfield Municipal Code, residential structures are required to be set back a minimum of 50 feet from all agricultural zones. Potential Impact Oil Fields 5.3-3 Development adjacent to oil fields and oil wells can result in potential health and safety dsks due to "gas migration," 'attractive nuisances," "soil and groundwater contamination" and "blowouts" when ddlling new wells, reworking old wells or abandonment of old wells. Several abandoned and active wells (two) are Iocated~AK~ within the project site's boundary, therefore, health and safety dsks are prese~l~ ~ c~,., Significance: Potentially significant impact. Development adjacent to~oil fields and oil wells shall be required to comply with all Federal, State ~d ORIGINAL Exhibit ~* Statement o/ Fact~ and Findings Page 9 local standards (Bakersfield Municipal Code). In addition, compliance with mitigation measures identified by the Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of project design, compliance with Federal, State and local standards and the following mitigation measures as identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. 5.3-3a The following Mitigation Measure aDolies to the Buena Vista oroiect site only: Pursuant to the Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources, active wells and associated equipment within the project area shall be enclosed by an eight-foot block wall, with barbed wire on the inside at the seven-foot level. Appropriate gates shall be installed and climbable landscaping around the perimeter of the facility shall be avoided. The inside grade of the facility shall be constructed so that potential spillage will be confined to the enclosure. Improvements are the responsibility of the project applicant/developer. 5.3-3b Sufficient access to the existing and abandoned wells shall be maintained in order for the Division of Gas, Oil and Geothermal Resources (Division) to investigate the condition of the wellheads and check for leakage. If any reabandonments are required, the Division shall furnish necessary specifications to the property owner. 5.3-3c If any abandoned or unrecorded wells are uncovered, or damaged during excavation or grading activities, remedial plugging operations pursuant to Division of Gas, Oil and Geothermal Resources requirements would be required. 5.3-3d Pdor to issuance of building permits, all oil contaminated soil shall be remediated tothe satisfaction of the Local Unified Program Agency (the Office of Environmental Services - Bakersfield City Fire Department) in conjunction with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board and/or California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Potential Impact Hazardous Material Users/Facilities Buena Vista Project Site 5.3-4 A potential rupture of the Pacific Gas & Electdc (PG&E) underground gas transmission pipelines, located in the southwest and northern portions of the proje~ area, could adversely effect the public health in the residential areas, once they ar~ developed. Significance: Potentially significant impact. Compliance ~ :)R',GINAL Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 10 State and applicable local regulations pertaining to setbacks would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding The PG&E pipelines are under high pressure and like others, have the potential to rupture, resulting in uncontrolled releases of natural gas. A pipeline rupture could result in environmental contamination and human health affects in the residential areas, once they are developed. For safety reasons, state regulations prohibit the construction of any structures directly over the pipeline and a right-of-way is usually established. The width of the right-of-way is negotiated between the property owner and the pipeline operator and usually ranges between 20-50 feet. Shared right-of-ways may span 60-70 feet. Types of shrubs may be restricted, specifically, structures and large trees cannot be over pipelines. Compliance with State and applicable local regulations would reduce potential impacts health and safety related to this pipeline to less than significant levels. Potential Impact Valley Fever 5.3-5 Grading of the project sites could lead to the release of fugitive dust and spores causing valley fever. Significance: Potentially significant impact. Compliance with the required mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. 5.3-5 At the initial construction meeting pdor to grading activities, all construction workers must be informed as to the symptoms of Valley Fever. Potential Impact Flooding/Kern River 5.3-7 Kem ' Development within the northem and western boundary of the River Raf~ '~ Project site may be affected by flood events due to proximity to the Kern R~v_ er Flood zones. Significance: Potentially significant impact. Pursuan~,~t~lGiNAL~ Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page I1 Agreement No. 97-212 signed on August 6, 1997 for the construction of a levee structure, construction of the levee structure and compliance with required mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of Agreement No. 97-212 and the following mitigation measures as identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. 5.3-7a The followinq Mitic~ation Measure aDolies to the Kern River Ranch Droiect site ontv: Prior to recording of any Final Map with parcels less than 20 acres, a levee shall be constructed. The location and dimensions of the levee proposed in the northern portion of the Kern River Ranch project site shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Bakersfield Public Works Department. The levee shall be located outside the limits of the primary and secondary floodways. 5.3-7b The followinQ MitiQation Measure aoDlies to the Kern River Ranch oroiect site ontv: Prior to recordation of a final map with less than 20 acres for land located within Zone A, as defined on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) "Flood Rate Insurance Map," the developer shall comply with the requirements of FEMA or revise the FEMA map. The Kern River Ranch project applicant shall furnish to the City of Bakersfield all documentation required by FEMA. Potential Impact Cumulative tmoacts 5.3-8 Future development within the study area is subject to Federal, State and local compliance regulations regarding the treatment, storage and clean-up of hazardous materials. Significance: Compliance with Federal, State and local requirements on a project-by-project basis would reduce cumulative impacts to a less than significant level Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding The proposed project, combined with on-going and future clevelopment of related proje~c,~AKE~,~ in the study area, would be requ*red to be ~n compliance with Federal, State and ~,~1 ~ regulations regarding on-site hazardous condition and the use of hazardous matedals.,~[~1o ~ mitigation measures beyond those identified on a project-by-project basis are requir~.~RiGl~^~ ~ Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 12 Aesthetics/Light and Glare Potential Impact Light and Glare 5.4-3 Development on the Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch project sites may create additional light and glare impacts beyond existing conditions. Significance: Potentially significant impacL Compliance with city codes would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding Light sources from the on-site residential and commercial developments may have a significant impact on the surrounding areas. Street light illumination from the residential areas would be comparable to existing nearby residential developments to the east of the proposed project sites. Compliance with City code and the use of directional lighting techniques would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. Title 17.58.060 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code requires that the lighting of parking lots be designed and arranged in such a manner so that light is reflected away from adjacent residential properties and streets. City building officials may also raquira use of glare shields or baffles for glare control of backlight. The types/locations of lighting fixtures/poles would be reviewed by the City dudng the site plan review process. Potential Impact Cumulative Impacts 5.4-4 Project development, together with cumulative projects, may result in greater urbanization and the loss of views in undeveloped areas of the southwest portion of the City of Bakersfield. Significance: Unavoidable Significant Impact. The Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan EIR identified an unavoidable adverse impact for aesthetics, with build-out of the General Plan. Finding (c) Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final environmental impact report. Facts in Support of Finding impact~C ~SAKE No feasible mitigation measures are available to mitigate cumulative aesthetic Except for the "No Project Alternative", the alternative that was analyzecl in the EIR co~d not avoid the significant and unavoidable cumulative aesthetic impacts. The "No Proje~RiGiNAL F.r. hibit ~' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 13 Alternative was rejected from further consideration because it did not meet the objectives of the proposed project. Construction of approved and pending projects in the local vicinity would permanently alter the nature and appearance of the west Bakersfield area through loss of open space. Security and street lighting would also introduce light and glare potential to the area. Aesthetic/light and glare impacts can be mitigated with the use of building materials that are consistent with the general character of the area and proper lighting techniques to direct light on-site and away from adjacent properties. Page 3-2 of the General Plan EIR states that development in accordance with the General Plan would convert existing open space to urban uses, resulting in the incremental loss of open space within Bakersfield. This conversion was considered an unavoidable adverse impact, for which a statement of overriding considerations was adopted. The agricultural land use designation contained on both the Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch sites was in effect at the time the General Plan EIR was certified. The project proposes amendments to the General Plan to allow development of urban uses on the sites. As such, the project, together with cumulative development in western Bakersfield, would exceed the EIR assumptions/conclusions and would contribute additional impacts not previously anticipated in the General Plan EIR. This exceedance constitutes a significant and unavoidable aesthetirJlight and glare cumulative impact. The unavoidable adverse impact on cumulative aesthetic conditions is considered to be acceptable in light of the Statement of Overriding Considerations provided herein as Exhibit Traffic and Circulation Potential Impact TdD Generation and Distribution 5.5-1 The proposed project would generate additional tdps on the adjacent roadways thus degrading the level of service at intersections and roadway segments identified below. Significance: Potentially significant impact- Impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of improvements pursuant to the requirements of the Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation Impact Fee Program. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as identified in the Final EI~F~ and incorporated into the project. OPiGINAL F-~bit ~' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 14 5.5-1 Pdor to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant(s) shall comply with the Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation Impact Fee Program. The project applicants shall participate in the improvements required on a pro-rata fair-share basis as provided in Table 8, BUENA VISTA & KERN RIVER RANCH: INTERSECTION PRO-RATA SHARE OF MITIGATION/REQUIRED MITIGATION, of the Supplemental Traffic Impact Study for Buena Vista & Kern River Ranch Cumulative Impact, dated June 1997. To accommodate 2020 cumulative traffic plus Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch project traffic volumes, the above referenced fees shall be used to provide the following improvements: Intersection Improvements Rosedale Highwav and Renfro Road: add eastbound through lane and westbound through lane (LOS C); Rosedale Highway and Fruitvale Drive: add southbound left turn lane and southbound dght turn lane (LOS C); Brimhall Road and Allen Road: add eastbound left turn lane, westbound left turn lane, northbound through lane, and southbound through lane (LOS C); Brimhall Road and CallowavDrive: add southbound dght turn lane (LOS C); Stockdale Hi(3hwav and Heath Road: provide exclusive turn lanes for southbound approach (LOS B); Stockdale Hiohwav and Renfro Road: add eastbound lane (LOS C); Stockdale Hi(~hwav and Allen Road: add northbound left turn lane, northbound through lane, southbound left Turn lane, southbound through lane, eastbound left turn lane, eastbound dght turn lane, and westbound left turn lane (LOS C); Stockdale Highwav and Buena Vista Road: add westbound left turn lane and eastbound dght turn lane (LOS C); Kern River Ranch Entrance #1 and Buena Vista Road: add eastbound left turn lane, eastbound right turn lane, northbound left turn lane, and southbound right turn lane (with Kern River Ranch) (LOS B); Deer Peak Drive and Buena Vista Road: add northbound through lane, southbound through lane and southbound left turn lane (LOS B); Ming Avenue and Allen Road: add westbound left turn lane, northbound dght turn lane, and two southbound left turn lanes (LOS B); Ming Avenue and Buena Vista Road: full expansion per City of Bakersfield's Standard Detail T-4 (LOS C); Min(~ Avenue and Ashe Road: add northbound left turn lane (LOS C); Chamber Boulevard and Buena Vista Road: provide two left turn lanes/one through lane/one right turn lane for eastbound approach, one left turn lane/one through lane/one dght turn lane for westbound approach, one left turn lane/two through lanes/one right turn lane for northbound approach, and one left turn lane/two through lanes/one right turn lane for southbound approach (with Buena Vista) (LOS C); White Lane and Buena Vista Road: add two eastbound left turn lanes, eastbound right turn lane, northbound through lane, northbound dght turn lane, southbound left turn lane, southbound through lane, and southbou~AK,~,~ dght turn lane (LOS C); and ~_- .,, IGIN,,~L Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 15 Panama Lane and Gasford Road: add northbound left and southbound left (LOS A). Segment Improvements · Rosedale Hiqhwav (Calloway Drive to Fruitvale Avenue): widen to six lanes (LOS A); Brimhall Road (Jewetta Road to Calloway Road): widen to four lanes (LOS A); Stockdale Hi(~hway (Buena Vista Road to Old River Road}: widen to six lanes (LOS A); · Stockdale Highway (Gasford Road to Ashe Road}: widen to six lanes (LOS A); · Stockdale Highway (Real Road to Wible Road}: widen to six lanes (LOS A); · Mina Avenue (Allen Road to Buena Vista Road}: widen to four lanes (LOS B); · Taft Highway (Buena Vista Road to Old River Road): widen to four lanes (LOS A); · Allen Road (Haaeman Road to Rosedale Highway}: widen to four lanes (LOS A); · Allen Road (Rosedale Highway to Stockdale Hiahway): widen to four lanes (LOS C); · Allen Road (Stockdale Hiahwav to Mina Avenue): widen to four lanes (LOS c); · Buena Vista Road (Stockdale Highwav to Mina Avenue): widen to six lanes/add median (LOS A); Buena Vista Road (Ming Avenue to VVhite Lane): widen to six lanes/add median (LOS B); Buena V~sta Road (VVhite Lane to Pachecol: widen to four lanes (LOS A); and Gasford Road (Pacheco Road to Panama Lane}: widen to four lanes (LOS A). Potential Impact Traffic Signal Reouirements 5.5-2 As a result of project generated t#ps under 2020 cumulative traffic plus Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch project conditions, fifteen intersections warrant signalization. Significance: Potentially significant impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels with installation of warranted traffic signals. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. ORIGINAL Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Fact~ and Findings Pa~e 16 Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. 5.5-2a The applicant(s) shall participate in the improvements required on a pro-rata fair- share basis as provided in Table 8, BUENA VISTA & KERN RIVER RANCH: INTERSECTION PRO-RATA SHARE OF MITIGATION/REQUIRED MITIGATION, of the Supplemental Traffic Impact Study for Buena Vista & Kern River Ranch Cumulative Impact, dated June 1997. To accommodate Year 2020 cumulative traffic with projects condition, traffic signals are projected to be required at the following intersections and the above referenced fees shall be used to provide the following improvements: Stockdale Highway and Heath Road; Stockdale Highway and Renfro Road; Kem River Ranch Entrance #1 and Buena Vista Road; Deer Peak Drive and Buena Vista Road; Chamber Boulevard and Buena Vista Road; Pacheco Road and Gosford Road; and Ming Avenue and Allen Road. 5.5-2b The traffic signals required as a result of the proposed project shall inctude an interconnect of the signals to function in a coordinated system with existing and planned signals. Potential Impacts Cumulative ImPacts 5.5-3 Development of both the Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch project sites, together with future development in accordance with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan would result in an increase in vehicle tdps on roadways serving the project area. Significance: Based on the findings of the traffic data contained within Appendix 14.4 of the Final EIR, year 2020 cumulative impacts related to traffic would be mitigated to less than significant levels. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of Mitigation Measure No. 5.5-1 prey ously c ted in this section, as identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. Exhibit ~' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 17 Noise Potential Impact Short-Term Construction tmoacts 5.6-1 Grading and construction on the proposed Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch project sites would result in temporary noise impacts to nearby noise sensitive receptors. Significance: Potentially significant impacL Adherence to City code requirements would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding Excessive noise levels resulting from construction activities generally would occur in the daytime hours only since City Noise Standards exempt construction noise if construction activities are limited to the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. Construction noise would last the duration of construction, although it would be most noticeable during the initial months of site-intensive grading and building construction for each development phase. Noise sensitive receptors in proximity to the construction sites, may experience excessive noise levels resulting from construction activities. These impacts, however, are exempt as noted above and would be short-term, ceasing upon completion of each phase. In order to minimize short-term noise impacts to adjacent sensitive receptors even further, it is recommended that the hours of operation of noise-producing equipment should be restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. Potential Impact Lona-Term Noise Impacts Mobile Sources 5.6-2 Project implementation would generate additional vehicular travel on the surrounding roadway network, thereby resulting in noise level increases along these roadways. Significance: For on.site locations, impacts would be potentially significant. Along several roadways, however, implementation of required mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. For off-site locations, noise impacts would be less than significant. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which , %AK~ ~ mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. ~ ~, OPlGINAL Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 18 Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. 5.6-2a To reduce significant traffic noise impacts to below 65 dBA CNEL at proposed residential locations adjacent to collector and arterial roadways, the project applicant(s) shall incorporate sound barriers, along cited roadways. Sinca lot design and grading plans are not yet available, the exact height and location of barriers cannot be accurately determined at this time. However, barriers (i.e., berms, sound walls) between six and eight feet may be required to reduce noise levels to acceptable levels. 5.6-2b Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the proposed commercial uses, the project applicant shall demonstrate that project commercial noise source impacts on nearby residences are below those indicated in the City's houdy noise level performance standards. To demonstrate commercial noise source impacts are below the City's standards, the project applicant may need to include project design features such as setbacks, barriers, building location/orientation, acoustical design of buildings, etc. Potential Impact Oil Production Eouioment Noise Levels 5.6-3 Finding Existing oil production wells may remain on-site following project development; thereby, resulting in potential noise impacts to future noise sensitive uses. Significance: Potentially significant impact. Compliance with City Noise standards would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding Oil production equipment is currently located within the project sites. Noise levels measured from an oil well within the Buena Vista site resulted in levels that would exceed City standards (50 feet). If the equipment remains and residences are built in close proximity to the oil production equipment, a significant noise impact would occur. However, with implementation of setbacks and noise attenuation techniques in accordance with City standards, noise impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. Potent~llmpact Cumulative Imoact 5.6-5 Implementation of the proposed project, together with cumulative projects, t~)uld increase the ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. Significance: Less~f~han Exhibit ~' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 19 significant impact with adherence to Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and on a project-by-project basis. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding Potential noise generated by the project and cumulative projects would be subject to adherence to the City's Noise Compatibility Guidelines, threshold criteria, and General Plan and Municipal Code requirements. Adherence to these requirements would serve to requce noise levels from short-term and long-term mobile and stationary sources. Air Quality Potential Impact Short-Term Air Quality lincacts 5.7-1 Significant short-term air quality impacts would occur during site preparation and project construction. Significance: Significant before and after mitigation for NOx emissions from construction equipment exhaust, significant before mitigation for PMfo fugitive dust although implementation of mitigation measures would reduce emissions to a less than significant level; and less than significant for emissions of other pollutants. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. (c) Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final environmental impact report. Facts in Support of Finding Implementation of the following mitigation measures will serve to lessen or avoid project impacts; however, the impacts would remain significant. Except for the "No Project/No Development" Altemative, the project alternatives analyzed in the EIR would not avoid the significant and unavoidable adverse air quality impacts associated with construction activities. These alternatives would result in the same or greater air quality impacts dudng construction compared to the proposed project. The "No Project/ No Development" alternative would not meet the objectives of the proposed project. The construction of the proposed project would result in the generation of fugitive d~ Compliance with SJVUAPCD Regu at on VIII would result in no significant fugitive dust emissions. To ensure compliance, the following measure shall be implemented. Exhibit ~E ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 20 5.7-1a Prior to the approval of a grading plan for any residential tract, multiple family project, and commercial project, the project applicant shall submit a letter to the City of Bakersfield Planning Department from the SJVUAPCD stating the dust suppression measures that shall be completed dudng construction activities in order to comply with SJVUAPCD Regulation VIII. The construction of the proposed project would include asphalt paving. Compliance with SJVUAPCD Rule 4641 would result in no significant ROG Emissions. To ensure compliance, the following measure shall be implemented. 5.7-1b Prior to the approval of a grading plan for any residential tract, multiple family project, and commercial project, the project applicant shall submit a letter to the City of Bakersfield Planning Department from the SJUAPCD stating the measures that shall be completed dudng asphalt paving in order to comply with SJVUAPCD Rule 4641. To reduce NOx emissions, the following measures shall be completed: 5.7-1c The construction grading plans shall include a statement that all construction equipment shall be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacture's specifications. 5.7-1d The construction grading plans shall include a statement that work crews shall shut off construction equipment when not in use. Implementation of the above measures will serve to substantially, but not completely, mitigate the potential significant air quality impact during construction. The remaining unavoidable adverse impact is considered to be acceptable in light of the Statement of Overriding Considerations provided herein as Exhibit "2". Potential Impact Lone-Term Air Quality Imoacts 5.7-2 The project would result in an overall increase in the local and regional pollutant load due. to direct impacts from vehicle emissions and indirect impacts from electricity and natural gas consumption. Significance: Significant for ROG and NO, emissions; less than significant for emissions of other pollutants. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. (c) Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final environmental impact report. Exhibit ~' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 21 Facts in Support of Findings Implementation of the following mitigation measure will serve to lessen or avoid project impacts; however, the impacts would remain significant. Except for the "No Project/No Development" Alternative, the project alternativesanalyzed in the EIR would not avoid the significant and unavoidable adverse air quality impacts associated with long-term operational activities. These alternatives would result in the same or greater long-term air quality impacts compared to the proposed project. The "No Project/No Development" Alternative would not meet the objectives of the proposed project. 5.7-2 The project applicant shall incorporate the following in building plans: Solar or low-emission water heater shall be used. Central water heating systems shall be used. Double-paned glass shall be used in all windows. Energy efficient low-sodium parking lot lights shall be used. One (1) bicycle rack shall be provided in each of the proposed commercial areas. Implementation of the above measures will serve to substantially, but not completely, mitigate the potential significant long-term air quality impacts. The remaining unavoidable adverse impacts are considered to be acceptable in light of the Statement of Overriding Considerations provided herein as Exhibit '2". Potential Impact Consistency with Air Quality Attainment Plan 5.7-3 The proposed project would not be consistent with the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD's Air Quality Attainment Plan (AQAP). Significance: Significant and unavoidable impact; mitigation measures are not feasible. Finding (c) Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final environmental impact report. Facts in Support of Finding No feasible mitigation measures are available for the project to be consistent with the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD's AQAP. Except for the "No ProjectJNo Development" Alternative, the alternatives that were analyzed in the EIR could not avoid the significant and unavoidable consistency impact. The "No ProjectJNo Development" Alternative was rejected from further consideration because it did not meet the objectives of the proposed project, The AOAP recognized growth of the population and economy within the Air Basin. The~~ Plan predicted the worldorce in Kern County to increase 40 percent and housing to increase= 30 percant from 1990 to 2000 based on projections included in the General Plans prepared°O[~lGlNAL F_.Mu'bit ~ ~ Statement of Facts and Fin&'ngs Page 22 for individual Cities within the County. As the project proposes to amend the General Plan land use designation to allow urban uses, the population/employment generated by the project was not originally included in the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 GeneraIPlan. Thus, project-related population/employment increases were also not anticipated in the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD AQAP. This. inconsistency would be a significant and unavoidable project impact. The unavoidable adverse impact on the consistency with the San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD AQAP is considered to be acceptable in light of the Statement of Overriding Considerations provided herein in Exhibit "2". Potential Impact Cumulative Imoacts 5.7-4 Impacts to regional air quality resulting from development of cumulative projects would significantly impact existing air quality levels. Significance: Significant and unavoidable impact; mitigation measures beyond adherence to standard ordinances and the Air Quality Attainment Plan have not been identified. Finding (c) Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final environmental impact report. Facts in Support of Finding No feasible mitigation measures are available for cumulative air quality impacts. Except for the "No ProjectJNo Development" Alternative, the alternatives that were analyzed in the EIR could not avoid the significant and unavoidable cumulative air quality impacts. The "No Project/No Development" Aitemative was rejected from further consideration because it did not meet the objectives of the proposed project. Complete buildout of all cumulative projects identified in Section 4.0 of the Final EIR would rasult in the development of approximately 52,806 acres and the addition of approximately 164,865 dwelling units. It is not possible at this time to accurately determine the emissions that would occur from mobile sources and energy consumption at some unknown future date when the number of dwelling units and population of Metropolitan Bakersfield has doubled. Emissions resulting from mobile source emissions and energy consumption associated with complete build out of the 164,866 dwelling units would have a significant and unavoidable impact. The annual short-term and long-term emissions associated with these projects is dependent on the phasing of each project. However, the build out, sale and occupancy of the units would be controlled by market demand. Emission reduction technology, strategies and plans are constantly being developed. These include the AQAP, PM~o Attainment Demonstration Plan, Bakersfield Metropolitan Area 2010 Plan Land Use and Conservatio~ Elements, Air Quality Guidelines for General Plans and Energy Aware Planning GuiderS' Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 23 The unavoidable adverse cumulative air quality impacts are considered acceptable in light of the Statement of Overriding Considerations provided herein in Exhibit "2". Biological Resources Potential Impact Sensitive Resources 5.8-1 Project construction would permanently replace 973.29 acres of undeveloped land with urban development thus potentially impacting sensitive species which could occur on both the Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch project sites. Significance: Potentially significant impact. Mitigation in accordance with the MBHCP requirements and mitigation measures as set forth in this Program EIR would reduce impact to less than significant levels. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. 5.8-1a Pdor to the issuance of a grading permits, the project proponents shall comply with all appropriate terms and conditions of the MBHCP to the City. The MBHCP requires certain take avoidance measures for the San Joaquin kit fox. MBHCP guidelines regarding tracking and excavation shall be followed to prevent entrapment of kit fox in dens. Specific measures dudng the construction phase of the project shall be implemented and include the following: A preconstruction survey shall be conducted prior to site grading to search for native kit fox dens (specifically tracking shall be conducted at the potential active den located in the southeastern portion of the Kern River Ranch project site). All pipes, culverts or similar structures with a diameter of four inches or greater shall be kept capped to prevent entry of kit fox. If they are not capped or otherwise covered, they shall be inspected daily prior to burial or closure to ensure no kit foxes, or other protected species, become entrapped. Excavations shall either be constructed with escape ramps or be covered to prevent entrapment. Or the site(s) could be protected dudng construction, such as with a wildlife exclusion fence, whj~AK~-c~d~ would eliminate the possibility of ranging animals from being harr~d during construction. Exhibit ~' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 24 All food, garbage, and plastic shall be disposed of in closed containers and regularly removed from the site to minimize attracting ranging kit fox or other animals. V~th the exception of Swainson's hawk impacts to special-status species on the project site are covered under the terms and conditions of the MBHCP and associated Implementing Agreement. The compensation and avoidance requirements of the MBHCP and buffer zones proposed as part of this project are consistent and follow an ecosystem management approach for endangered species, and provide adequate compensation of the Swainson's hawk and all other potentially occurring special-status species. 5.8-1 b Prior to issuance of grading permit(s), the project applicant(s) shall comply with the following raptor nest mitigation requirements: If grading is proposed to occur during the raptor nesting season (February through September), a focused survey for raptor nests shall be conducted by a qualified raptor biologist pdor to grading activities in order to identify active nests in areas potentially impacted by project implementation. If construction is proposed to take place during the raptor nesting/breeding season (February through September), no construction activity shall take place within 500 feet of an active nest until the young have fledged (as determined by a qualified raptor biologist). Trees containing nests that must be removed as a result of project implementation shall be removed during the non-breeding season (October through January). 5.8-1c The followino mitioation measures apPlies to the Kern River Ranch project site only: Construction directly actjacent to sensitive ripadan habitat potentially occupied by threatened, endangered and other protected species may result in take of listed species ranging through the construction site. During construction and development on the Kern River Ranch project site, the following mitigation measure is recommended to help prevent indirect or direct take of species within the pdmary floodplain directly adjacent to the project area, for which the MBHCP does not cover take or provide compensation or mitigation: River Access Management: The area alongside the Kern River riparian corridor should be fenced-off, and signs put up, dudrig construction to protect it and prevent damage to vegetation, burrows and nests from heavy equipment, construction vehicles, and to control public access. The off-site adjacent sycamore specimen tree is located within this area just north of the carrot field and special attention should be made to prevent damage to this tree. Trees and shrubs should be planted along the Kern River interface to help mitigate for noise, provide protective cover, and minimize adverse impacts of night lighting on a wildlife species which inhabit the adjacent floodplain and river riparian habitat. Exhibit ~' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 25 5.8-1d The presence of any previously unidentified protected species which are not addressed in the MBHCP, including those protected under the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act, should be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist pdor to construction. The Fish & Wildlife Service (USFVVS) and California Department of Fish & Game (CDFG) should be notified of previously untoported protected species. Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately to the CDFG and USFVVS. Potential Impact Sensitive Resources 5.8-2 Construction on the Kern River Ranch project site may cause increased erosion and siltation and subsequent water quality and habitat degradation in the Kern River. Significance: Compliance with City standards would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding Short-term construction activities on the Kern River Ranch project site could result in increased sedimentation in the Kern River. Implementation of best management practices (BMPs) to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater quality requirements would reduce impacts in this regard to less than significant levels. Potential Impact Cumulative Impacts 5.8-3 Development of the proposed project, as well as the buildout of the City's General Plan, would result in the cumulative loss of open space. Significance: Cumulative impacts are mitigated on a project. by-project basis and in accordance with the MBHCP requirements. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding Cumulative development within the Bakersfield area has the potential to adversely affect area biological resources. Regional loss of native areas is a significant issue although the. Buena. Vista/Kem R ver Ranch project does not contribute to this problem. The Bakersfi~l area ~s subject to the provisions of the MBHCP, thus cumulative impacts have be~n addressed and considered mitigable to less than significant levels. ©~IGINAL Exhibit Statement of Facts and Findings Page 26 Cultural Resources Potential Impact Paleontoloay 5.9-1 Grading and excavation activities may result in impacts to paleontological resoumes on both the Buena Vista and Kern River sites. Significance: Potentially significant impac~ Mitigation measures consisting of inspections and monitorfng would reduce the significance of impacts to less than significant levels. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. 5.9-1 If archeological or paleontological resources are discovered during excavation and grading activities on-site, the contractor shall stop all work and the developer shall retain a qualified archeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action. Salvage operation requirements in Appendix K of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines shall be followed and the treatment of discovered Native American remains shall comply with State codes regulations of the Native Amencan Heritage Commission. Potential Impact Archaeoloav 5.9-2 Grading and excavation activities may result in impacts to archeological resources on both the Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch project sites. Significance: Potentially significant impact. Mitigation measures are recommended to reduce the significance of impacts to less than significant levels, Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that s than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the Final~l~' ' and incorporated into the project. ~ ;'~ ORIGINAL Exhibit ~ * Statement of Facts and Findings Page 27 5.9-2b The following measure applies to the Buena Vista project only: An archaeological monitor shall be present at CA-KER-3962 dudng any subsurface construction activities. If significant cultural resources are discovered dudng monitoring, more testing or data recovery may be required. 5.9-2c The foliowine measure aDolies to the Kern River Ranch oroiect only: An archaeological monitor shall be present at CA-KER-3964 dudrig any subsurface construction activities. If significant cultural resources are discovered dudng monitoring, more testing or data recovery may be required. 5.9-2d Should human remains be discovered at any time on any portion of the project, work shall halt and the coroner be notified immediately (Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). In the absence of an archaeological monitor, a qualified archaeologist and the local Native Amedcan community, shall also be notified. Potential Impact Cumulative lincacts 5.9-3 Cumulative development may impact cultural resources in the absence of any mitigation. Significance: Evaluated on a project-by-project basis. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding Potential impacts would be site specific and an evaluation of potential impacts and required mitigation is conducted on a project-by-project basis. This is especially true of those developments located in areas considered to have a high sensitivity for cultural (amhaeological, paleontological, and historical) resources. Each incremental development is required to comply with all applicable State and Federal regulations concerning preservation, salvage, or handling of cultural resources. Given this, potential cumulative effects upon cultural resources are not considered to be significant. Public Services and Utilities Potential Impact Police Services 5.10-1 Development of the project sites would increase demand on police services beyond existing conditions. Significance: Potentially Significant Impact. Impacts are reduced to less than significant levels, with compliance with City standards. Finding (a) .x Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project ~'ch mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Exht'bit 9' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 28 Facts in Support of Finding Construction of the Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch project would create an increased demand for police services on the Bakersfield Police Department. At build-out, the proposed project may generate a population of 14,123 persons. This population increase would translate into an optimal increase of 21 sworn officers to serve the sites at project build-out (to satisfy the Bakersfield Police Departments generation factor of 1.5 sworn officers per one thousand population). This increase in population would also generate the need for additional non-sworn officers, cledcat personnel and administrative personnel. The number of support personnel required can be determined by using the formula of one non- sworn officer, one cledcel and one administrative person for every six sworn officers. This increase in personnel subsequently would also increase the need for patrol units, a larger facility or a police sub-station and other law enforcement equipment. Future residential and commercial development within the site would require additional police surveillance and services, resulting in increased service demands on the Bakersfield Police Department. The addition of officers, cledcal staff, and law enforcement equipment pursuant to conditions of approval as set forth by the City of Bakersfield would decrease the demand on existing police services and reduce the significance of impacts to less than significant levels. Potential Impact Fire Services 5.10-2 Development of the project sites would increase demand for fire protection services beyond existing conditions. Significance: Potentially significant impact. Compliance with fire safety standards and requirements would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding Both the Bakersfield Fire Department and Kern County Fire Department have reported that the extent of impacts and required mitigation would be evaluated primarily at site plan review on a project-by-project basis. Compliance with fire safety standards and requirements such as sprinkler systems, fire alarms, emergency access and adequate fire flow at public and on-site hydrants would be required dudrig the plan check process. Conditions for approval of futura development onsite may include an increase in Fire Department personnel and additional emergency equipment in order to maintain an acceptable level of service. Any development on-site shall be subject to the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code and local amendments, the California Safety Code Regulations Title 19 22, and 27, the Bakersfield Municipal Code, and the National Fire Prevention Association Standards, ~ Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 29 Potential Impact School~ 5.10-3 Development of the project sites would generate additional students beyond existing conditions. Significance: Potentially significant impact. Impacts are reduced to less than significant with implementation of required mitigation measures. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the Final EtR and incorporated into the project. 5.10-3a The following mitiaation measure aDolies to the Buena Vista Droiect onlv: Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any residence within the project area, the applicant shall submit fees to the Kern County High School Distdct and Panama-Buena Vista Union School District in the amount of $4.06 per square foot of assessable space (as defined in Section 65995 of the Government Code) for each such residence. This amount shall increase in even numbered years according to the adjustment for inflation determined by the State Allocation Board for Class B construction. Payment would not be required to a district which has certified in writing that alternative mitigation measures have been undertaken with respect to the project to adequately address school overcrowding. 5.10-3b The followin(3 miti(3ation measure applies to the Kern River Ranch orciect site only: The following shall apply to the Kern River Ranch portion of the project located within the Rosedale Union School District. In accordance with the Kern County Plan, the Kern High School district has identified that the mitigation required of projects such as this is an inflation-indexed $1.42. Payment shall not be required to the Kern High School District if it has certified in wdting that alternative mitigation measures have been undertaken with respect to the project to adequately address school overcrowding. With respect to the Rosedale Union School District, residential property would require either annexation of the property into the CFD 92-1; or, prior to issuance of a building permit within this portion of the project area, the Rosedale Union School Distdct must be paid the following amounts a~¢ applicable: 0~IGiNAL Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 30 (a) (b) (c) (d) $6637.47 per single-family residence; or $2,504.75 per multi-family residence; or $0.5954 per square foot of commercial/ industrial 'gross floor area'; or such higher or lower amount that is then equal to such higher amount that may have been lawfully established by CFD 92-1 as the amount required to prepay its Single Payment and Annual Special Taxes. 5.10-3c The followinq mitigation measure aoplies to the Kern River Ranch oroject site in lieu of 5.10-3b in the event that the Kern County Board of Supervisors orders the transfer of territory within the oroiect site to the Panama-Buena Vista Union School District Pursuant to Education Code Section 35765: 'Prior to issuance of a building permit for any residence within the project area, the Kern High School Distdct and Panama-Buena Vista Union School District must be paid the amount of $4.06 per square foot of assessable space (as defined in Section 65995 of the Government Code) for each such .residence. for the purpose of providing school facilities. This amount shall ~ncrease ~n even numbered years according to the adjustment for inflation determined by the State Allocation Board for Class B construction at its January meeting, which increase shall be effective as of the date of that meeting. Payment shall not be required to a distdct which has certified in writing that alternative mitigation measures have been undertaken with respect to the project to adequately address school overcrowding." Potential Impact W{ater 5.10-4 Development of the proposed project sites would increase the existing demand for domestic water. Significance: Although not identified as a significant impact, the proposed water system design will be required to be in compliance with the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code, applicable standards, specifications, policies, and regulations. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment, Facts in Support of Finding The City of Bakersfield has indicated its capability to supply adequate domestic water supplies, including water for fire protection service, based on the proposed zoning and water supply regulations. The water supply would have to conform with all Federal (United States Protection Agency), State (California Department of Health Services), and the local agency (Kern County Health Department) water quality standards. ORIGINAL Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 31 The Kern Water Agency, in coordination with vadous water service companies, is implementing water recharge and conservation programs to reduce the regional demand for water. Additionally, the City of Bakersfield oversees a program that focuses on groundwater recharge along the Kern River. Potential Impact Parks and Recreation 5.10-10 Development of the project sites would create additional demand on Parks and Recreation facilities. Significance: Analysis has concluded that although impacts are less than significant, project shall be subject to City of Bakersfield Municipal Code for Parks and Recreation facilities. Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding The applicant shall be required to either dedicate land, or pay in lieu fees pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code 15.80 which requires developers of new residential uses to provide 2.5 acres of land per population projections of 1000, based on fair market value. The minimum park size requirament is six acres for neighborhood parks. Maximum park acreage for community parks pursuant to Bakersfield Municipal Code 15.80 is upwards of 20 acres. The applicant is also required to pay park development fee of $670 per each new single-family residential building permit. The proposed project shall be required to be annexed into a maintenance assessment district for the maintenance of all street, median, and sump frontage landscaping as well as for the maintenance of parks. Potential Impact Cumulative Impacts 5.10-11 Cumulative development would increase demand for services and utilities. There would be an increased demand for the Bakersfield Police Department, Kern County SherifFs Department, Bakersfield and Kern County Fire Departments, local School District, and other public services. Increased consumption and generation rates are anticipated for electricity, natural gas, water, wastewater and solid waste. Significance: Analysis has concluded that cumulative development is subject to standards and requirements of reviewing agencies and no additional mitigation is required. Exhibit ~ ' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 32 Finding (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. Facts in Support of Finding Although there would be a substantial service and utility demand increase attributable to the extent of the cumulative development, the overall potential for service-related cumulative effects to occur is not considered significant. This conclusion is based pdmadly on a rationale that: 1) Already constructed residential and non-residential development would only have occurred after having satisfied all development-specific requisite permit, code, policy, and other City of Bakersfield development requirements and contributed their fair share of impact fees in order to ensure their participation in addressing area wide (cumulative) growth and service-related demand issues; and, 2) by having done the latter, each specific development would in effect be self-mitigating with regard to placing a potentially significant demand upon an area's public services and utilities. Alternatives VVith regard to project Alternatives, the City of Bakersfield, as lead agency, considered a range of feasible alternatives in accordance with Section 15126(d) of CEQA. The lead agency considered a "No Project" Alternative and 'Alternative Site" Alternative as part of the environmental review for the project. "No Project/No Development" Alternative Finding (c) Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final environmental impact report. Facts in Support of Finding The No Project/No Development Alternative is considered to be environmentally superior to the proposed Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch project. However, this Alternative would not realize any of the project objectives as indicated in Section 3.0, PROJECT DESCRIPTION of the Final EIR, thus, this alternative is not under any further consideration. 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 development of the property at some future date. Implementation of the ~No Project/No Development" Alternative would disregard the proposed project applications and retain the existing Bakersfield 2010 General Plan land use and zoning designations for the project sites. This alternative assumes that no new land uses (including infrastructure improvements) would be added to the project sites. Portions of the project sites currently under agriculture production would remain and crop rotation practices would continue. The ~No ProjectJNo Development" Alternative would not result in any of the environment~ impacts associated with development of the Buena Vista and Kem River Ranch project~'.?~3RiGiN,~L Exhibit 9' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 33 This AItemative would avoid potential impacts resulting from alteration of the project site's physical characteristics, health and safety impacts, removal of existing agricultural uses, and construction of new structures and impervious surfaces. Maintaining the project site in its existing condition would also eliminate potential impacts to any unknown cultural resources that may exist and would not alter the visual characteristics of the project sites. The 'No Project/No Development" Alternative would not result in the construction of uses associated with the proposed projects; therefore, aesthetic, air quality and noise impacts resulting from construction and operation of the proposed land uses would be avoided. Traffic and circulation impacts also would not occur with this Alternative, as vacant land would not generate traffic. By not constructing the proposed uses, increased demands on public services and utilities would not occur;, therefore associated impacts would be avoided. "Development in Accordance with Existing General Plan Designation" Alternative Finding (c) Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final environmental impact report. Facts in Support of Finding Due to a significant reduction in residential units and the elimination of the commercial designations, the "Development in Accordance with Existing General Plan Designation" Altemative would only partially meet the project objectives. W'~h the 'Development in Accordance with Existing General Plan Designation" Alternative, the project area would be developed to the maximum intensity allowed under the existing 2010 General Plan land use designation. Implementation of this alternative would consist of development on 971.82 acres under land use designation R-IA (Intensive Agriculture, Minimum 20 Acre Parcel Size) and development of 1.47 acres under HR (High Density Residential-Maximum 72.6 units per acre). Development in accordance with these designations would result in construction of 154 dwelling units (106 multi-family and 48 single-family) and would allow for continued agricultural production on the individual 20-acre parcels. Implementation of the "Development in Accordance with Existing General Plan Designation" Alternative would result in a decrease in impacts related to atl issue areas, particularly traffic/cimulation, noise, and air quality. Impacts associated with aesthetics, public health and safety would have similarities to the proposed project due to the introduction of people and development to the area. "Estate/Residential Densities and Commercial Development" Alternative Finding (c) Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final environmenta~ ~AKE~ impact report. ~- 'm~,~ ~,RIGINAL Exhibit ~E' Statement of Facts and Findings Page 34 Facts in Support of Finding Significant reduction in residential units, the "Estate/Residential Densities and Commercial Development" Alternative would only partially meet the project objectives. Under the "Estate Residential Densities and Commercial Development" AItemative, the project area would be developed to the maximum intensity altowed under the General Plan Estate Residential land use designation (Maximum 1.0 dwelling unit per net acre). In addition, the proposed GC (General Commercial) designations would also occur under this alternative. Implementation of this alternative would consist of development on 922.60 acres under the land use designation Estate Residential (Maximum 1.0 dwelling unit per net acre) and development of 49.22 acres under GC). Development in accordance with these land use designations would result in the construction of 922 single-family dwelling units. Implementation of the 'Estate Residential Densities and Commercial Development" Alternative would result in a decrease in impacts related to all issue areas, particularly traffic/circulation, noise, and air quality. Impacts associated with aesthetics/light and glare and public health and safety would be similar to the proposed project due to the introduction of people and development to the area. "Alternative Sites" Alternative Finding (c) Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final environmental impact report. Facts in Support of Finding Pursuant to § 15126 (d)(5)(B)1 of the State CEQA Guidelines, "the key question and first step in analysis is whether any of the significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the project in another location. Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR." In order to respond to the criteda of lessening the effects in comparison to the project, four sites in close proximity have been identified. The sites would be consistent with the project objectives, with the exception of consistency with the. location of the Southwest area mixed use activity center, as defined in the 2010 General Plan. The sites are identified as follows: The northern half and southwest quadrant of Section 27 and northern half of Section 28, located between Panama Lane and Hosking Avenue, the Hosking Avenue Extension and the Gosford Road Extension. Area between Brimhall Road on the north, Calloway Drive on the east, the Kern River and Stockdale Highway on the south and Allen Road on the west. Southern portion of Section 18, between Old River Road on the east, Pacheco~v,. Road on the south and Buena Vista Road on the west. ~JGINAL Exhibit ~ Statement of Facts and Findings Page 35 Each of the three sites are void of agdculturel production. The elimination of the prime agricultural land on the Buena Vista/Kern River Ranch sites has been identified as significant project impact. Although each of the three sites would reduce farmland conversion impacts, impacts associated with air quality and cumulative aesthetic impacts would be significant, which is consistent with the proposed project. Thus, impacts other than farmland conversion may not be substantially reduced but instead would be redistdbuted. Although the Alternative Sites Alternative would result in reduced farmland conversion impacts, the density of development along with corresponding impacts for traffic, air quality, noise and demand on public services and utilities may not be substantially reduced but instead would be redistdbuted. Although impacts for the most part would be redistdbuted, the reduction in farmland conversion impacts would result in the Alternative Sites Alternative being environmentally supedor to the proposed project. EXHIBIT "F" Mitigation Monitoring Program EXHIBIT 'rF" BUENA VISTA AND KERN RIVER RANCH PROGRAM EIR I~i~I'I~0NMENTAL IMPACT REPORT MITIGATION MONITORING I'ROGRAM Verlflcnlion of Complinnee Mitigation Measure Engineering Building and Safety Fire Department Public Planning Traffic Engineering Sanilutiuu Division Police Department Works $.3-1 Prior to issuance of any grading permit, thc Approved by: project applicant shall perform soil tests to determine concentrations of pesticide and fungicide residueswhich may be present within the on project siles. Should contaminant levels be in excess of acccplable Federal, State and/or County levels, the project applicant shall identify and implemenl remedial action, subject to approval by the City of Bakersfield and responsible regulatory agencies to reduce contaminants to acceptable levels. S.3-3a The followinn Milieation Measure applies Approved by: to the Buena Vista oroicet site only: Pursuant to thc Division of Oil, Gas and Geolhermal Resources, active wells and associated equipment on within the project area shall be enclosed by an eight-foot block wall, with barbed wire on Ih¢ inside at the seven-foot level. Appropriate gates shall be installed and climbable landscapingaround the perimeter of the facility shall be avoided. The inside grade of the facility shall be constructed so that potential spillage will be confined to the enclosure, lmprovemenls are Ibc responsibility of the project applicanUdeveloper. 5.3-3b Sufficient access to thc existing and Approved by: abandoned wells shall be maintained in order for the Division of Gas, Oil and Geothermal Resources (Division) to investigate the condition on ~:pf the wellheads and check for leakage. If any ~cabandonments are required, the Division shall 0 rnish necessary specifications to property lhe wner. Page 2 of 14 Mitigation Verification of Compliance Measure Engineering BuibJing mud Safety Fire Deparlment Public Planning Trullic Engineering Sanitotiun Division Police Department Works 53-3c If any abandoned or unrecorded wells are Approved by: uncovered, or damaged during excavalion or grading activities, remedial plugging operations pursuant to Division of Gas, Oil and Geothermal on Resources requirements would be required. 5.1.3d Prior to issuance of building permits, all oil Approved by: conlaminatcd soil shall be remcdiated to thc satisfaction of the Local Unified Program Agency (the Office of Environmental,Services- BakersfieU ou City Fire Department) in conjunction with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board and/or California Depart merit of Toxic Substances Control. $,3-5 At lhe initial construction meeting prior to Approved by: gradingactivities, all construction workers must be informed as lo the symptoms of Valley Fever. on 5.3-7a The followine Mitieation Measure and in5 Approved by: to the Kern River Ranch nroiect site only: Prior to recording of any Final Map with parcels less than 20 acres, a levee shall be constructed. The location on and dimensions of the levee proposed in the norlheruportion of the Kern River Ranch project site shall be reviewed and approved by Ibe City of Bakersfeld Public Works DepartmenL The levee shall be located outside lhe limits of Ihe prima~y and secondary tloodways. 53-7b The followine Mitieation Measure aonlica 1o lhe Kern River Ranch oroiect site on~y: Prior Io Approved by: recordation of a final map with less than 20 acres for land Iocaled within Zone A, as defined on the Federal Emergency ManagementAgency (FEMA) on Flood Rate Insurance Map, the developer sba · ,~ mply with the requirements of FEMA or revise i~ FEMA map. Thc Kern River Ranch project al~licant shall furnish to the Cily of Bakersfield all d~umentalion reqaired by FEMA. c~-~ Page 3 of 1 Verification of Compliance Mitigation Measure Engineering Building and Safety Fire Department Public Planning Traffic Engineering Sanitation Division Police Deparlment Works S.S-I Prior to the issuanceof building permits, the Approved by: project applicant(s) shall comply with the Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation Impact Fee Program. The project applicants shall on participale in thc improvements required o0 a pro- rata fair-share basis as provided in Table 8, BUENA VISTA & KERI,/ RIVER RANCH: [NTERSEC~FION PRO-RATA SHARE OF MITIGATION/REQUIRED MITIGATION, of the Supplemental Traffic Impact Study for Buena Ift~ht & Kern Ri~,er Ranch Curnulative lmpact, dated June 1997. To accommodatc 2020 cumulative traffic plus Buena Vista and Kern River Ranch project traffic volumes, the above referenced fees shall be used to provide the following improvements: Inlerseclion Imprnvemcnls Rosedale fliehwav and Rcnfro Road: add eastbound through lane and westbound through lane (LOS C); Rosedale Hiehwav and Fruitvale l~'iv¢: add southbound Icl't turn lane and southbound right turn lane (LOS C); Brimhall Road and Allen Road: add easlbound left turn lane, westbound left turn lane, northbound through lane, and southbound Ihrougb lane (LOS Brimhall Road and Callowav Drive: add southbound right turn lane (LOS C); Stockdale Highway and Heath Road: provide exclusive lurn lanes for southbound approach (LOS B); Stockdalc Hil~hwav and Rcnfro Road: add eastbound lane (LOS C); Page 4 of Mitigation Verification o f Compliance Measure Engineering Building and Safety Fire Department Public Planning Traffic Engineering Sanitation Division Police Department Works Stockdale Hiahwav and Allen Road: add northbound left turn lane, northbound through lane, southbound left Turn lane, southboundthrough lane, eastbound left turn lane, eastbound right turn lan~, and westbound left turn lane (LOS C); Slockdale Hiahwav and Buena Vista add westbound left turn lane and eastbound right turn lane (LOS C); Kern River Ranch Entrance #1 and Buena Vista Road: add eastbound left turn lane eastbound righl turn lane, northbound left turn lane, and southbound right lurn lane (with Kern River Ranch) (LOS B); Deer Pcak Drive and Bocna Vista RoiuI. add norlhbound Ibrough lane, southbound through lane and southbound left lurn lane (LOS B); · v : add westbound left turn lane, northbound right turn lane, and two southbound left turn lanes (LOS lB); Mina Avenue and Buena Vista Ro.~d: full expansion per City of Bakersfield's Standard Detail T-4 (LOS C); Mina Avenue and Ashc Roqd: add northbound left turn lane (LOS C); Chamber Boulevard and Buena Vista Road. provide two left turn lenes/one through lane/one right turn lane for eastbound approach, one left turn lanes/one right turn lane for northbound approach, and one left turn lane/two through lanes/one right turn lane for southbound approach (with Buena Vista) (LOS C); White Lane and Buena Vista Ro~d: add two eastbound left turn lanes, eastbound right turn lane, northbound through lane, northbound right turn lane, southbound left turn lane, southbound through lane, and southbound rP right turn lane (LOS C); and I;XHIbl I ' Page 5 of Verification of Compliance Mitigation Measure Engineering Buihling and Safety Fire Department Public Planning Traffic Engineering Sanilatinu Division Police Department Works Panama Lane and Gosford ]~Opd: add northbound left and southbound left (LOS A). Segment Improvements Approved by: Rosedale Hiehwav (Callowav Fruitvale Avenue): widen to six lanes (LOS on A); Brimhall Road (Jewetta Road Io Cal{oway Road): widen to four lanes (LOS A); Stockdale Hiehwav I'Bnena Vista Road lo Oltl River Road): widen to six lanes (LOS A); Stockdale Hiehwav (Gosford Road lo Ashc Road): widen to six lanes (LOS A); Stockdalc fliehwav I'Real Road 1o Wilde Road): widen to six lanes (LOS A); Mine Avenue fAllen Road to Buepa Visl~ ]load): widen lo four lanes (LOS B); Taft Hiehwav (Buena Vista Road 19 Olcl River Road): widen to four lanes (LOS A); Alien Road (Haecman Road Io Rosedale ]:]Jgll.~l~: widen Io four lanes (LOS A); Allcn Roud (Rosedalc tli_ehwav to Stockd;dc Hiehwav): widen to four lanes (LOS C); Allen Road (Stockdnle Hiehwav to Mira, Avenue): widen to four lanes (LOS C); Buena Vista Road (Sm<:kdale Hiehway Mine Avenuc~: widen to six lanes/add median (LOS A); Buena Visla Road (Mine Avenue Io While Lane1: widen to six lanes/add median (LOS B); Buena Visla Road tWhilc Lane 1o Pacheco): widen lo four lanes (LOS A); and Gosford Road fPacheco Road to Panama Lane1: widen lo four lanes (LOS A). I::XHIBI i' Page 6 of 14 Verification of Compliance Mitigation Measure Engineering Building and Safety Fire Department Public Planning Tcamc Engineering Sanitation Division Police Department Works 5.5-2a Thc applicant(s) shall participate in thc Approved by: improvements required on a pro-rata fair-share basis as provided in Table 8, BUENA VISTA & KERN RIVER RANCH: INTERSECTEIONPRO- on RATA SHARE OF MITIGATION/REQUIRED MITIGATION, of the SupplementalTmffic Impact Study for Buena Iftsta & Kern River Ranch Cumulative Impact, dated June 1997. To accommodatcYear 2020cumnlafivc trafficwiti~ projects condition, traffic signals arc projected to be warranted at the followingintersectioas and the above referenced fees shall be used lo provide the following improvcmcnt~: Stockdale Highway and Enos Lane; Slockdale Highway and Renfro Road; Kern River Ranch Entrance #1 and Buena Vista Road; Deer Peak Drive and Buena Vista Road; Chamber Boulevard and Buena Vista Road; Pacheco Road and Buena Vista Road; and Ming Avenue and Allen Road. $.S-2b The Iraffic signals required as a result of Approved by: tbe proposed project shall include an interconnect of the signals to funclion in a coordinated system with existing and planned signals, on S.6-2a To reduce significant traffic noise impacts Approved by: to below 65 dBA CNEL at proposed residenlial locations adjacent to collector and arterial roadways, the project applicant(s)shall incorpora~ on sound barriers, along cited roadways. Since lot design and grading plans are not yet available, thc exact height and Iocafion of barriers cannot be accurately determined at this time. However, L}~arriers (i.e., berms, sound walls) between six and e~ht feet may be required to reduce noise levels to a~o~eptabie levels. EXHIBIT "F Page 7 of '1 Verification of Compliance Miligution Measure Engineering Building and Safety Fire Department Public Planning Tramc Engineering Sautlaliun Division Police Department Works g.6-2bPrior to the issuanceof a buildingpermit for Approved by: the proposed commercial uses, the proj¢cl applicant shall demonstrate that project commercial noise source impacls on nearby on residences are below those indicated in the City's hourly noise level performance standards. To demonstratecommercial noise source impacts arc below the City's standards, the project applicant may need to include project design featuressuch as setbacks, barriers, building location/orientation, acoustical design of buildings, crc. 5.7-1a Prior to the approval of a grading plan for Approved by: any residential tract, multiple family project, and commercial project, Ihe project applicant shall submit a letter to the City of Bakersfield Planning on Department from the SJVUAPCD stating the dust suppression measures that shall be completed during construction activities in order to comply with :SJVIJAPCD Regulation VIII. 5.7-1b Prior to the approval of a grading plan for Approved by: any residential tracl, multiple family project, and commercial project, the project applicant shall submit a letter to the City of Bakersfield Planning on Department from the SJVUAPCD stating the measures that shall be competed during asphalt paving in order to comply with SJVUAPCD Rule 4641. 5.7-1c Thc constructiongradingplansshall include Approved by: a statement that all construction equipment shall be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacture's specifications, on S.7-1d Thc constructiongradingplansshallinclude Approved by: a statement that work crews shall shut off ~construction equipment when not in usc. Page 8 of 14 Verification of Compliance Mitigation Measure Euglueeriug Building and Safety Fire Department Public Plauuing Traffic ,~.ugiueeriug Sauitatiou Division Police Department Work~ 5.7-2. The project applicant shall incorporate the Approved by: following in building plans: Solar or Iow-emission water beater shall be on used. Central water heating systems shall b~ used. Double~,,,,~,: paned glass shall be used in all windows. Energy efficient luw-sodium parking lot lights shall be used. One (l) bicycle rack shall be provided in each of the proposed commercial areas. 5.8-1a Prior to the issuance of a grading permits, Approved by: the project proponcnis shall comply with all appropriate terms and conditions of the MB~ICP to the City. The MBHCP requires certain take on avoidance measures for thc San Joaquin kit fox. MBHCP guidelines regarding tracking and excavation shall be followed to prevent enlrapmenl of kit fox in dens. Specific measures during the construction phase of the project shall be implemented and include the following: A prcconstruction survey shall be conducted prior to site grading to search for native kit fox dens (specifically tracking shall be conducted at the potential active den located in the soutbeaslern portion of the Kern River Ranch project site). All pipes, culverts or similar slructures with a diameler of four inches or greater shall be kept capped to prevent entry of kit fox. If they are not capped or otherwise covered, they shall be inspected daily prior to burial or closure to ensure no kit foxes, or other protected species, become entrapped. EXHIBIT "F' Page 9 of '1, Mitigation Verification or Compliance Measure Engineering Building and Safety Fire Department Public Planning Traffic Engineering Sanitation Division Police Department Works Excavations shall cithcr bc constructed with escape tamps or be covered Io prevent entrapment. Or thc site(s) could be protected during construction, such as with a wildlife exclusion fence, which would eliminate thc possibility of ranging animals from bclng harmed during construction. .All food, garbage, and plastic shall bc disposed of in closcd containers and regularly removed from the site to minimize attracting ranging kit fox or other animals. With the exception of Swainson's hawk (sec following mitigation measure), impacts to special- slatus species on thc project sitc are covered under thc terms and conditions of Ihe MBHCP and associated Implementing Agreement. The compensation and avoidance requirements of the MBHCP and buffcr zones proposed as part of this project are consistent and follow an ecosystem management approach for endangercdspecies, and provide adequate compensation of the Swain.son's hawk and all other potentially occurring special- status spec/es. 5.8-1b Prior to issuance of grading permit(s), the Approvcd by: project applicant(s}shall comply with the following raptor nest miligalion requiremcnls: on If grading is proposed to occur during the raptor nesting season (February through Septembcr),a focused survey for raplor ncsts shall IH: comluctcd I)y a qnalificd raplor biologist prior lo grading activities in order to identify active nests in areas potent/ally impacted by project implementation. Page 10 of 14 Mitigation Verification of Compliance Measure Engineering Building and Safety Fire Department Public Planning Traffic Engineering Sanitation Division Police Deparlment Works If construction is proposed to take place during the raptor nesting/breeding season (February through September), no construction activity shall take place within 500 feet of an active nest until the you.nc have fledged (as determined by a qualified raplor biologist). Trees containingnests that must be removed as a result of project implemenlation shall be removed during thc non-breeding season (October through Januao,). S.8-1c The followine mitieation measures aoolie~ Approved by: to the Kern River Ranch nroiect site oqly: Consttuctiondirectlyadjacent to sensitive riparian habital potentially occupied by threatened on endaflgered and ot her protected species may result in take of listed species ranging through the conslruction site. During construction and development on the Kern River Ranch project site, the following mitigation measure is recommended to help prevent indirect or direct take of species wilhin Iho prima~y floodplain directly adjacent to the project area, for which the MBHCP does not cover take or provide compensation or mitigation: River .~cces$ Management: The area alongside the Kern River riparian corridor should be fenced.off, and signs put up, during construction to protect it and prevent damage to vegetaiion, burrows and nests from heavyequipment, constructicn vehicles, and to controlpublic access. The off-site adjacent sycamorespecimen trec is located within Ibls area just north of the carrot field and special attention should be made to prevent damage to this tree. Trees and shrubs should be planted along the Kern River interface to help mitigate for noise, provide protectiveco,,~r, and minimize adverse impacts of night lighting on a wildlife species which inhabit ~e adjacent floodplain and river riparian habitat. Page 11 of 1 Verification of Compliance Mitigation Measure Engineering Building and Safety Fire Department Public Planning Tcamc Engineering Sanitation Division Police Department Works $.8-1d The presence of any previously unidentif'ed ^pproved by: protected species wlfich are not addressed in the MBHCP, including those protected under lhe Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act, should be on avoklcd aud cvaluatcd by a qualified fii.l~)gist prior to construction. The Fish & Wildlife Se~ice (USFWS) and California Department of Fish & Game (CDFG) should be nolified of previously unreported protected species. Any unanticipated take of protecled wildlife shall be reported imnmdialety to the CDFG and USFWS. S.9-1 If archeologicalor paleontological resources Approved by: are discovered during excavation and grading activitieson-site, the conlractor shall stop all work and the developer shall retain a qualified on archeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action. Salvage operation requirements in Api~ndix K of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines shall be followed and the treatment of discovered Native American remains shall comply with State codes regulationsof the Native American ite~itage Commission. 5.9-2a Refer to Mitigation Measure 5.9-1. Approved by: on $.9-2b The followinnmeasureaoolies lo the Bue~la Approved by: Vista oroiect only: An archaeological monitor shall be present al CA-KER-3962 during any subsurface construclion activities, if significant on cultural resources are discovered during monitoring, more testing or data recovery may be required. Page 12 of 14 YerJfleatlon ol'CompIi~.-,.,,. Mitigation Measure Engineering Building and $nfety Fire Departmenl Public Planning Tramc Engineering Sanitation Division Police Depar~m,.m Works $.9-2c The followino measure annlies lo the Kerb Approved by: River Ranch proiect only: An archaeological monitor shall he present at CA-KER-3964 during anysubsurfaccconstrucfionactivilies. If significant on cultural resources are discovered during moniloring, more testing or data recovery' may be required. 5.9-2d Shouldhumanremainsbediscoveredatany Approved by: time on any portion of the project, work shall halt and Ihe coroner be notified immediately (Section 7050..5 of the 1-leallh and Safety Code). In the on absence of an archaeological monitor, a qualified archaeologist and Iht local Native American community, shall also be notified. $.10-3a The followine mifiealioo measure applies Approved by: lo thc 13uena Vista oroiect only: Prior lo the issuance of a building permit for any residence within the project area, the applicant shall submit on fees to the Kern County High School District and Panama-13uenaVista Union School District in thc amount of $4.06 per square fool of assessable space (as defined in Section 65995 of the Government Code) for each such residence. This amount shall increase in even numbered years according to the adjustment for inflation determined by the StateAUocafionBoard for Class 13 conslru~ion. Payment would not be required to a district which has certified in writing that alternative mitigation measures have been undertaken with respect to the project to adequately address school overcrowding. 5.10-3b The followine mitieation measure annlie,r Approved by: to the Kern River Ranch pro!ecl site only: The following shall apply to the Kern River Ranch ~rfionof Ihe project located within lhe Rosedale on ~d~ion Sehool District. Page 13 of 1, Verification of Compliance Mitigation Measure Engineering Building and Safety Fire Department Public Planning Tramc I~-gineering Sanitation Division Police Department Works in accordanccwith the Kern Counly Plan, thc Kern High School district has identified that the mitigation required of project~ such as this is an inflation-indexed $1.42. Payment shall not be required to the Kern High. School District ii it has certified in writing that alternative mitigation measures have been undertaken with respect to the project to adequately address school overcrowding. With respect to the Rosedale Union School District, rcsidcntial property would require either annexation of the property into thc CFD 92-1; or prior to issuance of a building permit within this portion of thc project area, the Roscdale Union School District must be paid the following amounts as applicable: (a) $6,637.47 per single-family residence; or (b) $2,S04.75 per multi-family residence; or (c) $0.59~4 per ~uare foot of commercial/ industrial "gross floor area"; or (d) such higher or lower amount that is then equal to such higber amount that may have been lawfully established by CFD 92-1 as the amount required to prepay ils Single Payment and Annual Special Taxes. 5,10-3c The followinu mitieation measure aoolle,~ Approved by: t~'~h~ Kern River Ranch orolect site in lieu 0f S.10-3b in the event that the Kern Courtly Board of Su0en'isors orders the Iransfer of tertlto~ within on the oroiect site to the Panama-Buena Vista Union School District oursuant Io Education Co~e Section 35765:~"Prior to issuance of a building permtt for any rcstdence within thc proJect arca the lCcrn Hi]gh School Dis~c~ and Pah~ma-i~cna Vista Umon School District must be pard th,~ ~m0unt of $4.06 p~r square foot of aSseSSab c r'~-rlll:il I "1-" Page 14 of 14 Verification of Compliance Mitigation Measure Engineering Building and Safety Fire Department Public Planning Tramc Engineering Sanitation Division Police Department Works ~Govermnent Code) for each such residence for thc purple of providmgschool facdatles. This amOunt S alhncreasemevennumbe~dyearsaccordmg to hol adjustmen,t for snflatmn deternuned by the Sta e AIIocatson, Board for C~nss B constructton at its January meeting,' which increase shall b~ effective as of the date of thnt meeting. Paymeng Shall not be required to' a:district which hns certified in writing that a!ternative mitigation measures have been undertaken with respect to the project to adequately address school